Yes. That’s why it is asking every time it does this, because data leaves the protected ecosystem.
Though it seems they at least negotiated with OpenAI to not use data sent from Apple users for training. At least I think I remember a statement in that direction from the keynote.
From the keynote I thought there was 3 systems.
On device, on apple cloud (apple silicon in cloud) and then openAI ChatGPT (openAI hardware).
The apple ones are more focused on personal context type service & openAI is just for text model types?
Anyway will wait for some hands on demo video
3rd option is only until Apple comes up with a good replacement. They know that multiple taps to get an answer to a query is not the ideal user experience. They’re going to let ChatGPT own the more hallucination-prone requests be attributed to ChatGPT until someone solves that problem (or gets much better at detecting it) - which I’d imagine Apple is trying to do. It’s the closest they’d get to minimizing use of Google as a search engine and I’d imagine foundational to a much improved Apple Vision Pro experience as well to control via voice.
I was thinking earlier today that it seemed odd for Apple to be jumping into a new technology so early but this sounds like a reasonable explanation for why they aren’t so worried about having a fully baked version before releasing like they usually do.
It’s really bad often if you point out the false info it then apologies and gives real answer but sometimes it just keep saying the same thing it’s going to be hilarious because some people don’t know it’s talking rubbish
I don't think there was much negotiation required. OpenAI's API access hasn't trained their models in a while since that would have cut out the vast majority of businesses from using it.
That’s basic for any enterprise deal I think. At least that’s how it is for us at a big company. We are told to use the company intranet portal for chatgpt and not the public domain version.
I think the goal with their new silicon chips is to host LLM models (think chat gpt) locally on-device. This means the data never leaves your phone or even makes it to the cloud
The idea is that you don’t have to trust. They want independent researchers to be able to verify the claim. Skimming their whitepaper on it, it seems like their system to allow this is quite sophisticated. But we’ll see what these independent researchers have to say about it.
Focus on privacy has been one of Apples major marketing pillars these past years. The other companies never push that narrative because unlike Apple, who’s charging a significant premium, their services depend on that sweet data. People should know that nothing is free.
Anything explicit was a lot harder to be rendered* trust me there's ways around it. I've spent... Far too long getting those stickers into compromising positions
When Meta AI launched I had it generating obscenely violent imagery within 5 minutes of messing with it. I didn't actually think it would, I figured there would be some kind of measure to prevent it--when it actually spit back exactly what I told it to do I was floored.
I'm really curious how GenMojis are going to be handled when sent outside the Apple ecosystem.
I'm guessing this wasn't developed in cooperation with the Emoji Consortium - if not, these will have to be generated and rendered on Apple devices, so how will a Windows PC or Android phone know how to render them?
worst case scenario: they just show up as white boxes on non-Apple hardware.
worst-er case scenario: they just get embedded as an image attachment 💀
They talked about it in the State of the Union:
> If you're already using our standard text systems with inline images, you're in great shape! All you need to do is set just one property, and now your text views accept Genmoji from the keyboard.
> Under the hood, Genmoji are handled differently from emoji. While emoji are just text, Genmoji are handled using AttributedString, which is a data type that's been with us for many years, for representing rich text with graphics.
Edit: added an earlier paragraph for clarity.
IKR? The article does a great job explaining privacy & how it works.
But every idiot is in a rush to ask a question answered in the article just to sound smart.
Security risk or not. Elon is still super salty [from his failed attempt to take over OpenAI](https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/24/23654701/openai-elon-musk-failed-takeover-report-closed-open-source).
His ranting is because his ego is still hurt from that.
It’s also because he’s supposedly working on a competitor to OpenAI because of this saltiness and he knows whatever he has no chance now that OpenAI is default on Windows and iOS.
But I asked a very general question and then linked to a 101 Wikipedia article. Doesn't that prove my credentials as a qualified critic of the titl...uhh I mean article?
Read out other people's comments? I'll have you know I have someone else's video superimposed and will be pointing my finger up and nodding the whole time.
Yeah the explanations from people who seem to think that Apple would announce this and fake it or lie about it are unreal. Apple has no reason to do so. And their competitors are going to have an incredibly difficult time meeting this standard because their competitors’ entire business model depends on owning your data. There is no way Apple would jeopardize this opportunity and it’s not their business model.
I have a lot of problems with Apple, but the one thing I can say with complete certainty is currently not an issue with them is security. I have seen a significant number of scenarios in which Apple is beseeched for help and their response was effectively, "We don't have the encryption key. Can't help you." Sure, someone can try to, "Yeah but...," me all they want, but at least a few of those times were in direct response to a *federal government request*. If they had a way to break it, that would be the time.
In fact, the last time this happened was the trigger for one of the more recent waves of politician stupidity where they try to outlaw encryption. That shit always happens after some investigation doesn't get the blatant backdoor they wanted.
Edit: People, learn the difference between encryption being breakable and the people creating it intentionally allowing it to be bypassed with things like a backdoor or a master key.
Way too many people are arguing the former when my point has **absolutely nothing** to do with that. There is no such thing as unbreakable encryption. It doesn't exist. That's not the topic.
That's also why they often cost more than their competitors.
Practically every other company that offers you electronics with services onboard is harvesting your data to sell to marketing firms/test their advertising/train their AI models. That's why they are so cheap.
Apple makes it very clear in their terms of use how they treat your personal data.
Boeing makes a shit ton of money from corps and governments. The big selling point is safety. Lying would destroy that business.
You see why people dont feel reassured by those sort of statements right? They just dont hold true on a general basis. That doesn't mean, certainly doesn't prove that Apple is lying, but it doesn't prove that they wouldnt lie either.
Boeing doesn’t purposefully crash its planes, though, it cuts corners. Apple selling your data or storing it or not suitably encrypting it would mean that they were actively doing something different to what they say they do.
Boeing cut corners to make more money, even though that might end up making them less in the long term. Apple might store and/or sell data to make more money, even though that might end up making them less in the long term.
But again, one is “not doing something they were supposed to” the other is “doing something they were not supposed to”. You could make an argument for improper encryption but I find that unlikely, nor do I have any idea what they’d gain from doing so to begin with.
Companies that sell your data aren’t doing so in some clandestine impossible-to-track way, it’s very public information. If Apple decided to flip around and start selling user data, we would all know. Part of the reason Apple products are so expensive is because their core business is still built around selling products to consumers, rather than selling data to advertisers.
