271–280 of 735 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If Apple had e.g. required competitors to undergo similar independent audits that would probably be allowed as it is quite similar to how Apple solved the third party app store issue.
Are we sure the EU would allow that? Or would it be seen as a way to stifle competition?
If Apple extended that philosophy to other vendors then yeah, it would be deliberately unfair and anticompetitive.
Of all the crimes Big Tech is committing against humanity, Apple's attempt to safeguard user privacy is the one the EU cannot abide?
it's more Apple's attempt to prevent users to choose their own models. Apple could build it in a way that other model providers could safely and securely interface with the Spotlight index. They could implement a big warning that shows "if you proceed with this request, Spotlight will send this and that to the model provider." But Apple chose not to do that.
How? How do you safely handover effectively every single bit of data on someone’s phone to any third-party company and preserve privacy?
Sure you can try and demand agreements from the third parties but will the EU see that as a move to limit competition?
Ignoring all other concerns it is a rather thorny problem.
I don’t think the EU would accept, and as a user I certainly wouldn’t accept, having to agree to a pop-up every time I used any feature that used any data on my phone that might go to a third-party AI.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google eng mgr here. I've worked on a few projects related to compliance with various government policies. This isn't "assign a two-pizza team to it, will be done in a quarter"; these types of compliance efforts can mean completely redoing multiple core systems to handle privacy, wipeout, audit, reporting, per-location policies, etc etc. These efforts can involve hundreds to thousands of people for multiple years. Su…
Also it does not matter what you do in the end. If you are Big Tech the EU will sue regardless and always finds an excuse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why does systems are not designed take into account that compliance work?
I assume you're asking this in good faith, so I'll answer in good faith. Laws vary from country to country, state to state, and they vary tremendously. Laws are also changing all the time. There's literally no way to predict what rules will be in place at any given time. Also, adding code to meet some government regulation takes time and effort that (form the company's perspective) could be better spent building a pr…
This looks to me like yet another bet from Apple: "they'll buy iPhones anyway, let them wait".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed but you ignore my second paragraph: they have developed (and 3rd-party audited) a way to handoff all the data (parts of your Personal Context, etc.) to their cloud servers in a privacy preserving way on-device. Why couldn't the same process could be used to handoff the data to a 3rd-party AI provider? (genuine why, if you have an understanding of the thing you have a strong opinion about I'd genuinely apprecia…
Apple PCC is using completely mad and paranoid amounts of security down to hardware and firmware level making sure nobody at any point of the supply chain can access the data. EU can’t and won’t enforce the same rigour for 3rd party cloud AI. Which is the problem for Apple. If said 3rd party service leaks private data, guess which company is going to be in the BIG HEADLINE and which one will hardly be mentioned in th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yet Gemini had no issues to comply with EU's DMA and release on all phones? Let's call it how it is: Android phones allow every competitor to run their chatbot in place of Gemini. Want Perplexity instead of Gemini? You can have it. Samsung launches with Perplexity as of late. Apple? As always, went into "ay mate, too integrated, can't give the same APIs to competitors" lame excuse.
That's not fully true. Lots of things get to Europe later (Gemini memories, though we have them now, Spark as latest noteworthy) Or never. Like the majority of Pixel 10 on device AI features (image editing, magic cue).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you considered that the EU's privacy laws may simply be onerous and burdensome, and the fact that a web of red tape has caught another fly may not actually reflect on the privacy claims of "groundbreaking Private Cloud Compute"?
I think OP didn't question the privacy of their Private Cloud Compute, just Apple's bad faith: they claim they can't handoff data in a privacy-preserving way to 3rd-parties when they tout that they absolutely CAN handoff data in a privacy-preserving way to their servers. Apple frames this as a privacy issue when it's only a brand/control issue.
Is it possible to do that with absolutely any company that wants to be able to be the AI on your phone? Are most of those companies even capable of handling something like that?
That’s thorny.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People in EU are upset that Apple is saying that EU would not let them build it, not that it's not offered there.
Phrasing it like that that without mentioning the $40B penalty if Apple releases the feature today feels a bit off to me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a geoblock. EU accounts can use the features when outside of the EU.
Interesting, I would have guessed the opposite as geoblocking is not perfect, unless it's using location services as well.