Like all of the apps they've sherlocked? Or money from scam apps they've collected money from users and not refunded? No, Apple are completely innocent and moral.
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's Phil Schiller to Serve as OpenAI Board Observer as Part of iOS 18 AI Agreement
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think it more applies to Apple under Tim. He was one who promoted subscription model for everything. And isn’t that a scam when you download app, click “next” and can accidentally click to pay with your card for that app? Isn’t this scam?
Back when Steve was CEO AppStore was a brilliant place. There were no thousands of useless apps, lots of them were free or had adequate single-purchase price, and moreover we had more games – nowadays we still have same games but none of the newer ones. Because there is subscription/ads based model that many developers use, and it automatically equals to poorest gaming experience possible (clash of clans type stuff).
If I was Tim I would have removed FilmicPro and Halide from App Store without questions. Those developers are total swindlers, they both had single-purchase products and then with few updates these got converted into subscription-based crap. It is like if you go to a store, buy whiskey and next day it gets converted to beer because “manufacturer has explicit rights blah blah blah…”. Those developers do not understand what the concept of “ownership” means
Hopefully with the gradually interest in emulation on IOS, apple will (Finally) see the writing on the wall.
It's no surprise that people are loving playing the old Zelda and Pokemon games. Full featured games that aren't coded to feel like coin-operated arcade machines, demanding more money.
Apple Arcade+ goes halfway there, but what's really needed is the (hinted in the past but never delivered) curation of the App Store.
Some kind of official integration with handful of review websites. Some way of filtering out the dross and only showing good quality apps.
It doesn't matter if they're subscription only, they just have to be good.
A lot of people would have said exactly that about the MP3 era and the iPod. Or even Rip Mix Burn.
They eventually turned it around with the iTunes Music Store, but they could negotiate it from a position of "otherwise you just get nothing for your content". There are some parallels there, for sure.
I was a huge skeptic for a long time. I don’t believe in 99% of the hype still but it is very useful for many things in my field of work. Mundane things.
Recently one of our users reported a phishing email, it included an email attachment with a html file inside of that with JavaScript that was obfuscated. I asked ChatGPT what the function was and it within a few seconds provided a detailed breakdown even covering the base64 encoding of one part to human readable text.
That’s what I like about “AI”. I imagine cases like this being far more useful to the general masses, not so much of this image generation stuff.
Never liked him with keynotes , always made it sound like Apple invented stuff first , and felt forced when he did the keynotes
I work in clinical healthcare and my company has all the AI sites and services domain/IP blocked on the entire network, for employees and visitors.
Tried it (chatGPT and copilot) anyway on my own device and it was wrong enough that I wouldn't trust it.
Blocking it from visitors is pretty shady. Do you block Google also? Doctors are not infallible and patients should always be thinking 'trust, but verify'.
You can't login to Google accounts on the employee-side with company issued devices and mail.google.com is blocked, but regular Google is available.
I don't work with IT in any fashion other than putting in service tickets so I have no idea their reasoning, other than potential HIPAA violations.
Last edited:
Hope he'll manage to convince openAI to introduce some 30% extortion scheme that go into Apple pocket.
I think it's an issue of expectations. AI doesn't know anything, it just strings words together and happens to look knowledgeable.
ChatGPT is great for sanitizing data to paste into excel. That's 90% of my AI usage, the remaining 10% is reminding me the difference between a JOIN and a LEFT/RIGHTJOIN in an SQL query.
Gemini on iOS is going to be so much more useful for search than OpenAI.
Hopefully they get the google deal done before launch.
Hopefully they get the google deal done before launch.
LMFAO, you're drinking too much apple juice bud.
Gemini is coming to iOS, I expect you'll change your tune when you realise OpenAI is useless on search.
Continuing on whether Siri becoming more restricted to Apple Intelligence hardware requirements. (Siri able to hand complicated user requests over to ChatGPT with explicit user permission)
A Siri divided against itself cannot stand
The new, intelligent Siri will only work on a select number of Apple devices. Everyone else has to use the dumber Siri. That might be problematic.
www.macworld.com
This article looks at multiple ways to work around this fiasco.
It is relevant! None of the data processed by Apple's AI goes through Open AI's ChatGTP. Apple has their own AI and Large Language Models (LLMs). Users have the option of using ChatGTP if they want to but they will be asked and have to opt-in to do that, that is separate from using Apple's own AI models. Apple has their own Virtual Private Cloud.
Yeah it is not a fit for everyone, which is why I mentioned my specific use case. Healthcare should block the use of it, unless you have a BA with OpenAI or Microsoft, you set your organization up for HIPAA violations.
Right. But this is Apple we're talking about. Remember when Siri was only available on the iPhone 4S?
Employees are different than visitors. It's why I specifically called it out. If I'm a patient at a healthcare location and am being prevented from checking my email, that's also an issue. Though I can just use cell (along with any employees tbh).
I think it is a tad shortsighted to equal «AI» (which isn't what the name says anyway in almost all cases) with ChatGPT. Machine recognition, learning and transforming will be a boon when combined with the regular day-to-day applications in many small ways. And it already is, has been for some years. It is a more or less inevitable next step in the evolution of science, from Taylorism as a thinking model of rationalizing work, the Spinning Jenny, the fully integrated robot engineering manufacture, the computer, new and faster means of communication and so on. It is only a first step, which will sooner or later co-relate with leaps in neuroscience, nanotechnology, robotic and so on. It will kill jobs and it will create jobs, it will be a weapon and a tool of creative endeavors, as all things us humans come up with, we use it to make art, make life better and f%&/( kill each other (AI is used in Ukraine and Gaza alike). Like any technology, it is about how we use technology, how society reacts to progress. Do we have models of re-distributing wealth so that machines doing repetitive work do not only make 1% of society richer but all of us. Do we have measures for trust and truth in a time in which anything can be a hyper-detailed and realistic simulacrum? Look at the pivot smart phones and social media have brought to society and extrapolate that to VR/AR/«AI» and maybe neurohybrid man/machine-interfaces. It's almost boring to talk about AI, as so many people do 2024, when next year it will be just another feature on your phone. But on the other hand, we are moving into the Asimovian world, so slow we almost do not notice it, of robots and computers that one day will be smarter than us, maybe not only in reproducing and transforming information but also in creating new ideas. And the most important thing is, that journalism, media, companies and most of all politics should have a model where we/they want to go. At the moment there is not only a sore lack of idea of the kind of society we want to shape with technology (if you exclude the Randian Silicon-Valley-models) but a depressing roll-back to the 30s of the last century... and these emerging kryptofascist kleptocracies will be terrible to bear (or get rid of) when they employ the new technologies, from face recognition to AI-based societal «nudges» to Orwellian social media used to steer public opinions. At this moment in time we do not need only better tech, we need an idea of society that harmonizes with the technology. We're living in ****ing interesting times.
