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

Siri AI

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

651–660 of 746 posts

Re: Siri AI

#651

Post by aurareturn »

gumby271 wrote: post #413
aurareturn wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I want Anthropic to have the same level of access that Apple grants itself on _my_ phone, I should be able to do so. I want to install my personal software on my refrigerator, washing machine, hand shaver, coffee maker. I bought them. They're mine. /s If people want to buy open hardware, then just buy those. If they don't exist, make them yourself.

Just make a new phone OS lol, problem solved.

If the demand for installing your own software is so great, a company would make it.

Re: Siri AI

#652

Post by e28eta »

Huppie wrote: post #529
e28eta wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t have the EU perspective, which might be changed by things like GDPR, but I prefer Apple’s stance that “no one should have this data, not even us”. One reason is that the data on a user’s phone isn’t solely owned by them. Some of it is shared with other people, or “belongs” to someone else: chat, email, shared documents, photos of people, contact information, etc. In a corporate environment, this is more expli…

Maybe you missed the 'or sent to private cloud' part of the announcement, it's not just local-llm only. Don't get me wrong, just like you I personally would also prefer LLM-integrations with a privacy-focused provider and I think Apple is a good party to get that from (assuming they're using good models and keep their privacy guarantees here...) But in the end you're still often 'sending data to an LLM provider', and…

> Maybe you missed the 'or sent to private cloud' part of the announcement, it's not just local-llm only.

I saw that. Maybe you’re unfamiliar with Apple’s Private Compute Cloud? It’s intended to allow cloud computation on data without making the data available to anyone, which I think backs up my interpretation that apple’s stance is “no one should have this data, not even us”

This is from https://security.apple.com/documentation/private-cloud-compu...

We designed Private Cloud Compute with core requirements that go beyond traditional models of cloud AI security:

* Stateless computation on personal user data: PCC must use the personal user data that it receives exclusively for the purpose of fulfilling the user’s request. User data must not be accessible after the response is returned to the user.

* Enforceable guarantees: It must be possible to constrain and analyze all the components that critically contribute to the guarantees of the overall PCC system.

* No privileged runtime access: PCC must not contain privileged interfaces that might enable Apple site reliability staff to bypass PCC privacy guarantees.

* Non-targetability: An attacker should not be able to attempt to compromise personal data that belongs to specific, targeted PCC users without attempting a broad compromise of the entire PCC system.

* Verifiable transparency: Security researchers need to be able to verify, with a high degree of confidence, that our privacy and security guarantees for PCC match our public promises.

- - - -

Second, according to their press release ([1] and a sibling comment elsewhere in this chain), they’ve been trying to find a way to allow interoperability without giving full access to everything. Unsuccessfully, so far. So it’ll be interesting to see where it goes, but I’m sympathetic to their current stance.

[1] https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2026/06/due-to-dma-siri-ai-de...

Re: Siri AI

#653

Post by stevage »

globular-toast wrote: post #570
zmmmmm wrote: post #438

It's interesting how anemic the use cases seem to be - we see the same things recycled over and over: "reword my email", "remove object from picture", "add a reminder", "summarise my text message which was already only 20 words long" etc etc. As if these are the major problems in people's lives. I really feel like there's a fascinating valley of death between simple things that actually work and things of real value…

Renting a car isn't a problem I have either. I've rented cars and vans plenty of times. I just phone up and talk to someone or email them. It's really easy. A lot of these "problems" seem to stem from people just not wanting to interact with other people at all. Do we really want to become like Asimov's "Solarians"?

Millennials and below absolutely do want to avoid interactions with strangers. Especially gen Z will go to great lengths to avoid making a phone call.

It sucks. This is why none of my local supermarkets have real checkouts anymore.

Re: Siri AI

#654

Post by rpdillon »

grey-area wrote: post #610
JohnBooty wrote: post #594

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s really one of the most flabbergasting things about discussing LLMs with the naysayers. There are a lot of extremely legitimate concerns, like the environmental impact and so on. But I just laugh when they point out that LLMs are merely clever regurgitators of their previous inputs… as if this isn’t how we as humans operate nearly all of the time. People realllllllllly want to think they’re special snowflakes.

