[HN Gopher] A notification for you, Apple: There is no husband
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       A notification for you, Apple: There is no husband
        
       Author : zdw
       Score  : 80 points
       Date   : 2025-01-18 00:53 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (techthings.cmail20.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (techthings.cmail20.com)
        
       | ggm wrote:
       | I am probably suffering confirmation bias. But that said, this
       | LLM smartness continues to be impressively shit. There's a level
       | of "yea that's cool" but it's outweighed by "that'd be wrong, and
       | suggests you understand nothing about me or my data"
       | 
       | It's a little (ok a lot) like targeted ads. I'll believe it's
       | targeted when it tries to sell me ancillary, related goods for
       | e.g. that fridge freezer I bought, not show me ads for fridge
       | freezer I now don't need.
        
         | 112233 wrote:
         | Yeah, framing is the key. Put LLM in autocomplete, and it is
         | "oh wow this thing reads my mind". Present it as an expert
         | counselor and "this stupid bot does not know we have no bridge
         | in our city" or something.
        
         | ben_w wrote:
         | Likewise, I do wonder how much of my _enthusiasm_ is
         | confirmation bias. Could it just be a Clever Hans? I think it
         | has to be at least a little smarter than that, even just to get
         | code that _usually_ compiles, but still, I am aware that it may
         | be more smoke and mirrors than it feels like, that I may be in
         | the cargo cult, metaphorically putting a paper slip into the
         | head of a clay golem shaped like Brent Spiner.
         | 
         | Targeted ads are a useful reference point. A decade back,
         | everyone was horrified (or amazed) by that story of
         | supermarkets knowing some teenager was pregnant before their
         | father did. But today... the category in which your fridge
         | example is, is the best it gets for me -- even Facebook, for
         | the most part, is on-par with my actual spam folder, with ads
         | for both boob surgery and dick pills, ads for lawyers based in
         | a country I don't live in who specialise in giving up a
         | citizenship I never had, recommendations for sports groups
         | focusing on a sport I don't follow in a state I've never
         | visited of a country I haven't set foot in since 2018. Plus,
         | very occasionally, ads for things I already have.
        
       | mensetmanusman wrote:
       | I'm sorry Gal, you have a husband now.
        
       | Prosammer wrote:
       | I'm a big fan of LLMs generally, but does anyone even want
       | incoming texts summarized like this? Like even if they were
       | accurate summaries, seeing "Wife expresses frustration with her
       | husband's messiness" is a lot less fun than "Clean up your
       | clothes, dipshit".
        
         | unsnap_biceps wrote:
         | My wife loves to carpet bomb messages and the summary is often
         | useful to glance at to see how important they are. But the
         | inaccuracy prevents it from being useful and I'll often open
         | the entire stream of thought even though I don't have time
         | between meetings.
        
           | ripped_britches wrote:
           | > I don't have time between meetings
           | 
           | [guillotine raises]
        
         | carbocation wrote:
         | I turned these summaries off, but then turned them back on
         | because I find them humorous.
         | 
         | A bit notable: the AI summarization of spam texts makes them
         | seem much more credible.
        
           | timewizard wrote:
           | There is no 'ironic user only' option in the analytics.
           | 
           | There probably should be.
        
         | the_snooze wrote:
         | I find the whole summarization use case completely misses the
         | mark. If a message is from someone I want to hear from, just
         | give it to me verbatim. Otherwise, give me tools to delay/down-
         | prioritize/ignore their messages.
         | 
         | I get the sense that making group chats silent by default would
         | have a more useful impact on notification overload than AI
         | summaries.
        
         | HnUser12 wrote:
         | I also find it useful for group texts when a long conversation
         | happens. Easier to get an idea when I don't care to join in.
         | Another use case for me is image descriptions, particularly in
         | carplay.
        
         | mattclarkdotnet wrote:
         | The entertainment value for me is in seeing these features
         | turned in by Apple/Meta/Google and then working backwards to
         | the real use cases they must be seeing. They simply wouldn't do
         | it if people didn't want it, hence lots of people want it.
         | You're all weirdos.
        
         | SoftTalker wrote:
         | I don't want any incoming texts at all if they are trivial
         | complaints that can wait until we see each other in person and
         | can actually have a conversation. Now if the AI could judge
         | "this isn't an emergency" and just present the messages at the
         | end of the day, or at least when I'm not otherwise busy, that
         | might be something.
        
