Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple decided not to roll out Siri in EU after denied request for exemption

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 735 posts

Re: Apple decided not to roll out Siri in EU after denied request for exemption

#311

Post by microtonal »

Johnny555 wrote: post #291
necovek wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EU response said it was "for a minimum of 18 months" — does not sound temporary to me.

How is that not temporary? "Ok, you asked for an exemption for a minimum of 18 months, we're granting you what you asked for, an 18 month exemption".

By now, Apple has accrued years of malicious DMA/DSA compliance. After those 18 months they'll try to find another reason not to allow competition.

Besides that, the law is the law and the DMA/DSA has been around for years. Why should they get an exception is one part of a duopoly?

Re: Apple decided not to roll out Siri in EU after denied request for exemption

#312

Post by catlikesshrimp »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #179
jefftk wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Laws and strategy are not fixed, and public bickering is part of how they get optimized.

That’s fair. Apple bickers in the EU and U.S. It doesn’t in China. I have a clear preference for one set of political systems.

As I understood it, you prefer systems with less freedom of speech.

Re: Apple decided not to roll out Siri in EU after denied request for exemption

#313

Post by burnte »

afavour wrote: post #2

Apple said "hey, can we not comply with the law", the EU said no, so it didn't launch. Seems pretty straightforward to me. I can see why Apple might want to request an 18 month exemption, there's clearly extra work required to comply with EU regulations. But on the other hand it also feels like a straightforward play for consumer sympathy: let them get used to using it every day for 18 months, then pressure the EU to…

> It's not as if Apple doesn't have the money to dedicate a team to matching the EU's requirements on a deadline. They just choose not to.

Exactly, that's actually why I LIKE this decision so much. I'm not on Apple's side, but I REALLY like the idea that a company just says, "Fine, we'll comply by not even offering this product." It's a perfectly legitimate choice, and it FORCED Apple to evaluate the pros and cons.

I want more companies to not get exemptions and thus not offer law-breaking products. I LIKE that the government is saying, "fix it or don't bring it here" and Apple just has to live with it. I like that Apple also is refusing to just bend over to the EU. We need more of these types of conflicts so we can work out good regulations, and not just always bend over and take it from whatever party won.

While I like a lot of Euro regulations, some of the privacy ones go too far with the whole "we're going to enforce this on the whole world" crap. I like California's method of "to sell it here you have to have this but we're not going to sue you for selling a noncompliant product elsewhere."

Re: Apple decided not to roll out Siri in EU after denied request for exemption

#314

Post by matheusmoreira »

eykanal wrote: post #38
afavour wrote: post #2

Apple said "hey, can we not comply with the law", the EU said no, so it didn't launch. Seems pretty straightforward to me. I can see why Apple might want to request an 18 month exemption, there's clearly extra work required to comply with EU regulations. But on the other hand it also feels like a straightforward play for consumer sympathy: let them get used to using it every day for 18 months, then pressure the EU to…

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…

> completely redoing multiple core systems to handle privacy, wipeout, audit, reporting, per-location policies, etc etc

So Google chose to be evil, now they have to rip all the evil out and redo it from scratch. Can't say I have any sympathy. Should have done the right thing from the start.

Re: Apple decided not to roll out Siri in EU after denied request for exemption

#315

Post by microtonal »

MBCook wrote: post #231
necovek wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not sure this is as much of a tension as you make it sound: where is the obligation that a marketplace administrator will be blamed for any and all breaches of data privacy trust from a participating (likely malicious) third party? According to GDPR, the app developer is the "data controller" and thus ultimately responsible. Only in the case where Apple knowingly participated in unlawful behavior is it likely to…

But this isn’t a normal app. Apple is the one handing over all the data to the AI service. Couldn’t someone argue that they “knowingly participated“? Do you think they want that risk?

Like they now hand over all your contacts, your location, calendar entries, microphone access, camera access. If you choose to do so.

