Apple can set the standard for not freely scraping, we will all be better off! I'm just not sure if this AI's moment, or a passing fad like 3D televisions. Remember how they tried to become a thing three or four times over the decades...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Wants to Partner With Major Publishers to Train AI
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It isn’t as hard as you might imagine. There are objective facts in the world and those can be compared to the content provided by purported news sources. And in fact several watch dog organizations do just that. Without skewing too hard into politics, one of the sources you mentioned is in the business of disseminating falsehoods. And of course this is how Apple will approach it too. They’ll, at least in part, take into consideration the factual track record of any partner they engage with.
But overall, this is a core problem with AI. People will expect it to be objective and unbiased, but that is literally impossible given human nature. The biases can be minimized but they can never be eliminated and that fact alone will cause it to be the focus of controversy, whether real or imagined, basically forever. It’s no wonder Apple hasn’t dipped in yet.
This reminds me a little of the early days of iTunes. Napster was on the verge of destroying the music industry in the name of making music free for everyone. Steve Jobs negotiated with all the major labels and offered them a way out. Now we see Apple offering money to influential publishers who are also facing a similar existential crisis. Even if Apple ends up scrapping their AI intentions, this is still a good thing for publishers because it creates an artificial value for their work and gets people thinking that we need a trusted gatekeeper/curator like Apple for news and entertainment. Sometime in 2024, there will be AIs scraping news sites full of disinformation and hate speech. I don't want the world listening to garbage for free when they can pay a small fee for real news and entertainment sourced by professional journalists and vetted by Apple using an AI that curates stories for specific listeners or viewers.
The source that doesn't rely on advertising dollars for funding is the best starting place for this discussion. NPR and PBS aren't perfect but I would trust their news and opinions over any other sources even though I do not agree with some of their programming.
It's all about the training because it's performed by humans who (like you say) all have had biases since they were 2 years old. Right now, AIs (in US) are trained mostly by asian and white males with degrees in computer data science. It could be worse but it won't be much better until we start training AI using public algorithms - kind of like those annoying CAPTHCA puzzles but for more advanced endeavors like the arts and sciences.
Do you accept that there exists an objective reality?
These LLMs and generative image applications are interesting, for sure. But we have yet to see the ramifications of such in our society. The fruit they bear will be felt in future generations.
I am glad that at least Apple broaching companies will put a spotlight on the problems of copyrights and infringement.
Discussions over "truth" immediately run into the basic philosophy topics of epistemology and ontology. Most people don't care to be bothered with such discussions. Perhaps students in journalism schools will struggle with these issues, but both the conman and the consumer probably will not.
I am glad that at least Apple broaching companies will put a spotlight on the problems of copyrights and infringement.
Discussions over "truth" immediately run into the basic philosophy topics of epistemology and ontology. Most people don't care to be bothered with such discussions. Perhaps students in journalism schools will struggle with these issues, but both the conman and the consumer probably will not.
So that is how mankind is going to be overtaken by AI.. by being inundated with misinformation, bias and bull****. Good to know.
Apple has approached several major publishers to establish deals that would allow the Cupertino company to train generative artificial intelligence systems on news content, reports The New York Times.
Apple is aiming for multiyear deals and has approached Condé Nast, NBC News, and IAC. Condé Nast publications include Vogue, Wired, Vanity Fair, Ars Technica, Glamour, The New Yorker, GQ, and more, while IAC owns publications like People, The Spruce, Serious Eats, Martha Stewart Living, Real Simple, Entertainment Weekly, and Better Homes & Gardens.
Proposed deals have been worth at least $50 million, and would allow Apple to license archives of news articles. According to The New York Times, some of the publishers were "lukewarm" on Apple's offer. Apple's terms are said to be "too expansive," and Apple has been vague about how it will apply generative AI to news.
Other publishers were "optimistic" about a potential partnership, and were pleased that Apple asked to use their content rather than just training generative models on published news without permission as other AI companies have done.
Multiple rumors have suggested that Apple is working overtime to catch up to its rivals on generative AI offerings, with Apple testing an "AppleGPT" chatbot internally and planning for new AI features in iOS 18.
Microsoft, Google, and Meta have all incorporated generative AI into their products over the course of the last year, which means Apple is lagging behind when it comes to AI technology. ChatGPT, the most popular chatbot from OpenAI, was trained on a huge amount of data that includes books, articles, and web pages.
In addition to the copyright issues that come with the broad scraping of internet content, ChatGPT has sometimes been criticized for the accuracy of the information that it sometimes surfaces. By training an AI model on a more tailored set of information, Apple could end up with a more reliable product. Apple is also said to be planning to incorporate generative AI features across its app offerings, so a model that has been fed content from news sources could perhaps be added into Apple News.
The New York Times says that Apple executives have been "debating" how to get the data needed for generative AI products. Apple has not wanted to source information from the internet because of its focus on privacy, so deals with news publishers provide an alternative.
Article Link: Apple Wants to Partner With Major Publishers to Train AI
Like most people here I'm scared of the bias views Apple AI is going to pick up from Better Homes & Gardens.
Why can't we have both sides where there's an opposing magazine that suggests pouring chemicals on your soil is just as good?
Why can't we have both sides where there's an opposing magazine that suggests pouring chemicals on your soil is just as good?
For me the biggest news is that they plan to pay content providers and not just take information like other companies such as ... fill in the blanks.
It may be too late at this point, but more websites may want to consider putting up firewalls to prevent their data from further being scrapped by the likes of chatGPT.
I am personally betting on AI being another overhyped fad. In light of the recent Gemini AI demo being faked, I find that AI demos have been pretty unimpressive overall. Instead of showing how they can improve our lives, I am seeing chatbots with no real purpose, I am seeing AI being used to allow people to get away with actually having to do any real creative work, and now I am see AI perform cheap parlour tricks like playing "rock, paper, scissors".
It's a perennial issue when companies have this extremely powerful tech that they have no idea what to use for and more importantly, how exactly to market it to consumers.
Better to pay upfront and ask permission than be sued and beg for forgiveness later I suppose.
So people use AI to write news and use that news to train AI?
I’m noticing a political bias pattern in the publishers listed in this article. Typical.
Another thing that comes to mind - if Apple can set the expectation that content creators should be compensated for the data scrapped by LLMs, what impact will this have on existing companies like OpenAI, which is still not profitable? Apple has more than enough money to bankroll this for all eternity. So once again, it may not be a question of who is first, but who the last man standing will be.
Will be nice if Siri improves in iOS 18. Even a slight improvement is welcome. Also seems like the next iPhone models will have some form of AI features/improvements added
Apple has already been moving into the whole entertainment industry. Now AI, Vision Pro and all.
Sadly, I think you are right. I’ve always thought so ever since a pumped up Siri was first mentioned.
Facts are based off proof, beliefs are based off feelings, with or without proof. It doesn’t matter where you get your news/information as long as the organization presents the proof that you yourself can research. The issue is that most people today are too lazy to figure stuff out for themselves and just believe everything they read/hear to be the absolute truth.
Humans are extremely biased, it manifests itself on these boards. The way some post, you’d think this site was called MacFacts. Everyone is so quick to blame and shame, reason and logic are completely stepped on and disregarded. People read and react without thought or context.