         | astrange wrote:
         | It's useful for multiple texts. Single ones not so much.
        
         | tomaskafka wrote:
         | Summarization model is crap, so it needs to be used for crap.
         | Like Trump news, or latest office slack drama. I want the
         | messages from my loved ones unabridged. Right now, Apple is
         | unable to discern these use cases.
        
         | sen wrote:
         | It's probably my favorite of the AI features on Apple devices
         | now.
         | 
         | My wife and I both have a habit of sending multiple small
         | messages rather than a large one. Probably because we both used
         | IRC extensively on the past and grew up on length-limited
         | SMSes. The summaries are very very handy at letting me glance
         | at my notification's and see if anything in her last x messages
         | needs a reply now or whether it's just "chat".
         | 
         | I've found LLM summaries of stuff in general to be one of the
         | handiest uses of it personally.
        
       | fouronnes3 wrote:
       | I wonder how long it will take for "guaranteed AI-free!" to
       | become a serious marketing argument for some products or
       | services.
        
         | ragazzina wrote:
         | As someone who has shopped for a dumb TV, this may very well
         | never happen.
        
           | add-sub-mul-div wrote:
           | Yeah, exactly. Undiscerning shoppers hear "Smart" TV and
           | either assume it's better or buy whatever's put in front of
           | them most loudly without even wondering if it's better or
           | not. Those same people will ensure that AI products are
           | successful and alternatives will similarly disappear.
        
             | chgs wrote:
             | People buy the cheapest option.
             | 
             | Two identical TVs the same size and make, one "smart", one
             | not. The smart is $10 cheaper, people go for that.
        
               | shmeeed wrote:
               | This. And the smart one is cheaper because it's a
               | collection device for data on you that they can sell.
        
           | mrweasel wrote:
           | Products no, I don't think that will happen. The market will
           | be so small and manufacturers won't service that market due
           | to cost. For services, maybe. I can see a bank or an ISP
           | advertise with "No AI customer service, only real people" and
           | especially elderly paying extra for that service.
           | 
           | One thing that I do wonder about is the value in adding AI
           | and "Smartness", what if people don't use it? I know
           | practically no one who uses their smart TV as anything but a
           | monitor (and speakers). Everyone adds an AppleTV or a
           | ChromeCast. My in-laws used Netflix on their Sony TV for a
           | bit, but it was slow and two years ago Netflix stopped being
           | supported on their TV and I gave them an old ChromeCast.
           | Backed in AI could easily end up in the same situation. It's
           | omni-present, but rarely used. That's a problem with the
           | current logic behind innovation where little market research
           | is done and companies are afraid to remove functionality as
           | it may make them look less competitive (in the eyes of
           | shareholders).
           | 
           | Someone point out that apparently Romanian online electronics
           | retailers have a pretty nice selection of dumb TVs, at least
           | they did a few years ago.
        
             | xethos wrote:
             | The OEMs don't care Netflix is no longer supported -
             | they're OCR'ing, hashing, and selling what you're watching
             | either way. They only need you to care enough to hook it up
             | to the internet in the first place so they can sell what
             | their users are watching
        
         | 112233 wrote:
         | I am surprised the artist/handcraft community has not yet
         | agreed on a way to signal that, given the strong sentiment.
         | 
         | It totally would make sense in, e.g. art or photography (or,
         | strangely, crocheting) circles to show that this image of a
         | mouse was not vomited by an ML that had eaten too much LAION
        
           | wongarsu wrote:
           | Photography has C2PA to have a cryptographically verifiable
           | chain of provenance for images. That way you can see what
           | camera took the image and which edits were done.
           | 
           | It's fairly new, but with the mess around stock photo sites
           | having undeclared AI images I wouldn't be surprised if it
           | sites eventually showcase this information
           | 
           | https://c2pa.org/
        
             | 112233 wrote:
             | This is an excellent thing to have with a very narrow usage
             | (e.g. journalism)
             | 
             | I do not see this getting into consumer phone images,
             | screenshots or such things.
             | 
             | Also, c2pa as done by Adobe simply records signed list of
             | what AI tools were used, and, since they are pushing AI
             | into everything, good luck deriving anything useful from
             | that list of modifications.
             | 
             | Also, I've seen a few photographers on internet on one hand
             | hating AI with all their might, and on other proudly
             | sharing their "technique" of upscaling blurry mess photos
             | to huge sizes using Topaz Labs. I mean...
        