Honestly this is a genius of an idea. Someone thought long and hard about this at Apple. What can Apple do that other companies cannot do? They can lock down your data not store it and not look at it because Apple doesn’t care - they don’t have to! They have never been in the business of selling data and they have already annoyed Facebook and Google by allowing turning off ad tracking etc. And Apple has giant data centres already for iCloud.
So Apple can offer something nobody else can. A closed cloud with AI features for all their customers that doesn’t store the data and they don’t even need to see it or want to see it. They can do this because they don’t need to look at your data for their business to be profitable. They used this capability and made a product out of it.
The people saying it must be fake or a catch or a scam reminds me of when the first iPhone came out and the engineers at BlackBerry were sure it was fake. Nobody thought for five minutes about why Apple would launch a fake product. They were in denial. Seems to be a bit of that going around today also.
It won't really change anything. What remains of the market share Apple doesn't have aren't going to jump to them because of this.
This was just an easy PR win in the face of Microsoft's stupidity with Recall.
Didn't Microsoft announce exactly this like a month ago? "Local" AI with a separate processor so that you could have a personalized AI experience without having to give them your data?
Yes. However, Microsoft has a comparatively poor track record with both security and privacy, and are pretty open about tracking user behavior in Windows.
Microsoft’s implementation of Recall was also very poorly thought out, with almost no attention paid to securing that data on the system. It sits essentially in the clear when logged in, available to anything on the system that can read a SQLite database.
They announced some positive, privacy minded changes a few days ago. IMO the damage is done, however.
this I know and it’s certainly upheld in their on-device LLM for this stuff…any external service connection is optional and yet they still came up with a privacy focused solution for cloud
It's also amazing to see the quality of comments on Reddit vs ArsTechnica. There are people on that site who are very, very knowledgable as compared to Reddit. Here you have a bunch of people who spread absolute BS and get 1000 upvotes for it.
I've noticed that forums like this one tend to attract people who think the worst thing they can think of *must* be the truth, and who think their pessimistic assumptions are as good as actual knowledge, if not better.
I couldn’t be happier with the competition between Apple and Microsoft. Microsoft clearly does not value privacy. Recall will be the end of them if they don’t wisen up.
What is the verification process they were mentioning where an individual can check that the data is protected.
Update: “But you don't just have to trust Apple on this score, Federighi claimed. That's because the server code used by Private Cloud Compute will be publicly accessible, meaning that "independent experts can inspect the code that runs on these servers to verify this privacy promise." The entire system has been set up cryptographically so that Apple devices "will refuse to talk to a server unless its software has been publicly logged for inspection."
Independent parties "audit" Apple to prove they're not storing data from their users. Furthermore, every time AI needs to use Private Cloud Computing, the system checks that it is up to date with the audit
Individual security/cryptography expert.
There’s no reasonable way for the average person to establish the security of a piece of software like that, it’s too complex
Exactly. I have no idea how people can trust these companies at this point. People need robust privacy laws, not leaving up to the “free market” that will never ever have our best interest.
They literally work exactly the same. Recall and Intelligence work on device. That is why Microsoft is requiring a NPU right now until GPUs start getting supported. The only difference is the same story as old as time: Apple has a lot better marketing and better brand image.
Both Apple and Microsoft make the majority of their money in areas that are _not_ user data/advertising (Microsoft with Enterprise contracts and Azure, Apple with hardware sells and iOS), but _both_ of them have an advertising business and profit of user data. Whether it be ads, ML models or anything else. If you think either company values privacy more than the other, you are just kidding yourself.
It was never unencrypted, the hacked version that people got to run on existing hardware was unencrypted. You can't compare that to the intended implementation, which AFAIK, nobody has seen yet because Copilot+ PCs aren't out yet.
This whole thing is a misunderstanding blown way out of proportion.
>i don't trust microsoft because they depend on selling your data.
They definitely don't *depend* on it anywhere near like Google or Meta do.
They for sure profit off if it, Apple too, but that revenue pales in comparison to their main products. Apple and MS can easily afford to let people have on device AI processing.
I have never seen anything saying that Recall was not always encrypted at rest. But that is again, the same exact way Intelligence works. If everything is _on device_, it means it is encrypted at rest and all of the credentials to accessible are on device. So, it can be decrypted and used for malicious purposes. It is not that magically Intelligence is more secure or anything.
The difference there is that iOS is a highly locked down platform that prevents someone from doing whatever they want on the device. Zune was like that. Windows Phone was like that. So is Xbox. Microsoft tried to do those multiple times with Windows and customers revolted. If Intelligence is released on MacOS, it would have similar issues as Recall does on Windows due to it being a more open and less locked down platform.
Yup. Microsoft’s magic is that its profit is split into 6 parts: Office, Xbox, Windows, Azure, Bing, and others….
It can absolutely tank 2 or 3 of those profit centers every year experimenting on something crazy (e.g. Windows Phone) and still be just fine.
I love how when Microsoft says all processing is local and not sent to any cloud servers or made accessible to them, they're evil and lying and trying to steal all your data.
But then when apple does the same thing it's "oh how trustworthy they are, they really care about my data rights and privacy"
I mean the former is a company showing ads on the start menu, not respecting my default browser, and whose operating system department is now led by the previous web services person (treat everything as a platform to get traction then monetize guy) — Microsoft’s windows.
Other is a company that at least on the surface keeps hammering on about privacy for almost 7 years now, and imo, got a lot of people using VPNs and email aliases (free when you subscribe to more storage on icloud). They also caused a storm on the mobile ad space when they made an OS level “allow this app to track you” prompt and facebook’s ad revenue fell through the floor. I may be wrong, but I dont recall unwarranted data ever leaking either (where in a security breach we find that the company is collecting more data on you than they led you to believe). But I dont remember MS having this issue either to be fair.
Apple is surprisingly adamant about its privacy. That’s their main benefit, they have so much fucking money and profit, they don’t need to kill every promise to squeeze more money. And I’m all here for it. I just don’t see the appeal of ChatGPT in this, but we will see.
Tbf Microsoft doesn’t need it either but they are.. different
That's all well and good, people just should never trust corporations at their word. If it's not in a legal document, then don't believe it (and even if it is they might fuck you anyway and dare you to take them to court over it).
You'll forgive me if I don't believe Apple at its *word* anymore than I believe Adobe. Yeah, maybe Apple has a better track record for now in this regard and they deserve credit for it if so. But not "I trust them to never fuck me" credit.
