Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
INTEL has a separate co processor for AI in Next Years release of the Meteor Lake Processors.

So I dont think ANY of the Mac Chips have a separate AI Co Processor including the upcoming M3 3nm Chips.

So the future with AI and Apple look way way off. Much like Touch Screen Macs.

 
View attachment 2240508

Siri used to be fun. Wish AI would have a bit more sense of humor. Screenshot from May 2013.

Nice, but I'm thinking that in the first years with AI, Siri or any other digital assistant will be like Sheldon Cooper (BBT)... not being able to recognise / understand sarcasm. Even worse, if not one of the agencies monitoring us has done so, Siri would have alerted the police via its satellite link when you say that.
 
INTEL has a separate co processor for AI in Next Years release of the Meteor Lake Processors.

So I dont think ANY of the Mac Chips have a separate AI Co Processor including the upcoming M3 3nm Chips.

So the future with AI and Apple look way way off. Much like Touch Screen Macs.



Says here Apples neural engine only handles media manipulation. not a true AI Co processor.

 
INTEL has a separate co processor for AI in Next Years release of the Meteor Lake Processors.

So I dont think ANY of the Mac Chips have a separate AI Co Processor including the upcoming M3 3nm Chips.

So the future with AI and Apple look way way off. Much like Touch Screen Macs.


Apple has had AI coprocessors since at least the A11 Bionic in 2017.
 
Whilst I want Siri to be better, I mostly don’t care.
Yes, The simple solution is to learn to speak Siri's language. Siri will never learn real English.

For example I can say "Hey Siri set kitchen lights to 85%" and the dimmer is adjusted to the desired brightness. If I change any of those words there is a chance of error. So I learn to say the phrases exactly as Siri wants. Same with sending texts and setting destination for maps app. You need to use the exactly "corect" words and speak each word clearly.

Yes i could be better but it is not so hard to learn "Siri Speak". Well it is not hard, perhaps because I've been a software developer for five decades, and I've gotten used to using the computer's language.

We have come so far. I first stared studying speech recognition and AI in the mid 1980s as a graduate student and that you could do it at all was exciting.But now people complain that Siri has less than human ability.

What if Apple used GPT-like systems? You could ask, "Please tell me about George Washington's first grandchild Susan." and you'd get a nice biographical summary, even though GW had children or grandchildren. It is also fun to ask about Beethoven's 10th symphony. Generative models are VERY good at generating text. But they have basically a negative IQ. They are worse than stupid. Even worse. If you publish this made-up stuff then it gets used in the next set of training data for the next version of GPT. So we get authorize answers about made-up facts.

Apple and Google have a really hard problem on their hands. These systems are good with language but are far less intelligent than my dog. The only solution is FAR beyond the current state of the art, These systems must be able to understand what they are saying. We are not even close to that yet, No one has a clue how to do that.

So, what we have is useful already, and be careful what you ask for.
 
Says here Apples neural engine only handles media manipulation. not a true AI Co processor.


Rule #1 of tech research online, makeuseof is not a good source for anything.

Rule #2, read and understand your source before quoting it. That's not what it says.
 
OK, but Siri is an embarrassment and Apple needs to do something about it.

I hope that it will use LLM to create a language model with a very limited set of information to act as a Siri replacement.

I don't need Siri to explain nuclear physics to me like ChatGPT.

However, I do need it to reliably do what Apple advertises it to do.

And at the moment, it doesn't.

Exactly. Apple just needs to make Siri work the way they pretend it does. I don’t want or expect anything more.
 
Of course it isn't, because Apple has been caught with its pants down here. And it's all because Tim Cooks loves hardware at the expense of software because that's what brings in the margins. And he has to go.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎
This is bizarre.

Apple announced an IOS 17 feature before WWDC, Personal Voice, that absolutely requires generative “AI.” It’s a accessibility feature, so I guess it doesn’t count. I don’t have the patience to re-watch the 2 hour WWDC keynote, but I recall mention of at least one other feature (the new AutoCorrect maybe?) that uses a Transformer Model, which is a kind of generative model.
 
I’m guessing Apple will wait until their version of ChatGPT doesn’t make up false answers, or threaten to kill humans when the humans tell ChatGPT that it is wrong.
Absolutely. I confess that over the years of being an Apple user - since I bought an iPhone 4 on launch day - I have often been infuriated on the more than one occasion when Apple has responded to the omission of a feature that competitors had already implemented quite well by saying "we're not going to implement X until we can do it properly/well/whatever". In this case however I 100% support Apple not implementing generative AI while it still makes up false answers. I believe the Google Bard team has even coined a term for the phenomenon - "hallucinations". This is definitely an issue with current generative AI that needs to be addressed before too many people start relying on it. I already see a few friends and acquaintances using ChatGPT as essentially a search engine and assuming that the stuff they get back is all 100% correct. At least with regular search results you can form a judgement (that may or may not be fair/accurate) as to how credible the source is whereas with ChatGPT you have no idea what the basis for any of its stated "facts" in a response are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎
Yeah, great idea. You'll usually get a good answer, but every once in a while you'll get completely manufactured nonsense that sounds like it's correct, with no way for you to know its wrong. It's a bit like Russian Roulette, and everybody loves that game!
Sure, Chat GPT and the like are firmly experimental and early betas, essentially.

