411–420 of 735 posts
Good for the total of eight users that will then use an alternative agent once it landed. Similar to the twelve people that use alternative app stores.
> “We have hundreds of thousands of users,” AltStore co-founder Testut told TechCrunch in an interview. “Wonderful and good numbers.” Zero idea if its true tho.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They aren't releasing it in China either.
Yet. But they are probably working with Chinese partners (including the government) on releasing something (maybe with Alibaba models instead of Google models, on a Chinese-local cloud rather than google cloud).
Maybe China is easier to work with - perhaps their rules are made clearer?
> EU regulators on Tuesday slammed Apple This reads more like a tabloid headline than the first sentence of a Reuters article.
I agree it’s a bit sensationalist. Here’s the EU Commission spokesperson’s criticism: >“The decision not to roll out Siri AI in the EU is Apple’s and Apple’s only,” spokesperson Thomas Regnier told reporters in Brussels, saying there was nothing in the Digital Markets Act to stop the company from introducing new products in the EU. >“Apple was simply unable to develop interoperability solutions that meet essential EU…
They can ship any feature they want, as long as they give users the option to choose alternative implementation of the feature.
If you are, like me, one of the EU customers that are again disappointed by Apple's behavior, please take 5 minutes to send Apple feedback about that: https://www.apple.com/feedback/iphone/
Good for the total of eight users that will then use an alternative agent once it landed. Similar to the twelve people that use alternative app stores.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
That’s right, they can hand it over to their servers. And they’ve got special agreements with Google to do the same exact thing. That preserves privacy. 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.
I find it interesting that Apple prefers to fall behind in Europe rather than opening their platform a tiny bit. It gives us European some opportunities. I have a side project at work that was heavily threatened by Siri’s new features. Now I feel more relaxed as Siri isn’t coming there anytime soon. But overall I doubt we will replace Apple.
Apple's services revenue is showing a strong growth and it is entirely dependent on keeping the ecosystem closed so that it can take its commission and sell its services.
Once things get moving they would prefer still having control on the on the US market rather than making slightly more money(if any. No one wants this AI stuff as you can tell by the strong sales Apple keeps having despite or thanks to not having AI integrated) when the EU market is still open to them.
If the price for some sort of functioning Siri is my privacy, I’m happy with the current dumb Siri
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree it’s a bit sensationalist. Here’s the EU Commission spokesperson’s criticism: >“The decision not to roll out Siri AI in the EU is Apple’s and Apple’s only,” spokesperson Thomas Regnier told reporters in Brussels, saying there was nothing in the Digital Markets Act to stop the company from introducing new products in the EU. >“Apple was simply unable to develop interoperability solutions that meet essential EU…
> At a certain point the regulation is self-defeating. What is that point? This is the discussion that the EU lawmakers cannot acknowledge. Because it's not self-defeating, what would that even be FAANG packing up and abandoning Europe? Worked out splendid for China.
Whereas the EU laws apply to foreign and domestic companies alike, and the goal is consumer protection. The compliance difficulty does not vary between foreign/local.
This is a common sentiment of EU tech regulation proponents. You may want protectionism but that's not really what these laws are about. Why not simply adopt the CCP's policy towards technology?