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

Apple Intelligence for iPhone, iPad, and Mac

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

941–950 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple Intelligence for iPhone, iPad, and Mac

#941

Post by School-Cotton »

harry8 wrote: post #853
TreetopPlace wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"AI convergence is going to lay bare organizational deficiencies in a way previous revolutions didn't`' Your quote really hit me. I trust Apple to respect my privacy when doing AI, but the thought of Microsoft or Google slurping up all my data to do remote-server AI is abhorrent. I can't see how Microsoft or Google can undo the last 10 years to fix this.

> "I trust Apple..." I'm actually a little gobsmacked anyone on this forum can type those words without physically convulsing. The even more terrible part is I'm sure it's common. And so via network externalities the rest of us who do NOT trust any of these companies on the basis that all of them, time and again, have shown themselves to be totally untrustworthy in all possible ways, will get locked into this lunacy.…

Do you have any examples of Apple being untrustworthy to back up your rather extreme reaction?

Re: Apple Intelligence for iPhone, iPad, and Mac

#942

Post by School-Cotton »

highwaylights wrote: post #603
ethbr1 wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I always saw this level of personal intelligence to come about at some point, but I didn’t expect Apple to hit it out of the park so strongly. Benefit of drawing people into their ecosystem. It's the benefit of how Apple does product ownership. In contrast to Google and Microsoft. I hadn't considered it, but AI convergence is going to lay bare organizational deficiencies in a way previous revolutions didn't. Nobody…

Ironically, I feel like Apple might have lost me as a customer today. It won't matter to Apple, obviously, but so much of what they showed today I just felt was actively pushing me out of the ecosystem. I first bought some devices for myself, then those devices got handed off to family when I upgraded, and now we're at a point where we still use all of the devices we bought to date - but the arbitrary obsolescence ha…

Requiring a new device for new features is not the same thing as removing support for older devices.

Re: Apple Intelligence for iPhone, iPad, and Mac

#943

Post by evrenesat »

pram wrote: post #812
evrenesat wrote: post #638

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope at some point they start selling a beefy Mac mini variant that looks like a HomePod to work as an actual private AI server for the whole family.

This is called a Mac Studio

It would be great if they let us install the private cloud server on our Macs, but I’m not holding my breath. Then again, in the name of more privacy, maybe they want to sell a dedicated local AI hub as another hardware product. They could even offer it for an affordable upfront cost that can be amortized into a multi-year iCloud subscription.

Re: Apple Intelligence for iPhone, iPad, and Mac

#944

Post by syspec »

notatoad wrote: post #486

is my iPhone 14 going to get none of this then? i understand i'm not going to get the on-device stuff, but something like siri being able to call out to chatGPT should be available on any device, right?

FWIW: You can do that on your phone today iwith Siri, if you have the ChatGPT app.

You just say "hey siri, ask chat gpt..." and then it will

Re: Apple Intelligence for iPhone, iPad, and Mac

#945

Post by zarzavat »

iansinnott wrote: post #835
tonynator wrote: post #832

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah real smart move to make your products initials unusable and unsearchable. Apple has done it again

Indeed. I suppose they are hoping people will associate the two letters with their thing rather than the original acronym.

People will just call it Apple AI like ATM machine.

Re: Apple Intelligence for iPhone, iPad, and Mac

#946

Post by Sai_ »

ethbr1 wrote: post #772
ants_everywhere wrote: post #740

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's actually exactly what you want. No one company should know what you do on all apps.

At this point, I trust {insert megacorp} more than {insert App Dev LLC} + {insert megacorp}. Neither is great, but at least the megacorp has a financial incentive to maintain some of my privacy.

I don't quite understand this comment. Are you encouraging us to use your comment as some sort of template and insert our own preferred corporate names?

Sounds like some crazy level of meta where your brilliance is applicable to any pair of mega corps...which I don't buy.

Re: Apple Intelligence for iPhone, iPad, and Mac

#947

Post by coolg54321 »

As a pixel user I'm really impressed with their cleanup tool, it looks way ahead in UX compared to magic editor on pixel, also having able to select the distractions without altering the main object looks really cool (at least in their demo), magic editor on pixel's underpowered SoC runs too slow, In general iphones have superior hardware vs pixel (as per the benchmarks) so having this on-device should make it really nice experience overall.

