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

641–650 of 735 posts

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

#641

Post by mike_hearn »

asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #445
shykes wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also forced EU voters to consider how much they value these services It's been a while since I left Europe, and I'm rusty on that particular layer of civics. Do EU voters actually have a say in this kind of regulation? Or is it all decided on the executive side which is only accountable to member states and not to individual citizens?

They do have a say. They can elect representatives who could change the legal framework and the incentives for the bureaucrats, or even remove the ability of the bureaucrats to regulate certain things. Then these regulations would not get passed and that would be that.

> They can elect representatives

They cannot. The EU Parliament cannot pass, change or repeal laws. Its representatives can't represent.

If you mean elect national representatives, then the EU treaties were deliberately written to only give them one option - exit entirely and be trade sanctioned by the others as a result, who must obey constitutionally even if it's self harm and they don't want to do it.

The EU is designed from the ground up to look slightly democratic from a distance without actually being so. Ordinary people living and working in member states have zero influence over these kinds of regulations which is why stuff like the DMA doesn't reflect their actual legislative priorities, which according to polls for a long time are primarily economic and immigration related, sometimes climate.

If you look at how the political class treated Brexit, you can see why it's so hard to influence these decisions.

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

#642

Post by mastermage »

tqwhite wrote: post #524
inetknght wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Skipping the EU makes sense in a fast-moving market (if you’re designated as a gatekeeper). Skipping the EU makes sense if the company doesn't want to comply with regulations aimed directly at it. > complying with the DMA from the outset could mean having to launch a year later everywhere. Oh no! Anyway... Once upon a time, companies delayed launches specifically so they'd launch a better product. That seems to be…

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.

Ah yes famously people do not want apps on their phone. (Which are third parties by definition)

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

#643

Post by AndroTux »

macintux wrote: post #511
AndroTux wrote: post #471

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you decide to upload all your data to $company, that’s your choice. I don’t see why a user shouldn’t have the choice to do that. People already have all their data with Google and Meta, so I don’t see why this would be an issue for many. It’s not Apples job to protect users from themselves. Besides, opening up the API would also allow people to self-host their models and plug in their own servers instead of having…

> It’s important to note that this isn’t about privacy. Strong disagree. Most people have no idea what someone could do with their phone's cumulative data. And when Facebook offers to dramatically enhance your personal network experience if you just configure their AI engine into your phone's settings, how many will understand the impact of that?

Then that's an issue where GDPR steps in. Obviously privacy is important. But so is user choice. Again, this specific problem we're talking about here is about user choice. Privacy is a different concern entirely.

Is Facebook evil? Absolutely. Should people stop using it? Absolutely. Is drinking, gambling, eating junk food and smoking bad for you? Absolutely. Should this mean adults should not have the choice to do these things? Debatable.

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

#644

Post by mrln »

miroljub wrote: post #515
shykes wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also forced EU voters to consider how much they value these services It's been a while since I left Europe, and I'm rusty on that particular layer of civics. Do EU voters actually have a say in this kind of regulation? Or is it all decided on the executive side which is only accountable to member states and not to individual citizens?

> Do EU voters actually have a say in this kind of regulation? EU voters don't have any saying in any EU level regulation. The EU regime do basically what they want.

While the democratic process in the EU deserves its criticism, this is plain wrong. EU citizens can vote for the EU parliament.

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

#645

Post by mastermage »

bnj wrote: post #493
schubidubiduba wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those requirements are explicitly on the outcomes because companies like Apple used to abuse loopholes in previous, non-outcome defined laws. They, as always, have no one to blame but themselves.

It sounds like what you’re saying is that because the legislature can’t anticipate how companies will abuse loopholes, they sidestep that by outlining the outcomes instead. The issue I have with that approach is that I don’t agree with that approach to governance. I believe it’s incumbent on the regulator to define what is acceptable vs. disallowed in unambiguous terms.

This is a spirit of the law vs letter of the law debate. Europe in general (i know its not that easy) tends to go more towards Spirit of the Law. While the US usualy tends more to letter of the law.

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

#646

Post by theshrike79 »

827a wrote: post #579
theshrike79 wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

yeah that must be why Apple is so careful about restricting access to the same data when it is synced onto a Mac oh wait they aren't

You actually think that "syncing onto a mac" is the same as sending the data to a completely unvetted 3rd party cloud?

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

#647

Post by KoolKat23 »

mike_hearn wrote: post #641
asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They do have a say. They can elect representatives who could change the legal framework and the incentives for the bureaucrats, or even remove the ability of the bureaucrats to regulate certain things. Then these regulations would not get passed and that would be that.

> They can elect representatives They cannot. The EU Parliament cannot pass, change or repeal laws. Its representatives can't represent. If you mean elect national representatives, then the EU treaties were deliberately written to only give them one option - exit entirely and be trade sanctioned by the others as a result, who must obey constitutionally even if it's self harm and they don't want to do it. The EU is de…

If it's not in the EU parliaments jurisdiction, it's in the EU council's. As a rule, all members states have to be democratic and you can simply vote out your EU council member i.e. your head of state. It is democratic.

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

#648

Post by Ravus »

rambambram wrote: post #551
Muromec wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jurisdiction concept is not strictly bound by territory. Classic example is two parties based in two jurisdiction dealing with each other somehow. Imagine there is a law in your jurisdiction saying if you hire a person there are rules A, B, C which are a bit inconvenient to you, the employer. What if you incorporate in a different jurisdiction where the salaries are higher but there are no rules B and C, but there ar…

I'm not talking about incorporated bodies, I'm talking EU law. EU decides what it wants in EU, not outside EU. Or am I missing something?

GDPR also applies to companies that provide services to EU citizens, no matter where the company is based.

This makes a lot of sense, because otherwise you'd get situations where Multi Corp X could claim, "Oh, but our Berlin office is actually offering this service hosted in Kiribati. We just happen to have German users" and not offer access to personal data.

Seen as enforcement is through fines, companies that do not have an EU presence are completely unaffected. So even if technically true, in practice claiming that there's global reach is false. Concretely, no one is going after a hypothetical Baton Rouge Herald for not providing an opt-out of data harvesting on their news website.

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

#649

Post by [deleted] »

a_paddy wrote: post #56
frizlab wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

google/gemini has not complied properly to DMA in android AFAIK

Probably not, but it's still available. The DMA most likely would require the ability for users to be able to benefit from to the AI regardless of which email/photo/messaging provider they prefer to use.

[deleted]

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

#650

Post by speleding »

tonoto wrote: post #508
shykes wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also forced EU voters to consider how much they value these services It's been a while since I left Europe, and I'm rusty on that particular layer of civics. Do EU voters actually have a say in this kind of regulation? Or is it all decided on the executive side which is only accountable to member states and not to individual citizens?

It might be that we have a say, but there are a lot of decisions happening in Brussels that it "feels like" we, EU voters, don't have a say in. Such as: - Chat Control - Vehicle regulations (mandates on "eCall", disturbing audio visuals and other "safety measuers) in Regulation (EU) 2018/858 - Eventual upcoming ethanol restrictions - Ban on plastic drinking straws - Drink caps that are stuck to the bottles - Ban on p…

The ideal solution for all this is would be what the Japanese have: a population trained to just throw garbage in the bin instead of on the ground. I don't think I've heard any politician who is even considering measures to get there. He would get my vote.
Post reply on HN