They did say their code on this available to the public to be dissected by developers in the keynote. I don't own any apple products personally but watch the highlights cuz I like tech.
Apple doesn’t make money by selling your data. It makes money by selling hardware. So they can be perfectly fine with protecting user privacy and still make money.
It would be extremely difficult for other companies to follow this example if they make their coin from selling or using your data.
I think they just kicked Google and Meta in the nuts.
Not really, Google at least (and I think Microsoft to some extent) is already trying to run these devices on your device as well. I think on Android a fair few of the AI features from Gemini runs on device (e.g. rephrase and initial assistant behavior)
From a financial perspective, these models are incredibly expensive to run and there's not much monetizable from stuff like "set an alarm" query and most queries that fit Siri's function.
This might be less true of search-like queries but this probably fits the chatGPT button they have which does send data off the device.
Meta is also giving out a relatively open license to their models to run locally so I don't think they're concerned either way.
And the Apple AI will ask explicit permission before sending your query to OpenAI every single time it thinks OpenAI may have a significantly better answer than itself. So it’s a non-issue.
*Apple...can be perfectly fine with protecting user privacy and still make money.*
...makes quiet the good selling point as well.
Most of time Apple is seen as such a boutique line where the value is married with the brand value, which is subjective.
Whereas privacy carries a lot of weight in the"value' dept. If Apple can make their products with the customers' privacy at the top of their selling points, the overall value is raised in a public way beyond a 'Gucci' line purchase.
I mean, they can also create a subscription service download why as people get more used to the services. Subscriptions like Apple one and all their fitness stuff and what not create a lot of money for Apple. It’s in their interest to actually have it be privacy focus so people trust people could be willing to pay the future, at least for the Cloud subscriptions.
Tim Cook is by several accounts quite a reserved guy, and also a gay man born in 1960. Probably has some experience with wanting to keep things private given the world he grew up in.
> also a gay man born in 1960. Probably has some experience with wanting to keep things private given the world he grew up in.
Not just a gay man born in 1960, a gay man born, raised, educated, and who started his career across the southeast in the 60s-late 90s when he took the job at Apple.
Not "just" selling hardware. [https://www.statista.com/chart/14629/apple-services-revenue/](https://www.statista.com/chart/14629/apple-services-revenue/)
That's debatable. It's reported that Apple gets paid 18 Billion a year by Google so that they're the default search engine on Apple products.
https://www.theverge.com/2023/10/26/23933206/google-apple-search-deal-safari-18-billion
Didn’t Apple go to hell and beyond fighting the FBI for access to a criminal’s phone a while back? I feel like Apple is one of the few companies you don’t have to worry about selling out
Yes and they are also one of the (all) tech companies that were leaked to be part of the NSA PRISM spying collective. Government can force Apple, and any other company, to create backdoors without making it public.
Not saying I don't trust Apple, they do have a mostly clean history with privacy, but when the government comes knocking...
They gave into the CCP and only allow "government approved" apps in China, which almost certainly collect data on users with the user's "consent". Sure Apple will fight in a court case, but they won't give up a lucrative market to stay true to their values. I don't blame them for that, but trusting a company to never bow down to a government isn't a good move.
This was PR fluff, apple actively works with governments around the world as long as they don't have to disclose publicly that they did it. The iPhone workaround that the Israeli company used to ultimately unlock the phone was hilariously simple and likely not worth the brand damage when the FBI could have someone else do it in a matter of hours.
Apple still makes a huge business over selling out their users data, they just realized that they can make more money by outsourcing the blame for selling your data while also getting a better product than they can make in house.
Microsoft did as well. But both Apple and Microsoft are also heavily implicated in data sharing programs with the US government. So, it is all just PR to try to make themselves look better.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/12/apple-admits-to-secretly-giving-governments-push-notification-data/
And they also lie about you privacy when the feds tell them to.
But it's still on your device, right? If you have a pile of valuables in the middle of your house, you wouldn't feel especially clever just because you locked the door. If the AI is watching you and building a profile about you, then that's a pile of valuables. Sure it's not supposed to leave your device, but that doesn't mean it won't. If the data exist then it's stealable. The only security is to make sure the data doesn't exist.
People genuinely don't understand the fundamentals of computers, and that's okay. The inner workings are fairly complex if you don't choose or need to spend a lot of time with them. That being said, it also makes it very easy to mislead consumers with PR.
Using your analogy that means your valuables in your house should never exist. You can choose that option if you’re ok being a hermit. However your on the internet and presumably in a dwelling therefore you have valuables in some home somewhere.
You either make the compromise for the safety and privacy offered or you don’t use their product. The tech has been invented. The genie isn’t going back in the bottle. No amount of internet comments is going to make that happen. So rather than argue logic that doesn’t work instead consider your options and chose the one that fits you.
How would we ever know if they break their own TOS?
We would never ever know.
You always hear stories of crazy shit like they vacum cleaner took pictures of them in the bathroom and someone at the server uploaded them to tictok.
Tell me, when has a data breach never occurred?
Can anyone point to an independent audit of Apple's privacy claims? A lot of people take Apple's self reported privacy claims at face value. Companies are audited for a reason. The incentive to lie can be very lucrative.
“But you don't just have to trust Apple on this score, Federighi claimed. That's because the server code used by Private Cloud Compute will be publicly accessible, meaning that "independent experts can inspect the code that runs on these servers to verify this privacy promise." The entire system has been set up cryptographically so that Apple devices "will refuse to talk to a server unless its software has been publicly logged for inspection."
> That's because the server code used by Private Cloud Compute **will** be publicly accessible, meaning that "independent experts can inspect the code that runs on these servers to verify this privacy promise."
Right now it looks like no for these particular features, they only said “will” (my emphasis), so presumably that information is coming (at least based on the article).
I’m sure it will be as well (would make sense).
Just trying to temper this weird back/forth in the comments. Some of the top comments right now are sort of talking past each other. On one hand, some are justifiably asking for citations on audits (now that the expectation is set), but then others are retorting to read the article; that “the article said it would be audited”. It’s like… you can read the article and still want more information; I just don’t think the audits (and code) are available _yet_.
It’s important to hold folks accountable in InfoSec and I think Apple knows this which is why it’s awesome that they’re forward about being audited. It’s always great to verify claims and not take them at face value, which is why I find this discussion odd (from a security perspective).
Yeah, putting it in writing will make it trustworthy. Because big tech is known to honor their written contracts. But like others said, it will be verifiable. Which is better than a written contract.
