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

Apple picks Gemini to power Siri

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 674 posts

Re: Apple picks Gemini to power Siri

#191

Post by Melatonic »

blitzar wrote: post #134
concinds wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An Apple-developed LLM would likely be worse than SOTA, even if they dumped billions on compute. They'll never attract as much talent as the others, especially given how poorly their AI org was run (reportedly). The weird secrecy will be a turnoff. The culture is worse and more bureaucratic. The past decade has shown that Apple is unwilling to fix these things. So I'm glad Apple was forced to overcome their Not-Inven…

Apple might have gotten very lucky here ... the money might be in finding uses, and selling physical products rather than burning piles of cash training models that are SOTA for 5 minutes before being yet another model in a crowded field. My money is still on Apple and Google to be the winners from LLMs.

Apple has also never been big on the server side equation of both software and hardware - don't they already outsource most of their cloud stack to Google via GCP ?

I can see them eventually training their own models (especially smaller and more targeted / niche ones) but at their scale they can probably negotiate a pretty damn good deal renting Google TPUs and expertise.

Re: Apple picks Gemini to power Siri

#194

Post by MaysonL »

mucle6 wrote: post #90
quitit wrote: post #63

This is a bit of a layer cake: 1. The first issue is that there is significant momentum in calling Siri bad, so even if Apple released a higher quality version it will still be labelled bad. It can enhance the user's life and make their device easier to use, but the overall press will be cherrypicked examples where it did something silly. 2. Basing Siri on Google's Gemini can help to alleviate some of that bad press,…

re 3: I doubt Google is going to hand over the weights to Apple to put on device.

They wouldn’t fit.

Re: Apple picks Gemini to power Siri

#195

Post by semiquaver »

Fiveplus wrote: post #42

The writing was on the wall the moment Apple stopped trying to buy their way into the server-side training game like what three years ago? Apple has the best edge inference silicon in the world (neural engine), but they have effectively zero presence in a training datacenter. They simply do not have the TPU pods or the H100 clusters to train a frontier model like Gemini 2.5 or 3.0 from scratch without burning 10 year…

  > without burning 10 years of cash flow.
Sorry to nitpick but Apple’s Free Cash Flow is 100B/yr. Training a model to power Siri would not cost more than a trillion dollars.

Re: Apple picks Gemini to power Siri

#197

Post by gallerdude »

HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #190
mdasen wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where does it say that it won't be white-labeled? Yes, Apple is acknowledging that Google's Gemini will be powering Siri and that is a big deal, but are they going to be acknowledging it in the product or is this just an acknowledgment to investors? Apple doesn't hide where many of their components come from, but that doesn't mean that those brands are credited in the product. There's no "fab by TSMC" or "camera sens…

If I were Goodle, I'd offer Apple a very significant discount to have visible branding of "powered by Gemini".

I'm sure Apple is more than happy to pay the premium for cleanness.

Re: Apple picks Gemini to power Siri

#198

Post by anonymouskimmer »

crazygringo wrote: post #123
kenjackson wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that they don't appear poised to do it themselves. But why not work with Meta or OpenAI (maybe a bit more questionable with MS) or some other player, rather than Google?

The optics of working with Meta make it a non-starter. Apple symbolizes privacy, Meta the opposite. With OpenAI, will it even be around 3 years from now, without going bankrupt? What will its ownership structure look like? Plus, as you say, the MS aspect. So why not Google? It's very common for large corporations to compete in some areas and cooperate in others.

SORRY TO EVERYONE ELSE FOR GOING OFF TOPIC.

I didn't see you 41 day old reply to me until it was too late to comment on it. So here's a sarcastic "thanks for ignoring what I wrote" and telling me that exactly what I was complaining about is the solution to the problem I was complaining about.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46114935

1) I told you my household can't use Target or Amazon for unscented products, without costly remediation measures, BECAUSE EVEN SCENT-FREE ITEMS COME SMELLING FROM PERFUME CROSS-CONTAMINATION THANKS TO CLEANING, STORAGE, AND TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS. SOMETIMES REALLY BADLY.

FFS. If you are going to respond, first read.

I also mentioned something other than "government intervention to dictate how products are made" as a solution to this issue, namely adequate segregation between perfumed and non-perfumed products.

And I care less about my wallet than I do about my time and actual ability to acquire products that are either truly scent free, or like yesteryear, don't have everlasting fragrance fixatives.

For people in my position, which make up a small percentage of the population (that still numbers in the millions), the free market has failed. We are a specialized niche that trades tips on how to make things tolerable.

SORRY TO EVERYONE ELSE FOR GOING OFF TOPIC.

Re: Apple picks Gemini to power Siri

#199

Post by thayne »

its_ethan wrote: post #144
benoau wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gatekeeping - nobody else can be the default voice assistant or power Siri, so where does this leave eg OpenAI? The reason this is important is their DOJ antitrust case, about to start trial, has made this kind of conduct a cornerstone of their allegations that Apple is a monopoly. It also lends credence to the DOJ's allegation that Apple is insulated from competition - the result of failing to produce their own winn…

So because Apple chose not to spend money to develop it's own AI, it must be punished for then choosing to use another companies model? And the reason that this is an issue is because both companies are large? This feels a little squishy... At what size of each company does this stop being an antitrust issue? It always just feels like a vibe check, people cite market cap or marketshare numbers but there's no hard cri…

> it must be punished for then choosing to use another companies model

The problem isn't that they used another company's model. It's that they are using a model made by the only company competing with them in the market of mobile OS.

Post reply on HN