It’s clear that they made an end run around the rules, laws and agreements they made.
I hope some judge throws the book in their face for it and forces them to pay out of their profits to the artists at the rate they agreed was fair before they began selling audiobooks.
Spotify is predatory and isn’t paying artists enough for their content but a lot of anti spotify news anymore is envious and just as predatory music companies trying to take a bite out of them.
Spotify is no worse than anyone else except very lesser known artists can put their music on here and actually have a chance at exposure that other platforms don’t offer.
Overall 6/10. I’ve tried other music streaming platforms and methods and in my opinion Spotify has what I want. Everyone will price gouge if they could. But I especially will never use YT music.
Spotify wants another $2 per month from me for “numerous improvements and fixes”, like putting Joe Rogan right in my face everytime I start up and not shuffling properly.
I think ts great! Sound quality is as good or better. Ive always discovered new music more from yt than Spotify personally so it has about 10+ years of my listening habits to go on and it dies a good job finding new stuff I like
While downloading is technically locked for free {even revanced) users ther are appa like newpipe or ytdlp that you can use to rip the audio in various formats. .
For organizing large collections and playlists I think both Spotify and YouTube are not really good but yt music on the desktop/webui is great where Spotify has a better interface for their mobile app. This might be more of a me problem though because I prefer organizing my collection offline using something like ex falso and musicbrains picard.
In terms of music library size they are pretty much equal, I used soundiiz ($5 service) to export and sync my library from spotify to yt and it got most everything, playlists included.
I think overall it might take some adjusting to if you’re very used to Spotify and its UI but its a very suitable replacement.
That said, my original point is that training data gathered from queries is probably not valuable enough to offset the costs of unpaid GP4 query compute for the biggest smart phone manufacturer on earth.
The data is valuable, but for GP4 access, OpenAI would rather scrape chat forums, sell integration licenses, or sell pro licenses to offset all those damn Nvidia chips.
I doubt that’s the play. OpenAI is probably locked into a service contract, and Apple had built the platform so different 3rd party LLMs can be swapped out by Apple or the end user. So if OpenAI breached the contract, Apple could go with a different default model.
It will be interesting to see the upgrade numbers in a year. Do most people not care about AI, or will the user base be wary? Current numbers show around 77% uptake on iOS 17.
My hot take is that the new iMessage features will push adoption rates really high. People in my household want the beta for that reason alone, and I’m having to bat them away because this is a buggy DB1.
A version is Siri that isn’t shit is also a big reason. But that is not coming until 18.1 or 2. So my money is on text effects and stupid emoji reactions being the initial upgrade driver.
I wonder how this will end up working. I want to use chat gpt without an account and while logged into a VPN and to have unlimited requests… would be nice if this was the solution to this.
They always rebrand features for marketing, you aren’t in a video chat you’re FaceTiming™. You aren’t talking with AI you’re talking with Apple Intelligence™.
So I’ve been at a corporate offsite all week. I’m sick of hearing about “alpha” and “genai”. Business and leadership are so up their own asses. I’ve been holding back so long on asking a question around the general morality of the bed they’re making. I’m so curious where the future is going to go. We are in an arms race when it comes to LLMs
Samsung Lawsuits: Apple’s series of lawsuits against Samsung over alleged patent infringements related to smartphone and tablet designs and functionalities have been seen by some as overly aggressive. These lawsuits have led to significant financial penalties for Samsung and have been viewed as attempts to stifle competition rather than protect genuine innovations.
App Store Patents: Apple has been known to enforce its patents related to the App Store, targeting other companies that have tried to create similar platforms. This has sometimes been criticized as an attempt to maintain a monopoly over app distribution for iOS devices.
HTC Lawsuit: In 2010, Apple filed a lawsuit against HTC for allegedly infringing on 20 Apple patents related to the iPhone’s user interface and underlying architecture. Some viewed this as an aggressive move to slow down the growth of Android devices.
Patent Assertions Against Smaller Companies: There have been instances where Apple has asserted its patents against smaller companies or startups. Critics argue that these actions can stifle innovation and competition, as smaller companies often lack the resources to fight prolonged legal battles against a giant like Apple.
“Apple denies that, based on their common meaning, the words ‘app store’ together denote a store for apps”
Actual quote from a legal filing by Apple in 2011. It’s about copyright but the effect and intent is the same. They wanted Amazon to not use the term “app store”.
Did you generate this with chat gpt? And that’s not being a patent troll. A patent troll is specifically a company that buys up patents, that they do not intend to use and never do, and then sue for them. E.g. a company that does nothing, produces no value, and simply takes others to court for what they own.