       | darknavi wrote:
       | > If you still have problems with it, turn it off... Have I done
       | that? No, of course not. He may be messy and lack common sense,
       | but that's no reason for me to kill my husband!
       | 
       | I know this is probably a joke but it reminds me of the moral
       | questions that appear in the Apple TV+ show Severance. The idea
       | of turning off a feature being compared to "killing" someone
       | reminds me of the innie/outtie moral quandaries.
        
       | golly_ned wrote:
       | I worked, fortunately briefly, in Apple's AI/ML organization.
       | 
       | It was difficult to believe the overhead, inefficiency, and
       | cruft. Status updates in a wiki page tens of thousands of words
       | long in tables too large and ill-formatted for anyone to possibly
       | glean. Several teams clamboring to work on the latest hot topic
       | for that year's WWDC -- in my year it was "privacy-preserving
       | ML". At least four of five teams that I knew of.
       | 
       | They have too much money and don't want to do layoffs because
       | they're afraid of leaks, so they just keep people around forever
       | doing next to nothing, since it's their brand and high-margin
       | hardware that drives the business. It was baked into the Apple
       | culture to "go with the flow", a refrain I heard many times,
       | which I understood to mean stand-by and pretend to be busy while
       | layers of bureaucracy obscure the fact that a solid half of the
       | engineers could vanish to very little detriment.
        
         | LeoPanthera wrote:
         | I'd love to hear from anyone else who work(s/ed) at Apple to
         | confirm or deny this story.
        
           | rustystump wrote:
           | Can confirm.
        
             | whynotminot wrote:
             | Is this confined to the AI/ML group? Or across the software
             | org at large?
             | 
             | I feel like every large company has a former employee who
             | can say "there's a lot of people there doing nothing,
             | there's people playing politics, and there's too much
             | bureaucracy to get things done." It's hard to tell just
             | from comments if it's better, worse, or the same at Apple
             | versus the other behemoths.
             | 
             | Despite these kinds of comments, every year, Apple ships
             | quite a lot of software. Even brand new entire operating
             | systems like vision OS -- even if that's of course to some
             | extent reusing a lot of other components from macOS,
             | iPadOS, etc. But even re-use can carry still carry
             | significant overhead.
             | 
             | Idk I guess at the end of the day I'm still pretty
             | impressed at Apple's ability to ship well-integrated
             | features at scale that work across watches, phones, and
             | laptops--AI notification slop aside.
        
               | exBarrelSpoiler wrote:
               | Apple is a huge organization with a lot of internal
               | variance. Knew someone doing localization testing for
               | Siri and reported severe understaffing issues. There are
               | some very small teams with crucial tasks that are badly
               | under-resourced.
        
               | dep_b wrote:
               | These happen to be the Xcode and macOS-parts-not-copied-
               | from-iOS teams?
        
               | rustystump wrote:
               | To be clear, I was _not_ in the AI /ML org but the news
               | org so make of that what you will. I can also confirm a
               | similar and at times even more bonkers experience.
               | 
               | I also think it is expected for any sufficiently large
               | bureaucracy. Scale is hard.
        
           | mattnewton wrote:
           | One of my coworkers at Apple once wondered aloud to his
           | manager "What does anyone actually have to do around here to
           | get fired?!" (About a coworker who effectively only made work
           | for other people)
           | 
           | There were actually very fast ways to get fired - but if you
           | were likable and didn't leak you could work there seemingly
           | forever making no progress and frustrating the people buying
           | the "do your life's work" pitch.
           | 
           | I was in a small auxiliary team though. The main way you
           | could get fired was becoming the "directly responsible
           | individual" for something important to a senior person and
           | dropping the ball. But there were so many roles the senior
           | people didn't trust or care about that there was ample
           | opportunity to never have one of those hot potatoes tossed
           | your way in a team like mine. Frustrating, if you wanted to
           | catch one and do something that mattered (tm) as young me
           | did.
        