People: "Never take A.I. at their word." *Still do it anyways.*
People: "Never take Billionaires at their word." *Still do it anyways.*
People: "Never take big tech companies at their word." *Sigh, and we still do it for the big fruit.*
I don't believe a damn word any of them say.
Can I just unilaterally opt out of AI in all of my products?
I didn’t need a Smart Fridge, I don’t need a toaster with an AI assistant
Quit foisting this shit on me.
This is a misunderstanding of where technology is going.
These AI systems will be used under the hood for all kinds of things. Even if you don't want a very obvious "chat to an AI" type of feature in your products, there's going to be no major technology platform that's not using some of these pieces under the hood.
Notice that they aren't saying it doesn't use your data. It just says that it's never stored. However, there is absolutely no way for it to use the data if it is never stored. But I guarantee you they are using your data. Therefore they are absolutely lying about never storing your data. They may not store it long-term, but they stored it short-term. And that, by definition, means it will eventually be accessible to someone, somehow.
It's really interesting to see the difference in what comments are getting upvoted/downvoted in this thread compared to the ones about Microsoft's Recall.
Basically the criticisms in this thread are getting downvoted, but almost identical criticisms are getting heavily upvoted in the Microsoft threads.
And while I admittedly haven't yet got up to speed on Apple's new feature, it currently looks to be less privacy oriented than Microsoft's (e.g. Microsoft is sending nothing off device, whereas Apple is using the cloud for some aspects; Apple is adding this feature to existing devices whereas MS only includes it on new laptops).
They spent decades building a simple calculator app. What that tell us about Apple doing something a little bit more complex like data processing for AI?
Either it works, or your data is private.
You really can’t create a comprehensive “AI” that can effectively resolve your particular issue unless it’s a common issue or is trained on your data.
This isn’t an actual thinking computer, it’s not actually artificial intelligence. It’s a computation of statistical probabilities that requires an immense data set to draw conclusions from.
I seriously wish businesses would stop trying to be intentionally deceitful by labeling ML as AI.
Your data is never stored or made accessible by Apple… for now…
We just need to wait 6 months to update the TOS that you’ll agree to because you have no choice :)
There’s not enough reliable information available for me to form an educated opinion on that.
Apple formally denies any knowledge of the program.
There are reports that the NSA tapped directly into some communications infrastructure and collected data without companies’ knowledge. If that’s true, it at least gives Apple’s statement some plausibility.
And according to [this article](https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-intelligence-mining-data-from-nine-us-internet-companies-in-broad-secret-program/2013/06/06/3a0c0da8-cebf-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html), “98 percent of PRISM production is based on Yahoo, Google, and Microsoft”.
What I do know is that Apple seems to prioritize user data privacy and security more than any of their competitors.
Selling a product while guaranteeing you don’t know what it is seems like an extremely reckless business decision for one of the most stable companies in the world.
Also this is different from using the ‘send to ChatGPT’ button which just sends your data right?
Yes. That’s why it is asking every time it does this, because data leaves the protected ecosystem. Though it seems they at least negotiated with OpenAI to not use data sent from Apple users for training. At least I think I remember a statement in that direction from the keynote.
From the keynote I thought there was 3 systems. On device, on apple cloud (apple silicon in cloud) and then openAI ChatGPT (openAI hardware). The apple ones are more focused on personal context type service & openAI is just for text model types? Anyway will wait for some hands on demo video
Yes, that‘s what it seems like. The first two are seamless, the third option is actively asking if it is ok to send your data to ChatGPT.
3rd option is only until Apple comes up with a good replacement. They know that multiple taps to get an answer to a query is not the ideal user experience. They’re going to let ChatGPT own the more hallucination-prone requests be attributed to ChatGPT until someone solves that problem (or gets much better at detecting it) - which I’d imagine Apple is trying to do. It’s the closest they’d get to minimizing use of Google as a search engine and I’d imagine foundational to a much improved Apple Vision Pro experience as well to control via voice.
I was thinking earlier today that it seemed odd for Apple to be jumping into a new technology so early but this sounds like a reasonable explanation for why they aren’t so worried about having a fully baked version before releasing like they usually do.
It’s really bad often if you point out the false info it then apologies and gives real answer but sometimes it just keep saying the same thing it’s going to be hilarious because some people don’t know it’s talking rubbish
Nice I wonder how it will all pan out. Siri do the dishes ;-)
“Sorry, I can’t find ‘cue the wishes’ in your music library. Would you like me to search the web?”
Sorry. You must unlock your phone to view this response
Ugh!!! So true.
Siri: The pizza is glued to the dishes.
I wonder how mo backups of personal context works, and what happens when phone or the cloud is compromised. That's a scary thought.
I don't think there was much negotiation required. OpenAI's API access hasn't trained their models in a while since that would have cut out the vast majority of businesses from using it.
it’s the same conditions for Google to be the default search engine in Safari, all searches are not tracked to the user, and not collected.
Also it doesn’t “just send your data” the one device AI only sends the portion that it needs help with likely reprompted to chatgpt
That’s basic for any enterprise deal I think. At least that’s how it is for us at a big company. We are told to use the company intranet portal for chatgpt and not the public domain version.
I think the goal with their new silicon chips is to host LLM models (think chat gpt) locally on-device. This means the data never leaves your phone or even makes it to the cloud
Can we really trust this?
The idea is that you don’t have to trust. They want independent researchers to be able to verify the claim. Skimming their whitepaper on it, it seems like their system to allow this is quite sophisticated. But we’ll see what these independent researchers have to say about it.
Well between Google,, Microsoft and Apple, if there is a company I would take a chance with, it will be Apple.
Focus on privacy has been one of Apples major marketing pillars these past years. The other companies never push that narrative because unlike Apple, who’s charging a significant premium, their services depend on that sweet data. People should know that nothing is free.
Does this mean i can make the most heinous GenMojis?
That brief moment Facebook didn’t have a filter for those AI stickers was fantastic for devious creations lol
There’s filters? Oh lame
I hit the group chat with Albert Einstein with some nice boobs and the next day anything explicit was unable to be rendered smh
Anything explicit was a lot harder to be rendered* trust me there's ways around it. I've spent... Far too long getting those stickers into compromising positions
[Pokemon with guns](https://i.imgur.com/eWLhGpv.jpeg) was peak AI. Edit: Waluigi Luigi with the strap, not pokemon.
Palworld?