Yeah, this is super on-brand for Apple. They still have the Jobsian slavish devotion to branding with all the Tim Apple complete lack of understanding as to its value or how to leverage that value.
Call Apple what you will, but suggesting the 9th highest revenue company in the world lacks understanding of how to leverage its brands doesn’t really make sense to me.
Sorry to bring this argument to yet another thread, but the only reason why what is fundamentally the exact same feature was generally perceived as a disaster for Microsoft last week and what seems to be a net win for Apple this week is that man, they do seem to understand these things.
"Apple Intelligence" is a very stupid name, though.
I'd say it's because Apple's implementation isn't essentially spyware at it's core. The Microsoft implementation was straight up deranged and dangerous, frankly.
Nah, it's exactly the same. Arguably in some aspects more suspect, in that it doesn't seem to have an opt-out at all and it IS sending some data over the Internet for remote processing.
Presumably better local security than the first version MS announced, but we'll have to see when compared to the shipping version. Definitely obscuring what they're actually doing a lot more. It's Apple magic, not just letting some AI look at your screen and stuff.
But hey, ultimately, that's my point. The fact that they went on that stage, sold the exact same thing and multiple people are out here, of all places going "no, but this time it's fine" shows just how much better at selling stuff Apple is. I'm not particularly excited or intend to use either of these, but come on, Apple's messaging was so far ahead of MS's on this one.
Oh, did I miss that? Did they explain how that works and what AI features are still functional if you don't turn it on?
EDIT: I'm not being passive aggressive here, BTW. I genuinely don't know if they've explained this either way. If somebody can source it, I'm genuinely interested.
Apple‘s solution does not require 200gb of screenshots where most personal info is visible in plain text… Apple wins here because they have a clear structure in their OS and all important data already in Apple‘s own Apps. And they analyze this stuff already very much as one can see with all the Siri suggestions everywhere since, I don’t know 5 years? microsoft‘s chaos approach in their Windows is now shooting them in their foot real hard.
I hope, that we can get a open source linuxAI to be run locally, that integrates like AppleAI. Should be better possible since, at least, all apps are installed mostly the same way(s) and are designed to be dependent on each other.
I'm not saying anything particularly new and I'm mostly repeating what I've been saying since tghe announcement, but I'd argue that all of those caveats are entirely down to branding and PR and not engineering.
App design, yes. Microsoft made their Timeline 2 so that it actually shows you in the UI all the screenshots that it took from you doing stuff and that's creepy. Apple doesn't tell you what they're pulling and they are almost certainly processing it further to get deeper insights... but they do it in the background so you don't have to think about it as much.
So again, better understanding of the user, messaging and branding. Same fundamental functionality. Way different reactions.
Yes, but apple doesn’t need to screenshot shit, thats the point, they trained their customers to only use apple apps, where they have full control and force developers to use their AI API to stay relevant.
Microsoft failed to convince user to use microsoft everywhere except with teams and the office suite
Google has the relevant data of most microsoft user, and screenshoting this (like scraping) would have allowed microsoft to get to that data without paying google for it
But that is kinda shady and thus not widely accepted.
The use cases they have presented are literally asking for a picture you received last week that contained a particular piece of text, selecting the text and copying it over.
I know Apple made it seem like AI is magic, but here in the real world that uses real world computers you need to know what's on the image to do that.
But hey, no, that's my point. You understand what taking a screenshot of your desktop looks like. You can grok that to the extent that you can feel weird about the idea of somebody doing that to you every five seconds. You can't wrap your head around the steps of breaking down all your information to the extent Apple is describing. Yeah, they know exactly what you did and when, and what you looked at and what it said and how it relates to everybody you know and to your activity. But since you can't intuitively understand what that requires you don't know enough to feel weird about it.
That right there is good UX, even if the ultimate level of intrusion is the same or higher.
This is not screenshoting, the picture is already a picture which the AppleAI has access to
Apple solves it by having the AI deamon running with relatively low rights and analyse stuff directly through a API where apps expose data for it
This is way less bad than just screenshoting everything and as added bonus, apps can give the AppleAI data not even shown on screen, which is impossible with the Screenshot idea.
Hold on, how is this "low rights" if it's looking at and reading every single file you have in your device AND every single thing you access online or have remotely stored? Surely from a purely technical standpoint looking at the screen is less access by every reasonable metric. You don't look at it, the AI doesn't know about it. Right? Do we have a sense of shared reality here?
Don't get me wrong, that's still very effective spyware and I certainly don't want a screenlogger running on my device, Apple or Microsoft. But if you present to me a system that constantly reads every file you access on any capacity and remembers it, displayed onscreen or not, versus one that looks at your screen... well, the one that looks at your screen knows less about you by any measure. OBS can record your screen, but it doesn't know what the emails you haven't read while you're recording say.