Nothing holds them from having designed this as an API that others can use where the user has permission toggles of what data they want to share with the LLM provider.

Re: Apple decided not to roll out Siri in EU after denied request for exemption

#316

Post by happyopossum »

aprentic wrote: post #305
eykanal wrote: post #38

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…

You're essentially saying that privacy violations are baked into the cores of these systems.

The DMA has nothing to do with Privacy - it's an anti-competition scheme. Apple is saying that privacy is baked in to their approach, and they can't ensure that if they allow every other AI provider the same level of access.

Re: Apple decided not to roll out Siri in EU after denied request for exemption

#317

Post by jen20 »

inetknght wrote: post #270
disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At what cost? This is Apple’s second bite at AI. Giannandrea fucked up the first time. I’m honestly with Cupertino on not over complicating it the second time around. If they found the right mix of features and architecture, great, then work to port it to high-bar jurisdictions. I totally agree with you in principle here, but Apple have a pretty large vested interest in not supporting interoperability here (and in…

> Apple have a pretty large vested interest in not supporting interoperability here Yeah that needs to stop. This is kinda why the DMA was created in the first place...

It doesn't _have_ to stop - the features just can't ship in the EU while these requirements are in place, which is exactly what is happening here. The law is working as intended, just not in the way the proponents thought it would.

Re: Apple decided not to roll out Siri in EU after denied request for exemption

#318

Post by jldugger »

andix wrote: post #253

It's totally fine that Apple doesn't release this feature for EU customers. If they think they can still sell enough phones it's also fine I guess. What's not fine, is to blame the EU for the missing feature. It's damaging their brand and damaging their reputation. Just think about if Porsche would make a press release and calling the US tariffs "un-American". Wouldn't be perceived well either.

By who? The only US people who seem to like the tarrifs are the ones front running trades on their announcement.

Re: Apple decided not to roll out Siri in EU after denied request for exemption

#319

Post by Nifty3929 »

burnte wrote: post #313
afavour wrote: post #2

Apple said "hey, can we not comply with the law", the EU said no, so it didn't launch. Seems pretty straightforward to me. I can see why Apple might want to request an 18 month exemption, there's clearly extra work required to comply with EU regulations. But on the other hand it also feels like a straightforward play for consumer sympathy: let them get used to using it every day for 18 months, then pressure the EU to…

> It's not as if Apple doesn't have the money to dedicate a team to matching the EU's requirements on a deadline. They just choose not to. Exactly, that's actually why I LIKE this decision so much. I'm not on Apple's side, but I REALLY like the idea that a company just says, "Fine, we'll comply by not even offering this product." It's a perfectly legitimate choice, and it FORCED Apple to evaluate the pros and cons. I…

Yes, exactly! Also forced EU voters to consider how much they value these services, and whether the regulations are worth it not to have them, or to have watered down versions of them. I say this without judgment - I see it as a legitimate area of consideration.

I think the worst is hugely impactful laws for which exceptions are constantly carved out so nobody can truly evaluate whether the law/reg is a good one or not.

Re: Apple decided not to roll out Siri in EU after denied request for exemption

#320

Post by microtonal »

abigail95 wrote: post #229
necovek wrote: post #168

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.

Nobody in the EU would have been upset if they said: we cannot offer this in the EU because we want to shut out competitors from providing alternative LLMs and this is not allowed in Europe. Fine. I don't care.

Many Europeans are upset that Apple blames Europe that they cannot implement this because it would sacrifice privacy. (Which is kind of ironic, because the EU has nearly the best privacy protection worldwide.)

Apple doesn't care about privacy. By default (without ADP), your (i)Messages, Drive files, contacts, calendars, backups of data from third-party apps are not end-to-end encrypted [1]. US law enforcement can request it. EU citizens are not protected because the US can use the CLOUD Act to demand the data. If Apple really cared about privacy, they would have closed that hole long ago.

[1] https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651

Post reply on HN