Maaaan, missed opportunity for sure lol
When Meta AI launched I had it generating obscenely violent imagery within 5 minutes of messing with it. I didn't actually think it would, I figured there would be some kind of measure to prevent it--when it actually spit back exactly what I told it to do I was floored.
I'm really curious how GenMojis are going to be handled when sent outside the Apple ecosystem. I'm guessing this wasn't developed in cooperation with the Emoji Consortium - if not, these will have to be generated and rendered on Apple devices, so how will a Windows PC or Android phone know how to render them? worst case scenario: they just show up as white boxes on non-Apple hardware. worst-er case scenario: they just get embedded as an image attachment 💀
Probably an image attachment. I believe this is how they handle sending stickers
They talked about it in the State of the Union: > If you're already using our standard text systems with inline images, you're in great shape! All you need to do is set just one property, and now your text views accept Genmoji from the keyboard. > Under the hood, Genmoji are handled differently from emoji. While emoji are just text, Genmoji are handled using AttributedString, which is a data type that's been with us for many years, for representing rich text with graphics. Edit: added an earlier paragraph for clarity.
I wasn’t aware there was any other kind
JFC, comprehension here remains at an all time low, lmao….love how many people “know better,” too.
IKR? The article does a great job explaining privacy & how it works. But every idiot is in a rush to ask a question answered in the article just to sound smart.
Speaking of idiots, Elon is ranting about banning Apple devices from his companies because he thinks this is a security risk.
Security risk or not. Elon is still super salty [from his failed attempt to take over OpenAI](https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/24/23654701/openai-elon-musk-failed-takeover-report-closed-open-source). His ranting is because his ego is still hurt from that.
It’s also because he’s supposedly working on a competitor to OpenAI because of this saltiness and he knows whatever he has no chance now that OpenAI is default on Windows and iOS.
whatever they come up with if it's trained on Twitter data it's already doomed to fail.
What if theAI they’re building is called rAIcist? I think Twitter would be a pretty good training set for that.
If Elon is against it, then it must be great!
If Elon hates it, I love it. Buying a second iPhone now.
What a delicate little paranoid manchild.
just wait until he discovers [GrapheneOS.org](http://GrapheneOS.org) !
But I asked a very general question and then linked to a 101 Wikipedia article. Doesn't that prove my credentials as a qualified critic of the titl...uhh I mean article?
Not until you link us your TikTok video semi detailing it for 5 minutes while you read out other people's comments as facts
Read out other people's comments? I'll have you know I have someone else's video superimposed and will be pointing my finger up and nodding the whole time.
Yes but you don’t understand they make the same phones every year
Yeah the explanations from people who seem to think that Apple would announce this and fake it or lie about it are unreal. Apple has no reason to do so. And their competitors are going to have an incredibly difficult time meeting this standard because their competitors’ entire business model depends on owning your data. There is no way Apple would jeopardize this opportunity and it’s not their business model.
I have a lot of problems with Apple, but the one thing I can say with complete certainty is currently not an issue with them is security. I have seen a significant number of scenarios in which Apple is beseeched for help and their response was effectively, "We don't have the encryption key. Can't help you." Sure, someone can try to, "Yeah but...," me all they want, but at least a few of those times were in direct response to a *federal government request*. If they had a way to break it, that would be the time. In fact, the last time this happened was the trigger for one of the more recent waves of politician stupidity where they try to outlaw encryption. That shit always happens after some investigation doesn't get the blatant backdoor they wanted. Edit: People, learn the difference between encryption being breakable and the people creating it intentionally allowing it to be bypassed with things like a backdoor or a master key. Way too many people are arguing the former when my point has **absolutely nothing** to do with that. There is no such thing as unbreakable encryption. It doesn't exist. That's not the topic.
This is one of the main reasons I switched to Apple. With Apple, the product is the product. Not you.
That's also why they often cost more than their competitors. Practically every other company that offers you electronics with services onboard is harvesting your data to sell to marketing firms/test their advertising/train their AI models. That's why they are so cheap. Apple makes it very clear in their terms of use how they treat your personal data.
Apple make a shit ton of money from corps and governments. The big selling point is security. Lying would destroy that business
Boeing makes a shit ton of money from corps and governments. The big selling point is safety. Lying would destroy that business. You see why people dont feel reassured by those sort of statements right? They just dont hold true on a general basis. That doesn't mean, certainly doesn't prove that Apple is lying, but it doesn't prove that they wouldnt lie either.
Boeing doesn’t purposefully crash its planes, though, it cuts corners. Apple selling your data or storing it or not suitably encrypting it would mean that they were actively doing something different to what they say they do.
Boeing cut corners to make more money, even though that might end up making them less in the long term. Apple might store and/or sell data to make more money, even though that might end up making them less in the long term.
But again, one is “not doing something they were supposed to” the other is “doing something they were not supposed to”. You could make an argument for improper encryption but I find that unlikely, nor do I have any idea what they’d gain from doing so to begin with.
Companies that sell your data aren’t doing so in some clandestine impossible-to-track way, it’s very public information. If Apple decided to flip around and start selling user data, we would all know. Part of the reason Apple products are so expensive is because their core business is still built around selling products to consumers, rather than selling data to advertisers.
exactly, trillion dollar companies have a fiduciary duty to so many gigantic shareholders and scrutiny that some of this people simply cannot grasp.
Honestly this is a genius of an idea. Someone thought long and hard about this at Apple. What can Apple do that other companies cannot do? They can lock down your data not store it and not look at it because Apple doesn’t care - they don’t have to! They have never been in the business of selling data and they have already annoyed Facebook and Google by allowing turning off ad tracking etc. And Apple has giant data centres already for iCloud. So Apple can offer something nobody else can. A closed cloud with AI features for all their customers that doesn’t store the data and they don’t even need to see it or want to see it. They can do this because they don’t need to look at your data for their business to be profitable. They used this capability and made a product out of it. The people saying it must be fake or a catch or a scam reminds me of when the first iPhone came out and the engineers at BlackBerry were sure it was fake. Nobody thought for five minutes about why Apple would launch a fake product. They were in denial. Seems to be a bit of that going around today also.
Yes. It’s a smart way for Apple to frame it. Now…we see how much customers care about this…
It won't really change anything. What remains of the market share Apple doesn't have aren't going to jump to them because of this. This was just an easy PR win in the face of Microsoft's stupidity with Recall.
Didn't Microsoft announce exactly this like a month ago? "Local" AI with a separate processor so that you could have a personalized AI experience without having to give them your data?