The info is easier to extract, easier to be made human readable, definitely creepier in concept, probably easier to exploit. But less intrusive. Can we at least agree on that?
You have other deamons on your device that have more rights. It doesn’t need rights if it gets packages delivered from apps by the API. Of course a big flaw in apple’s system is, that you don’t exactly know which system app gives what data to your personal appleAI LLM. So long story short, microsoft should have let your personal LMM be trained by the screenshots and don’t let those screenshots be saved to disk, but only temporarily saved in RAM. I bet, that the chips from snapdragon aren’t fast enough to achieve that good enough and this is typical microsoft bruthforce problem solving. Of course, if someone would be able to steal your trained appleAI (like Apple for example) they still can ask anything about you. I don’t know how apple plans to keep your trained LLM save, but that we will see soon I guess. Maybe it is stored in iCloud in order to sync with all devices, which of course could be a problem for many people. I use Arch, btw
I don't know that this is a matter of performance, considering MS is pushing a specific TOPS spec to support these features. From the spec we have, several of the supported devices Apple is flagging for this feature are below the 40 TOPS spec required for Copilot+. I think that's more than they're putting in M4, isn't it?
Granted, Apple IS in fact sending some of this data to server to get processed, so on that front they are almost certainly deploying more computing power than MS at the cost of not keeping the processing on-device. Of course I get the feeling that we disagree about which of those is the "brute force" solution.
I also think you're misunderstanding what Apple and MS are doing here. They're not "training" a model based on your data. That'd take a lot of additional effort. They presumably have some combination of pre-existing models, some proprietary some third party and they are feeding your data into the models in response to your query to serve as context.
That's fundamentally different. It's a different step on the process, it's a different piece of work. And it's very similar to the MS solution because in both cases when you ask something the model is pulling your data up and sharing it with the user. The difference is that in MS's original implementation the data also resided in your drive and was easily accessible even without querying the model as long as you were logged into the user's local account.
But the misconception is another interesting reflection of how these things are branded. I suppose Apple spent a ton of time talking about the AI "learning" about you, implying a gradual training process, rather than "we're just gonna input every single text message you've ever sent into this thing whenever you ask a question". MS was all "we're watching you and our AI will remember watching you for like a month in case you forget", which certainly paints a different mental picture, regardless of the underlying similarities.
I understood it like Apple provides a pre trained LLM and it is then trained on device with user data directly resulting in new weights and configuration for each person‘s personal AppleLLM. For me that seems more reasonable that way because the data is way less random but strictly orchestrated by the limitations defined by apple through the API that needs to be used in order to integrate your app with the user’s personal AppleLLM
And I still agree, the weights and configuration of the AppleLLM is as critical as 100gb screenshots of your windows, but definitely harder to understand if extracted.
I just don't think that's plausible at all. I mean, they can "train" further by doing stuff like storing certain things somewhere and I imagine there's a fair amount of "dumb" algorithm and programming work going on under the whole thing...
...but I don't think there's any model training on device. That's orders of magnitude more processing power than running this stuff. Your phone would be constantly draining for months, it's just not how these things work.
Ahh, lol, sorry for taking so long to understand 😅 guess many misunderstood apple, like I did, or not, at least I think I get it now.
So, the only difference between copilot and apple is that appleAI has access to the API where app developers decide what is seeable for the AI vs Access to everything one has seen on the screen except DRM stuff
At apple, as attacker, you would need to get access to that API and you can get all data and at copilot you need access to the Photos
So the difference why anybody prefer Apples solution, is because their LLM gets butter clean data which is perfectly structured by devs vs at windows, where the LLM has to work with pretty much chaos data
Where exactly is Apples solution spyware? It is only a process that runs while interacting and processing data. Or is it enough to be proprietary and have access to this data, well then, spotlight is spyware.
It's spyware in that both applications are a centralized searchable repository that knows exactly what you did, when and how. And no, the supposed ability to limit specific applications is not a difference, MS also said you can block specific apps and devs can block specific screens within an app. They're both the same on that front, presumably.
What I'm saying is the reason people are reacting differently is down to branding and UX.
Cook has not leveraged the value of Apple’s innovation successfully eg Apple Silicon being limited to Apple devices vs PowerPC days, the Vision Pro being horrible, the recent hilarious iPad creativity crusher ad.
A company with Apple’s market cap can do dumb shit and still appear valuable just because they have Apple’s market cap.
I read OP as “names are dumb and this is just Apple trying to be different in the same way everyone else is.” I think all of that is true and I think it’s valid criticism of the product. My last point about Apple’s value is probably the most important. They can do a lot of dumb shit before it matters.
engadget.com
Active