Re: Apple Intelligence for iPhone, iPad, and Mac

#948

Post by PaulRobinson »

harry8 wrote: post #853
TreetopPlace wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"AI convergence is going to lay bare organizational deficiencies in a way previous revolutions didn't`' Your quote really hit me. I trust Apple to respect my privacy when doing AI, but the thought of Microsoft or Google slurping up all my data to do remote-server AI is abhorrent. I can't see how Microsoft or Google can undo the last 10 years to fix this.

> "I trust Apple..." I'm actually a little gobsmacked anyone on this forum can type those words without physically convulsing. The even more terrible part is I'm sure it's common. And so via network externalities the rest of us who do NOT trust any of these companies on the basis that all of them, time and again, have shown themselves to be totally untrustworthy in all possible ways, will get locked into this lunacy.…

Could you provide an alternative model where you get what you want, that is economically viable for vendors and manufacturers to invest in, and that does not require me to teach my parents how to sysadmin their phones to keep them safe?

I trust Apple more than I trust Google to not share my data with a large group of corporate entities who want to sell me things I do not wish to buy.

I believe both - and if required, organizations like Mozilla, Ubuntu, Redhat/Oracle, whoever - to comply with law enforcement requests made of them to hand over any data relating to me that they might hold. I'm OK with that. I think Apple has less of that data than Google, and works actively to have less of it. Google works actively to increase the amount of data they have about me.

I think even if you had a functional device using entirely open software, that any organisation you share that data with or use to communicate with using that device - including cloud service providers, network providers, and so on - would also comply with law enforcement.

"Ah!", you say, "But I get to choose which crypto to use! I know it won't have backdoors!". To which I will reply you are unlikely to have read and truly understood the source code to the crypto software you're using, and that such software is regularly shown to have security issues. It's just not true that open source means that all bugs become shallow, and the "many eyes" you're hoping for to surface these issues are likely employed at, err, Apple, Google, Redhat, Ubuntu, Mozilla...

I look at the landscape and I conclude that true open source environments have a ton of issues, Google/Android have far more (for my taste), and that I am more confident in Apple than I am in either myself (even as an experienced tech expert), or Google, or Microsoft, to keep my data private to me to the greatest extent legally permissible.

Do I think "legally permissible" should be extended? Sure. Do I wish a multi-billionaire would throw 50% of the net worth at making open source compete on the same level? Yeah, cool. Do I think any of that is realistic in the next 5 years? No. So, I make my bets accordingly, eyes wide open, balancing the risks...

Re: Apple Intelligence for iPhone, iPad, and Mac

#949

Post by seec »

fckgw wrote: post #591
thefourthchime wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until this gets into reviewers' hands, I think it's fair to say that we really have no idea how good any of this is. When it comes to AI being able to do "all kinds of things," it's easy to demo some really cool stuff, but if it falls on its face all the time in the real world, you end up with the current Siri. Remember this ad? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sw1iwC7Zh24 12 years ago, they promised a bunch of things…

These are all very basic commands that Siri pulls off flawlessly whenever I use it.

Most of the stuff shown are much faster to do yourself if you have your hands free and if you don't you have to pray the gods that Siri doesn't fuck up for whatever reason.

Even something as simple as setting the time, Siri will bork it at least 1 in 10 times. I know that for sure, since I worked at a friend's restaurant 2 summers ago and was heavily using Siri's timer to time french fries blanching (many batches for at least 2 hours every day or every 2 days); this dam thing would regularly use wrong time or not understand at all even though it was always the same dam time and the conditions were always similar.

On the other hand, the Google home at my cousin's place operates at my command without mistakes even though he doesn't even have the luxury of knowing my voice.

People who think Siri is good either are delusional or have special godlike skills. But considering how many hilarious "demos" I have gotten from Apple fans friends; I will say it's the former.

I myself use iPhone/Apple Watch/Macs since forever so it's not like I'm free hating. I just goddam suck like too many Apple stuff recently...

Re: Apple Intelligence for iPhone, iPad, and Mac

#950

Post by chockablock »

mholm wrote: post #652
wwalexander wrote: post #597

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the image generation felt really…cheap?…tasteless? but everything else was really impressive.

Personalization really feels like the missing link here. The images it creates are highly contextual, which increases their value dramatically. Nobody on Reddit wants to see the AI generated T. rex with a tutu on a surfboard, but in a group chat where your dancer buddy Rex is learning to surf, it’s a killer. The image AI can even use photos to learn who a person is. That opens up a ton of cool ways to communicate wit…

> in a group chat where your dancer buddy Rex is learning to surf, it’s a killer.

Maybe, but this class of jokes/riffs is going to get old, fast.

Post reply on HN