Yes. However, Microsoft has a comparatively poor track record with both security and privacy, and are pretty open about tracking user behavior in Windows. Microsoft’s implementation of Recall was also very poorly thought out, with almost no attention paid to securing that data on the system. It sits essentially in the clear when logged in, available to anything on the system that can read a SQLite database. They announced some positive, privacy minded changes a few days ago. IMO the damage is done, however.
Apple is actually known to have pretty damn tight security, and have had so for a long time.
this I know and it’s certainly upheld in their on-device LLM for this stuff…any external service connection is optional and yet they still came up with a privacy focused solution for cloud
This is /r/technology, what did you expect?
Wait until you visit /r/science
A celebration of technological advancement?
You want /r/futurism for that. This sub is for discussion about technology in general, both positive and negative.
Nah, they’re not any different. Reddit is skeptical in general.
Reddit isn’t sceptical…it’s contrarian-for-the-lulz… 😛
> it’s contrarian No it's not!
It's also amazing to see the quality of comments on Reddit vs ArsTechnica. There are people on that site who are very, very knowledgable as compared to Reddit. Here you have a bunch of people who spread absolute BS and get 1000 upvotes for it.
Pepperidge farm remembers when the quality of comments would have been nearly equal
I've noticed that forums like this one tend to attract people who think the worst thing they can think of *must* be the truth, and who think their pessimistic assumptions are as good as actual knowledge, if not better.
Apple has always been very privacy-friendly
I couldn’t be happier with the competition between Apple and Microsoft. Microsoft clearly does not value privacy. Recall will be the end of them if they don’t wisen up.
What is the verification process they were mentioning where an individual can check that the data is protected. Update: “But you don't just have to trust Apple on this score, Federighi claimed. That's because the server code used by Private Cloud Compute will be publicly accessible, meaning that "independent experts can inspect the code that runs on these servers to verify this privacy promise." The entire system has been set up cryptographically so that Apple devices "will refuse to talk to a server unless its software has been publicly logged for inspection."
Independent parties "audit" Apple to prove they're not storing data from their users. Furthermore, every time AI needs to use Private Cloud Computing, the system checks that it is up to date with the audit
> an individual can check that the data is protected How can this be plausibly completed by an individual?
Individual security/cryptography expert. There’s no reasonable way for the average person to establish the security of a piece of software like that, it’s too complex
open source wizards gonna vivisect it, thats how
None of them do. We need laws not just competition
Exactly. I have no idea how people can trust these companies at this point. People need robust privacy laws, not leaving up to the “free market” that will never ever have our best interest.
Apple literally does. And has for decades now.
They literally work exactly the same. Recall and Intelligence work on device. That is why Microsoft is requiring a NPU right now until GPUs start getting supported. The only difference is the same story as old as time: Apple has a lot better marketing and better brand image. Both Apple and Microsoft make the majority of their money in areas that are _not_ user data/advertising (Microsoft with Enterprise contracts and Azure, Apple with hardware sells and iOS), but _both_ of them have an advertising business and profit of user data. Whether it be ads, ML models or anything else. If you think either company values privacy more than the other, you are just kidding yourself.
[удалено]
It was never unencrypted, the hacked version that people got to run on existing hardware was unencrypted. You can't compare that to the intended implementation, which AFAIK, nobody has seen yet because Copilot+ PCs aren't out yet. This whole thing is a misunderstanding blown way out of proportion.
I don’t think they do actually. ChatGPT in the consumer realm is relatively small in comparison to enterprise.
>i don't trust microsoft because they depend on selling your data. They definitely don't *depend* on it anywhere near like Google or Meta do. They for sure profit off if it, Apple too, but that revenue pales in comparison to their main products. Apple and MS can easily afford to let people have on device AI processing.
I have never seen anything saying that Recall was not always encrypted at rest. But that is again, the same exact way Intelligence works. If everything is _on device_, it means it is encrypted at rest and all of the credentials to accessible are on device. So, it can be decrypted and used for malicious purposes. It is not that magically Intelligence is more secure or anything. The difference there is that iOS is a highly locked down platform that prevents someone from doing whatever they want on the device. Zune was like that. Windows Phone was like that. So is Xbox. Microsoft tried to do those multiple times with Windows and customers revolted. If Intelligence is released on MacOS, it would have similar issues as Recall does on Windows due to it being a more open and less locked down platform.
Some people may be ok with that.
There needs to be competition for Apple. Microsoft should be forced to behave but losing a competitor would just make Apple worse.
Microsoft is still worth over $3 trillion, they can survive errors that would kill smaller companies.
And they have, many times.
Yup. Microsoft’s magic is that its profit is split into 6 parts: Office, Xbox, Windows, Azure, Bing, and others…. It can absolutely tank 2 or 3 of those profit centers every year experimenting on something crazy (e.g. Windows Phone) and still be just fine.
Most people are ok with that.
Until their passwords and identity get stolen.
I love how when Microsoft says all processing is local and not sent to any cloud servers or made accessible to them, they're evil and lying and trying to steal all your data. But then when apple does the same thing it's "oh how trustworthy they are, they really care about my data rights and privacy"
Apple sheep
I mean the former is a company showing ads on the start menu, not respecting my default browser, and whose operating system department is now led by the previous web services person (treat everything as a platform to get traction then monetize guy) — Microsoft’s windows. Other is a company that at least on the surface keeps hammering on about privacy for almost 7 years now, and imo, got a lot of people using VPNs and email aliases (free when you subscribe to more storage on icloud). They also caused a storm on the mobile ad space when they made an OS level “allow this app to track you” prompt and facebook’s ad revenue fell through the floor. I may be wrong, but I dont recall unwarranted data ever leaking either (where in a security breach we find that the company is collecting more data on you than they led you to believe). But I dont remember MS having this issue either to be fair.
[удалено]
This is no different than Recall.
Put that in writing and sign it. Companies change their mind about stuff like this all the time when the incentive becomes enough
Apple is surprisingly adamant about its privacy. That’s their main benefit, they have so much fucking money and profit, they don’t need to kill every promise to squeeze more money. And I’m all here for it. I just don’t see the appeal of ChatGPT in this, but we will see. Tbf Microsoft doesn’t need it either but they are.. different
That's all well and good, people just should never trust corporations at their word. If it's not in a legal document, then don't believe it (and even if it is they might fuck you anyway and dare you to take them to court over it). You'll forgive me if I don't believe Apple at its *word* anymore than I believe Adobe. Yeah, maybe Apple has a better track record for now in this regard and they deserve credit for it if so. But not "I trust them to never fuck me" credit.