They’ll get better as the models are refined.

And they’re very ambitious.

Open-AI etc seek to have AIs with good to expert domain level knowledge on practically everything.

But what I’m talking about for Siri is far more modest.

I just want Siri to know about:

- Apple services and apps.
- My third party apps from information made available to it.
- My content.
- And any other good quality information sources that Apple makes available to it ie not the entire internet.

Then I want Siri to:

- Be able to understand me and to converse intelligently with me (about the above)
- To make useful proactive suggestions.

I’m not saying that this is easy.

But given what has already been established with LLMs, it shouldn’t be impossible for Apple to come up with a Siri which is hyper focussed around the above knowledge areas.
 
Well, if it's powered by Siri, which it would be, Apple must be in crisis mode for letting Siri languish so much rather than trying to put effort into making it even remotely useful. This might just be Tim Cooks biggest failing is letting Siri get so far behind. I suppose the neural engine in their chips is designed to do AI computing so I would think that would be already built into the hardware at least?
Exactly the point.

Else you’re like Steve Balmer and Research in Motion (BlackBerry) laughing at the iPhone.

And we all know how those stories ended didn’t we?

We might get in say, 2025-2026:

Apple: We have the superior UX and App Store!

Everyone else:

‘I just ask my AI to work my phone, do stuff for me like book flights, tickets, groceries.

I ask it to proactively tell me about the news, concerts, movies, TV, podcasts that I might be interested in etc.

I have to admit, that I look at my phone screen a lot less than I used to.’
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎
This is bizarre.

Apple announced an IOS 17 feature before WWDC, Personal Voice, that absolutely requires generative “AI.” It’s a accessibility feature, so I guess it doesn’t count. I don’t have the patience to re-watch the 2 hour WWDC keynote, but I recall mention of at least one other feature (the new AutoCorrect maybe?) that uses a Transformer Model, which is a kind of generative model.
Apple is already doing a ton in this space. What the tech illiterate press and people with hot takes here can’t understand is if it’s not using marketing buzzwords to pump the stock it seemingly doesn’t exist.

Moving to the Transformer model is a *huge* advancement, meaning they’ve essentially rebuilt many of the ML based feature-set. But Apple isn’t shoehorning it into Siri to write papers for you so in the eyes of the press they haven’t done anything at all.

Is there really a reason why a car or an e-bike needs to have ChatGPT? Of course not, a language model doesn’t help with anything at all, but those companies are *marketing* it to boom-chasing investing idiots.
 
Apple has never been good at this stuff: AI, Search, Cloud Computing. But their hardware has always been used to build this stuff or present the end user experience. Apple does not have a presence in web search but due their hardware dominance, Google pays them 15 billion a year. They have the most successful App store, their overall services generate a lot of money and people likely use Siri for basic stuff.

I am one of those who wishes for Apple to keep the main focus on hardware, they mostly excel at it, their products are durable and desirable... their services on the other hand 🤦‍♂️, probably the worst on the market, I only use iCloud and that's because it hooks up easily with the ecosystem, if it wasn't for that I would not even care for it.
 
I honestly have zero issues with Siri. I use it every day for all sorts of things. Not discounting anyone else's experience but mine has been great.

Same here. No issues and I use it everyday.

Sadly, Siri has become the reflexive go-to product when someone wants to take a lazy swing at Apple and feel better.
 
Que comments that cannot differentiate between AI assistants failing to understand human speech (universal problem) and Siri not yet being ChatGTP (completely separate and important problem unique to apple).

The real question is what is in it for apple. Generative AI models cannot turn then lights off, set timers, etc. They can spit out text and summaries and tons of other really cool stuff. But you can use any online version for that. How does giving siri that power help? ChatGTP gets info wrong all the time and even makes stuff up. Does apple want siri making stuff up?

Apple is way behind in generative AI which is the world changing technology but it's not clear how it helps them other than "siri doesn't do what I say" which generative AI doesn't help at all because 9/10 times the problem is vocal speech comprehension. If we were typing into siri....well it would appear more effective.
 
Well, if it's powered by Siri, which it would be, Apple must be in crisis mode for letting Siri languish so much rather than trying to put effort into making it even remotely useful. This might just be Tim Cooks biggest failing is letting Siri get so far behind. I suppose the neural engine in their chips is designed to do AI computing so I would think that would be already built into the hardware at least?
I use it for actual useful things like controlling my device or setting appointments or reminders.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gusmula
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.