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

621–630 of 735 posts

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

#621

Post by watermelon0 »

mike_d wrote: post #598
microtonal wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Complying with complex privacy laws is surprisingly orthogonal to making a product with good privacy. Maybe it's more because the privacy is largely marketing and helps with continuously shutting out competitors under the guise of privacy? If they really cared about privacy, they would end-to-end encrypt iCloud backups [1] by default and not just when ADP is enabled, which only a small subset of users do. In fact, ma…

Apple is one of the few tech companies that puts user privacy first, and any claims otherwise are deeply misguided. They pioneered things like iCloud Private Relay and privacy protecting cloud backups for devices. Ironically the gaps you point to are things they have had to do to appease the European Union.

> They pioneered things like iCloud Private Relay and privacy protecting cloud backups for devices.

They didn't pioneered it, they just brought it to the masses. Tor was here before the Private Relay, and most open source backup applications offer E2EE out-of-the-box.

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

#622

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #192
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…

> purely a lobbying move It can be more than one thing. It’s a lobbying move, to be sure. But it’s also almost certainly a time-to-market and potentially cost-mitigation play, too.

I do take your general point here, but if you know you need to implement the DNA requirements then you need to build and plan for some of that well in advance of launch.

I guess I don't see how much time they gain unless they don't plan to ever release a DMA compliant version.

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

#623

Post by stouset »

Forgeties79 wrote: post #177
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> complying with all kinds of laws delays release in some way or another and having none of them would allow people to ship faster, so what makes these EU regulations so distinct? DMA was designed to be a comprehensive regulatory suite. Lawmakers knew it would be onerous; that’s why it only applies to large companies. Also, the DMA’s interoperability requirement creates external partners. Let’s face it, Apple’s track…

No one complains (out loud) about US regulations either. Ultimately it’s about the weight you can throw as well as PR. Probably easier for Apple to make the EU look bad and drag their feet on it. I imagine they’re still not thrilled about the Lightening->USB-C change

Apple was literally the first major company to go all-in on USB-C. They shipped entire devices that only had USB-C ports.

If anything, I would wager they were happy about it. They were going to have to do it anyway, and it would inevitably cause friction for users who were already invested in Lightning cables and third-party devices. The EU forcing this just meant they could shift the blame for any negative sentiment onto the EU.

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

#624

Post by stouset »

inetknght wrote: post #532
tqwhite wrote: post #524

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If, like me, you specifically do not want third parties inside the Apple ecosystem, Apple has done a great job. I totally hate the EU's insistence of tearing down Apple's walled garden. That is a huge reason I like their products so much.

Interoperability only requires Apple to allow third parties to have the same capabilities that Apple does on your device . It doesn't require you to purchase or use a third party service or device. It merely allows you to have that choice in the first place.

And I explicitly do not trust third parties with that sort of access. I am personally thrilled that they don’t and can’t have it.

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

#625

Post by stouset »

fnordsensei wrote: post #122
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…

The point isn’t that it’s easy or straightforward to do. The point is that one of the world’s wealthiest companies can spare the resources needed to comply with the regulations of one of the world’s largest markets.

They can, and if they had thought it was advantageous for them to do so, they would have done so.

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

#626

Post by mantas »

krzyk wrote: post #482
mantas wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this case it looks like EU is requiring to let competitors mess with Apple users privacy.

Not quite. It is up to Apple to design a system in which operators (even Apple) can't see your data. Apparently they designed it in a way that operator can see it (so it is cool if it is Apple, but not cool if it is someone else).

How can Apple ensure what other cloud models do in their servers?

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

#627

Post by mantas »

pocksuppet wrote: post #597
mantas wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this case it looks like EU is requiring to let competitors mess with Apple users privacy.

Is this the new excuse for user hostility? Instead of "think of the children" it's "think of your privacy"?

More like „think of those managing the extended family IT infrastructure“.

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

#628

Post by remus »

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #468
slekker wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I value them a lot, happy that the EU didnt bend down to Apple. If it werent for the EU, the companies would get away with all sorts of shit. Is as if people forget companies are evil by nature and will fuck you any chance they get.

[flagged]

I totally agree cookie banners are awful, but you could equally lay the blame at the foot of website owners who are so keen to track your movements across the web that they'll layer this awful UX on their users. No tracking cookies => no cookie banners.

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

#629

Post by remus »

theshrike79 wrote: post #453
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.

You know what would also damage their brand? Fancois Normal installing a 3rd party AI service which turns out to have zero security and actively just harvesting private data. Tell me which company in your opinion would be in the LOUD headlines, Apple or the random 3rd party?

> Tell me which company in your opinion would be in the LOUD headlines, Apple or the random 3rd party?

The world I want to live in is not the one where apple claims responsibility for every byte of my data which passes through their products.

I think web browsers are a nice comparison here. Chrome added some nice security features (e.g. safe browsing) which are broadly a good thing for reducing harm from websites, but at the same time if you go to a dodgy website and they harvest all your personal details no one blames chrome for that.

No doubt AIs are an interesting use case because of the sheer volume of personal data involved, but if I want to trust some other AI app like gemini or chatGPT with my data then why should I be restricted from doing that?

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

#630

Post by stouset »

Rohansi wrote: post #608
theshrike79 wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course Google has the capacity to run PCC. This isn't about whitelabel PCC being run by FAANG. This is about Super Private Benoau AI being available for any user to install. How can they know whether it respects their privacy or not? The home page says that they're the best and mostest private ever of course, has animations generated by Claude and everything. But actually it runs on servers bought from Hetzner's s…

> How can they know whether it respects their privacy or not? How can you know whether Apple would actually respect your privacy or not? If it's on-device you can audit it, but how can you prove their cloud is actually respecting your privacy? If you have an answer to this then why can't third-parties also do the same?

Third parties don’t have to do the same. And they won’t.
Post reply on HN