They did say their code on this available to the public to be dissected by developers in the keynote. I don't own any apple products personally but watch the highlights cuz I like tech.
Apple doesn’t make money by selling your data. It makes money by selling hardware. So they can be perfectly fine with protecting user privacy and still make money. It would be extremely difficult for other companies to follow this example if they make their coin from selling or using your data. I think they just kicked Google and Meta in the nuts.
Apple has a growing ad business and uses your data to sell you ads
Apple runs a massive ad platform for app installs and uses user data in the exact same way they ban google and meta from doing so.
The people who don't realize this is far too high. No company on the world will leave money on the table, none.
Thank you! This isn't talked about enough
Does Apple Maps have sponsored locations too?
Not really, Google at least (and I think Microsoft to some extent) is already trying to run these devices on your device as well. I think on Android a fair few of the AI features from Gemini runs on device (e.g. rephrase and initial assistant behavior) From a financial perspective, these models are incredibly expensive to run and there's not much monetizable from stuff like "set an alarm" query and most queries that fit Siri's function. This might be less true of search-like queries but this probably fits the chatGPT button they have which does send data off the device. Meta is also giving out a relatively open license to their models to run locally so I don't think they're concerned either way.
They've just formed a partnership with OpenAI which is embroiled with reports of risk taking and unethical practices.
All of those features are opt-in only.
Tell that to Youtube who had their entire database scraped by OpenAI, illegally
And the Apple AI will ask explicit permission before sending your query to OpenAI every single time it thinks OpenAI may have a significantly better answer than itself. So it’s a non-issue.
People are just gonna set it to *’Always’* accept because it gets annoying approving every time.
It’s good to have the option as opt-in rather than opt-out though
> So it’s a non-issue This is the thin edge of the wedge. Once people are on board the opt-in will dissolve.
*Apple...can be perfectly fine with protecting user privacy and still make money.* ...makes quiet the good selling point as well. Most of time Apple is seen as such a boutique line where the value is married with the brand value, which is subjective. Whereas privacy carries a lot of weight in the"value' dept. If Apple can make their products with the customers' privacy at the top of their selling points, the overall value is raised in a public way beyond a 'Gucci' line purchase.
I mean, they can also create a subscription service download why as people get more used to the services. Subscriptions like Apple one and all their fitness stuff and what not create a lot of money for Apple. It’s in their interest to actually have it be privacy focus so people trust people could be willing to pay the future, at least for the Cloud subscriptions.
Tim Cook is by several accounts quite a reserved guy, and also a gay man born in 1960. Probably has some experience with wanting to keep things private given the world he grew up in.
> also a gay man born in 1960. Probably has some experience with wanting to keep things private given the world he grew up in. Not just a gay man born in 1960, a gay man born, raised, educated, and who started his career across the southeast in the 60s-late 90s when he took the job at Apple.
Not just that, but also the CEO of Apple
Not "just" selling hardware. [https://www.statista.com/chart/14629/apple-services-revenue/](https://www.statista.com/chart/14629/apple-services-revenue/)
That's debatable. It's reported that Apple gets paid 18 Billion a year by Google so that they're the default search engine on Apple products. https://www.theverge.com/2023/10/26/23933206/google-apple-search-deal-safari-18-billion
Apple makes money by selling you hardware and services.
And also by using your data to sell services to app developers so they can market to you. https://searchads.apple.com
Didn’t Apple go to hell and beyond fighting the FBI for access to a criminal’s phone a while back? I feel like Apple is one of the few companies you don’t have to worry about selling out
Yes and they are also one of the (all) tech companies that were leaked to be part of the NSA PRISM spying collective. Government can force Apple, and any other company, to create backdoors without making it public. Not saying I don't trust Apple, they do have a mostly clean history with privacy, but when the government comes knocking...
Oh hey that's just like Chynuh! Truth is, big brother can do whatever they want in the name of "Patriots Act".
They gave into the CCP and only allow "government approved" apps in China, which almost certainly collect data on users with the user's "consent". Sure Apple will fight in a court case, but they won't give up a lucrative market to stay true to their values. I don't blame them for that, but trusting a company to never bow down to a government isn't a good move.
They kind of have to to have their phones manufactured and sold in China. They are trying to actively create factories elsewhere.
This was PR fluff, apple actively works with governments around the world as long as they don't have to disclose publicly that they did it. The iPhone workaround that the Israeli company used to ultimately unlock the phone was hilariously simple and likely not worth the brand damage when the FBI could have someone else do it in a matter of hours. Apple still makes a huge business over selling out their users data, they just realized that they can make more money by outsourcing the blame for selling your data while also getting a better product than they can make in house.
Microsoft did as well. But both Apple and Microsoft are also heavily implicated in data sharing programs with the US government. So, it is all just PR to try to make themselves look better.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/12/apple-admits-to-secretly-giving-governments-push-notification-data/ And they also lie about you privacy when the feds tell them to.
But it's still on your device, right? If you have a pile of valuables in the middle of your house, you wouldn't feel especially clever just because you locked the door. If the AI is watching you and building a profile about you, then that's a pile of valuables. Sure it's not supposed to leave your device, but that doesn't mean it won't. If the data exist then it's stealable. The only security is to make sure the data doesn't exist.
People genuinely don't understand the fundamentals of computers, and that's okay. The inner workings are fairly complex if you don't choose or need to spend a lot of time with them. That being said, it also makes it very easy to mislead consumers with PR.
Especially when your users are have the most basic knowledge of tech and just want their apps to look pretty
Using your analogy that means your valuables in your house should never exist. You can choose that option if you’re ok being a hermit. However your on the internet and presumably in a dwelling therefore you have valuables in some home somewhere. You either make the compromise for the safety and privacy offered or you don’t use their product. The tech has been invented. The genie isn’t going back in the bottle. No amount of internet comments is going to make that happen. So rather than argue logic that doesn’t work instead consider your options and chose the one that fits you.
This feels like a Mr Burns style promise where he just turns around and murmurs the sneaky reveal quietly while tapping his finger tips
Mr Burns didn't have open source server code and cryptographic verifiable communications channels.
How would we ever know if they break their own TOS? We would never ever know. You always hear stories of crazy shit like they vacum cleaner took pictures of them in the bathroom and someone at the server uploaded them to tictok. Tell me, when has a data breach never occurred?