It is not in fact how humans work at all. Ask a human to plan a trip: They do research, Pick destinations led by their own experience/likes/dislikes Compare to other guides Plan itineraries so they can get there Check and share Ask an LLM to plan a trip: It takes the prompt and continues it based on weights in the training data. If there is no data it picks the most likely thing (maybe made up). If there is it’ll mos…

I think even if what you say is true, it doesn't address parents' point that both humans and machines regurgitate what they've consumed.

But I'd also want to point out that the way you're characterizing an LLM planning a trip doesn't have any structure to it, which indicates that in your scenario you're not using any kind of harness. I've been amazed at how capable even 30 billion parameter models are when I put them inside of a harness that provides structure and task management. If you consider that scenario, especially with the ability to search the web and use skills, suddenly the LLM looks a lot more like what the human process looks like.

Re: Siri AI

#655

Post by [deleted] »

zmmmmm wrote: post #438

It's interesting how anemic the use cases seem to be - we see the same things recycled over and over: "reword my email", "remove object from picture", "add a reminder", "summarise my text message which was already only 20 words long" etc etc. As if these are the major problems in people's lives. I really feel like there's a fascinating valley of death between simple things that actually work and things of real value…

[deleted]

Re: Siri AI

#656

Post by andiareso »

MattDamonSpace wrote: post #7
baggachipz wrote: post #3

> coming this fall I believe we also heard that a couple years ago.

Went out of their way to show actual usage of these features on actual devices in actual people’s hands

I noticed that, but I also noticed that it is ridiculously slow too which prompts the person to keep talking while the response was being generated.

After getting it in my hands, it's the same. At least 4 times slower for similar basic Siri responses. My guess is they are doing less local and more server-side generation to start as the on-device models might not be good enough yet.

Re: Siri AI

#657

Post by Planktonne »

macintux wrote: post #641
Planktonne wrote: post #620

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tech issues don't exist in a vacuum; the idea that tech--a thing we use to enhance our lives, in a discussion literally about doing that--can only be considered from a purely mechanical standpoint is a thought-terminating cliché at this point. Considering the uses and impact of tech is part of talking about it; you can't limit discussion just to the wires.

> It's a use-case that is either inefficient or inhuman, and I find it really odd that it's one that you value. You could have simply asked without denigrating the commenter.

I don't read my comment as denigrating; discussions will naturally involve disagreements.

I do think that the sententious tone-policing of yours and other comments is injurious to discussion.

Re: Siri AI

#658

Post by abustamam »

Planktonne wrote: post #621
abustamam wrote: post #617

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We buy technology for the convenience it gets us. When we can't rely on technology doing what it promised for us then we complain because we spent money on something that doesn't work as advertised. Even worse when it did work before and no longer does. In any case, OPs reasons for wanting to turn off any light in any of their rooms are unknown to us. Maybe they took their kids out to breakfast and realized they forg…

The OP has already given us context that makes your contrived example unlikely: they want to turn off just the main light, and in a specific bedroom. My extrapolation was reasonable, yours is a reach. There's no reason to hunt for a poor parallel to shut down discussion.

I'm not sure what is being discussed? OP is a bad parent for wanting to turn off exactly one light in his child's bedroom? If so, yes, there is plenty of reason to shut down this discussion.

Re: Siri AI

#660

Post by kennywinker »

nozzlegear wrote: post #597
kennywinker wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My complaint is this image is supposed to tell the story of how this stuff is useful or new. Finding a message from earlier in the same day and then paraphrasing the message instead of just showing it isn’t useful or new. A simple keyword search uses infinitely fewer GPUs and finds me the info as fast without the risk of hallucinations or datacenter driven environmental collapse. But for whatever reason - because thi…

> But for whatever reason - because this stuff is mostly useless, because they’ve all got ai psychosis, or because of general dysfunction in the corporate structure - they can’t come up with a better example. More likely, they just wanted an image that shows it can search your text messages for context. Most people still aren't familiar with AI, so having a very simple example image [¹] for people who may not have us…

> Most people still aren't familiar with AI

I don’t think that’s true. Who are these blissfully unaware masses, and how do I join them?

I guess it depends on your definition of “familiar”, but it’s in the news every single day, and you can’t even google something without being slapped in the face with it. I feel like the only people left unfamiliar are people who have no access to the internet - and by definition they aren’t buying iPhones

Post reply on HN