Honestly I was surprised at how limited the ChatGPT integration seems to be. It felt like they 80/20'd AI with the onboard models + semantic index, but also wanted to cover that last 20% with some kind of SOTA cloud model. But they didn't necessarily NEED to.
OpenAI and Apple Announce Partnership
171–180 of 343 posts
Re: OpenAI and Apple Announce Partnership
#172This is one of those things that seems like a good idea but is really an existential threat to OpenAI. Having a single extremely large customer gives that customer a disproportionate amount of power over your business. Apple can decide one day to simply stop paying you because, hey, they can afford the years of litigation to resolve it. Can you weather than storm? Famously, Benjamin Moore (the paint company) maintain…
Eh.
Apple is just racing to integrate AI into its current compute platform as fast possible.
OpenAI definitely believes a smart enough AI (AGI, ASI) will solve way bigger problems or create essentially a brand new compute platform.
Heck, ChatGPT as a lame LLM is almost its own compute platform already.
Apple is just speeding up people getting used to not needing apps and fancy devices vs simply communicating with an agent.
Who really will need Apple in 10-15 years if AI really does get good enough then?
Re: OpenAI and Apple Announce Partnership
#173It’s an interesting choice to announce a brand-new standard for privacy guarantees regarding AI/ML queries…
…then announce a partnership with ChatGPT.
Re: OpenAI and Apple Announce Partnership
#174Earlier quoted context omitted.
I truly hope the reckless enthusiasm for LLMs will cool down, but it seems plausible that discretized, compressed versions of today's cutting-edge models will eventually be able to run entirely locally, even on mobile devices; there are no guarantees that they'll get better , but many promising opportunities to get the same unreliable results faster and with less power consumption. Once the models run on-device, ther…
I don't believe this scenario to be very likely because a lot of the 'magic' in current LLMs (emphasis on 'large') is derived from the size of the training datasets and amount of compute they can throw at training and inference.
Llama 3 8B captures that 'magic' fairly well and runs on a modest gaming PC. You can even run it on an iPhone 15 if you're willing to sacrifice floating point precision. Three years from now I full expect GPT4 quality models running locally on an iPhone.
Re: OpenAI and Apple Announce Partnership
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
They "leapfrogged" Google on providing a natural language interface to the world knowledge we'd gotten used to retrieving throug web search. But Apple's never done more than toyed in that space. Apple's focus has long been on a lifestyle product experience across their portfolio of hardware, and Apple Intelligence appears to be focused exactly on that in a way that has little overlap with OpenAI's offerings. The part…
Siri is a toy, but I don't think that was Apple's intent. It's been a long-standing complaint that using Siri to search the web sucks compared to other companies offerings.
Apple's product focus is on getting Siri to bridge your first-party and third-party apps, your 500GB of on-device data, and your terabyte of iCloud data with a nice interface, all of which they're trying to deliver using their own technology.
Having Siri answer your trivia question about whale songs, or suggest a Pad Thai recipe modification when you ran out of soy sauce, is just not where they see the value. Poor web search has been an easy critique to weigh against Siri for the last many years, and the ChatGPT integration (and Apple's own local prompt prep) should fare far better than that, but it doesn't have any relevance to "leapfrogging" because the two companies just aren't trying to do the same thing.
Re: OpenAI and Apple Announce Partnership
#176I hate everything about this. Curious how blocking OpenAI's TLDs at the DNS level will go.
Re: OpenAI and Apple Announce Partnership
#177Um, wow. The major question in my mind: did Apple pay, or did OpenAI pay? (A-la google for search). Apple is not going to lose control of the customer, ever, so on balance I would guess this is either not a forever partnership or that OpenAI won’t ultimately get what they want out of it. I’m very curious to see how much will be done on device and how much will go to gpt4o out of the gate. I’m also curious if they’re…
Apple is definitely paying because they don't let OpenAI save anything.
Re: OpenAI and Apple Announce Partnership
#178IMO this really feels like the Facebook / Twitter integration from early iOS. That only lasted a few years. Apple clearly thinks it needs a dedicated LLM service atm. But still thinks it is only supplemental as they handle a bunch of the core stuff without it. And require explicit user consent to use OpenAI. And Apple clearly views it as a partial commodity since they even said they plan to add others. Tough to bet a…
Actually, just in three to five years, lots of "AI boxes" and those magical sparkling icons next to input fields summoning AI would be silently removed. LLMs are not accurate, they aren't subject matter experts that'll be maybe within 5% error margin. People will gradually learn and discover anf the cost of keeping a model updated and running won't drastically reduce so we'll most likely see dust settling down.
[deleted]
Re: OpenAI and Apple Announce Partnership
#179Re: OpenAI and Apple Announce Partnership
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually, just in three to five years, lots of "AI boxes" and those magical sparkling icons next to input fields summoning AI would be silently removed. LLMs are not accurate, they aren't subject matter experts that'll be maybe within 5% error margin. People will gradually learn and discover anf the cost of keeping a model updated and running won't drastically reduce so we'll most likely see dust settling down.
LLMs are not accurate, they aren't subject matter experts that'll be maybe within 5% error margin. You're asserting that the AI features will be removed in 3 to 5 years because they're not accurate enough today , but you actually need them to remain inaccurate in 3 years time for your prediction to be correct. That seems unlikely. I agree that people will start to realize the cost, but the accuracy will improve, so p…
The same argument can be used for Tesla full self driving: basically it has to be (nearly) perfect, and after years of development, it's not there yet. What's different about LLMs?