Was the failure really driven by privacy policy? Long term a privacy play is the right move. But right now, Siri's capabilities even underwhelm vis-a-vis a model with no understanding of user context that is just interpreting commands.

> From the outside looking in it really feels like Apple focused so much on privacy and now has no strategy of how to make that work with AI right now.

Are you referring to https://security.apple.com/com/blog/private-cloud-compute/?

The only way that AI will ever be able to replace each of us, is if it gathers our entire audio, text, etc history. PCC seemed like the only viable option for a pro-AI, yet pro-privacy person such as myself. I thought PCC was one of the most thoughtful things I had every seen a FAANG create. Seriously, whoever pushed that should get some kind of medal.

Are you saying that there is no technical solution for privacy and AI to coexist? Not only that, but that was the blocker?

I am genuinely interested if anyone can provide a technical answer.

If total invasion of privacy is the only way to make AI useful, then maybe it isn't useful?

I find it hard to believe privacy is the issue. Chinese companies have no issue releasing great self hostable models (and some admittedly nearly impossible to self host due to the sheer size)

Yes, I think the question here is not so much why the old is leaving, but if anyone seriously expects the new guy to succeed any more? ex-Microsoft too, not exactly a great start.

What does seem slightly odd is Apple have probably saved billions by failing to be dragged into the current model war.

If there's a company who could ever afford to be late to the party is apple though.

Not the first to bring mp3 players to the market, nor phones, nor tablets. Market leader every time.

They could have just stayed in a corner talking about privacy, offer a solid experience while everything else drowns in slop, researched UX for llms and come 5 years later with a killer product.

I don't get why they went for the rush. It's not like AI is killing their hardware sales either.

People only want privacy if it doesn’t come at the cost of a good product. It’s not enough on its own.

> it really feels like Apple focused so much on privacy and now has no strategy of how to make that work with AI right now

I see Apple dusting off its OG playbook.

We're in the minicomputing era of AI. If scaling continues to bear fruit, we'll stay there for some time. Potentially indefinitely. If, however, scaling plateaus, miniaturisation retakes precedence. At that point, Apple's hardware (and Google's mindshare) incumbency gains precedence.

In the meantime, Apple builds devices and writes the OS that commands how the richest consumers on Earth store and transmit their data. That gives them a default seat at every AI table, whether they bother to show up or not.

It could benefit them if they remained an AI free or a NOT AI first alternative once enshitification has really taken hold with AI.

I personally hope Apple doesn’t get too involved in the madness. If the sentiment changes they’ll be in a great position messaging wise. Microsoft and Google have thrown their reputations away.

I think the only department involved in privacy at apple is the marketing department. Nobody else has worked in anything related.

> Apple focused so much on privacy

Apple also doesn't have actual privacy since their focus was using the word strategically against their competitors, not actually protecting user data.

> Subramanya, who Apple describes as a "renowned AI researcher," spent 16 years at Google, where he was head of engineering for Gemini. He left Google earlier this year for Microsoft. In a press release, Apple said that Subramanya will report to Craig Federighi and will "be leading critical areas, including Apple Foundation Models, ML research, and AI Safety and Evaluation."

I don't see how Google + Copilot mindset even touches on privacy. I wouldn't be surprised if we users will be forced to pay even more personal data in the near future.