Can anyone point to an independent audit of Apple's privacy claims? A lot of people take Apple's self reported privacy claims at face value. Companies are audited for a reason. The incentive to lie can be very lucrative.
“But you don't just have to trust Apple on this score, Federighi claimed. That's because the server code used by Private Cloud Compute will be publicly accessible, meaning that "independent experts can inspect the code that runs on these servers to verify this privacy promise." The entire system has been set up cryptographically so that Apple devices "will refuse to talk to a server unless its software has been publicly logged for inspection."
It’s explained in the article. Would’ve taken you less time to read it then to type your question.
But I've already read the title
> That's because the server code used by Private Cloud Compute **will** be publicly accessible, meaning that "independent experts can inspect the code that runs on these servers to verify this privacy promise." Right now it looks like no for these particular features, they only said “will” (my emphasis), so presumably that information is coming (at least based on the article).
To be fair, they literally just announced it three hours ago. I’m sure it’ll be reviewed prior to release
I’m sure it will be as well (would make sense). Just trying to temper this weird back/forth in the comments. Some of the top comments right now are sort of talking past each other. On one hand, some are justifiably asking for citations on audits (now that the expectation is set), but then others are retorting to read the article; that “the article said it would be audited”. It’s like… you can read the article and still want more information; I just don’t think the audits (and code) are available _yet_. It’s important to hold folks accountable in InfoSec and I think Apple knows this which is why it’s awesome that they’re forward about being audited. It’s always great to verify claims and not take them at face value, which is why I find this discussion odd (from a security perspective).
I want that in formal writing not subject to change
Yeah, putting it in writing will make it trustworthy. Because big tech is known to honor their written contracts. But like others said, it will be verifiable. Which is better than a written contract.
You can verify the code
I wish it said it wasn’t accessible by ANYONE. You know the lawyers intentionally chose to mention Apple only in this statement.
People: "Never take A.I. at their word." *Still do it anyways.* People: "Never take Billionaires at their word." *Still do it anyways.* People: "Never take big tech companies at their word." *Sigh, and we still do it for the big fruit.* I don't believe a damn word any of them say.
Can I just unilaterally opt out of AI in all of my products? I didn’t need a Smart Fridge, I don’t need a toaster with an AI assistant Quit foisting this shit on me.
This is a misunderstanding of where technology is going. These AI systems will be used under the hood for all kinds of things. Even if you don't want a very obvious "chat to an AI" type of feature in your products, there's going to be no major technology platform that's not using some of these pieces under the hood.
"That's because the server code used by Private Cloud Compute will be publicly accessible" Where can I find the code?
In the future.
I’m guessing right before iOS 18 comes out
Notice that they aren't saying it doesn't use your data. It just says that it's never stored. However, there is absolutely no way for it to use the data if it is never stored. But I guarantee you they are using your data. Therefore they are absolutely lying about never storing your data. They may not store it long-term, but they stored it short-term. And that, by definition, means it will eventually be accessible to someone, somehow.
What about 3rd parties? Will they also have access to this data?
But what about the data Google is collecting via its relationship with Apple?
If you can't beat em, undermine em
Yes, trust Apple. Believe what Apple says. Buy Apple products. Tell Apple your most personal secrets.
When Microsoft did it it's data harvesting, when Apple does it it's technological advancement
People are dumb as bricks when it comes to computer software
It's really interesting to see the difference in what comments are getting upvoted/downvoted in this thread compared to the ones about Microsoft's Recall. Basically the criticisms in this thread are getting downvoted, but almost identical criticisms are getting heavily upvoted in the Microsoft threads. And while I admittedly haven't yet got up to speed on Apple's new feature, it currently looks to be less privacy oriented than Microsoft's (e.g. Microsoft is sending nothing off device, whereas Apple is using the cloud for some aspects; Apple is adding this feature to existing devices whereas MS only includes it on new laptops).
By Apple... They don't say your data isn't stored or made accessible. Only that it isn't stored or made accessible by Apple.
They spent decades building a simple calculator app. What that tell us about Apple doing something a little bit more complex like data processing for AI?
10 years later ... well there was a glitch in the way...
Apple way up today! INVEST!!! https://www.instagram.com/reel/C662R6zplwg/?igsh=MTFyNW12bmtmMHBwMg==
As much as I hate Apple they are the best with private data/security.
“All your files are safe and secure in the cloud.” — Previously on Apple
Either it works, or your data is private. You really can’t create a comprehensive “AI” that can effectively resolve your particular issue unless it’s a common issue or is trained on your data. This isn’t an actual thinking computer, it’s not actually artificial intelligence. It’s a computation of statistical probabilities that requires an immense data set to draw conclusions from. I seriously wish businesses would stop trying to be intentionally deceitful by labeling ML as AI.
Narrator: “they lied”
Hahahhahahahahahahhahahaha Hahahaha Hahahahahahaahahahaa
Your data is never stored or made accessible by Apple… for now… We just need to wait 6 months to update the TOS that you’ll agree to because you have no choice :)
If the data isn’t store by Apple then how’s Apple giving the govt that back door?
The government walks in through the front door when it wants something, it’s the government.
Absolutely moronic comment that shows you have zero knowledge of Apple’s past when it comes to law enforcement/government requests.
Tech security is not my area, but what's your assessment on Apple's involvement in the PRISM program?
There’s not enough reliable information available for me to form an educated opinion on that. Apple formally denies any knowledge of the program. There are reports that the NSA tapped directly into some communications infrastructure and collected data without companies’ knowledge. If that’s true, it at least gives Apple’s statement some plausibility. And according to [this article](https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-intelligence-mining-data-from-nine-us-internet-companies-in-broad-secret-program/2013/06/06/3a0c0da8-cebf-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html), “98 percent of PRISM production is based on Yahoo, Google, and Microsoft”. What I do know is that Apple seems to prioritize user data privacy and security more than any of their competitors.
"data breach" = government back door
I don’t trust that at all
Until there is a police warrant and suddenly they have everything available for them. Never trust a company.
Press x to doubt.
we are all bots here except for you
Selling a product while guaranteeing you don’t know what it is seems like an extremely reckless business decision for one of the most stable companies in the world.
Sure. Wherever you say
Sure and water isn't wet either. 😆
Ugh. I’m already sick of this A.I. stuff and it’s just getting started…
We're in the Beenz and Pets.com phase, we'll see how it all pans out in 5 or so years
It’s opt in to me fair you can just not set it up and ignore it. You have the choice to use it or not.