             | nyarlathotep_ wrote:
             | Wonder if that's still the case today when seemingly every
             | software company has now been laying people off en masse
             | for the better part of three years.
             | 
             | That kind of story is one you'd hear about "rest and vest"
             | in the late 2010s.
        
           | msephton wrote:
           | Can confirm. I was a Technology Evangelist (adjacent t,o but
           | not the same as, Developer Relations) for certain web and app
           | technologies.
           | 
           | The dept I reported to was laid-off en mass in
           | late-2015/early-2016.
           | 
           | I interviewed for the iOS design team later that year and
           | after several months and two interviews was ghosted and never
           | heard from them again.
        
         | DidYaWipe wrote:
         | Apple also cultivates "pets" who suck, but for some personal-
         | connection or political reason have received or curried favor
         | that results in them being retained and even promoted through
         | Apple's organization despite high-profile and embarrassing
         | failures. See: the Aperture fiasco. And also: Jony Ive.
         | 
         | When will it substantially harm the company, enough so that
         | someone ("activist" investors?) raise a hue and cry? Developers
         | clearly can't wield enough influence; I say this from
         | experience.
         | 
         | Nor customers. Apple's shoe-horning of "AI" shit into its
         | products to pander to "pundits" and "analysts," shames the
         | company that once held itself out as a rebel and disruptor.
         | 
         | And even Apple adherents have noted profoundly slipping
         | quality. Absurd defects persist, and new ones arise. The "AI"
         | BS reminds me of one of my favorite longstanding Apple
         | blunders: If you are going on a business trip and you enter all
         | your appointments and flight info into Calendar, you're in for
         | a surprise (and potentially embarrassment) when Apple CHANGES
         | THE TIMES of all of them simply because you TRAVELED to a
         | different time zone.
         | 
         | There is no way to tell Calendar to simply USE THE TIME SHOWN
         | ON THE PHONE. If you set up an appointment and then travel
         | east, you will miss that appointment (or return flight) because
         | Apple will change the time of that appointment to make it
         | LATER. This is mind-boggling detachment from reality, but
         | that's where Apple operates... and far too often gets a free
         | pass on it. Is it any wonder that its "AI" is just as bad?
        
           | gffrd wrote:
           | That does seem like it would be confusing, especially the
           | first time around.
           | 
           | That said, you are able to fix your calendar to a specified
           | time zone: https://support.apple.com/guide/iphone/schedule-
           | display-even...
        
           | Kwpolska wrote:
           | The calendar thing is working correctly. Every event has a
           | time zone attached, even if you didn't notice it or change
           | it. If your appointments involved other people and you had
           | sent out calendar invites, they would have noticed the wrong
           | time.
        
             | pmontra wrote:
             | Shouldn't the default time zone for an appointment be the
             | one of the place it is held at? For online events, the time
             | zone of the person setting the event. Of course it must be
             | possible to set the time zone explicitly.
             | 
             | I don't have an iPhone to check with but what I mean is
             | that the time of an appointment should be displayed as 9:00
             | AM PST and people flying from NYC to LA should always see
             | 9:00 AM PST when they are in NYC, at any mile of the flight
             | and at destination.
        
               | lazyasciiart wrote:
               | Many people enter appointments without enough detail to
               | say it is not going to be held at your current location.
               | e.g for a planned vacation "3pm check for concert
               | tickets", which will indeed stay at PST and show up on
               | your phone at 6pm in New York.
        
               | cosmotic wrote:
               | It could theoretically use the location field to show a
               | warning like "Which time zone, current or event
               | location?"
        
               | lores wrote:
               | It's trivial to consider any event that did not specify a
               | time zone to happen at local time, wherever that is, and
               | not change its time when the phone's zone changes.
               | Business software will set a zone, self-entered or casual
               | appointments won't, so that matches usage. At worst,
               | display a warning sign on the calendar entry. The default
               | is "do no harm", not "we didn't know you didn't mean us
               | not to do harm".
        
               | jen20 wrote:
               | What if I have two devices in different time zones?
               | Should such an event show up at different times on each?
        
             | kruuuder wrote:
             | > The calendar thing is working correctly.
             | 
             | Only from a stubborn, technical perspective. It's obviously
             | not working as intended for GP. It should be easy to create
             | "local timezone" events on Apple devices, and it isn't.
             | 
             | In fact, I'm thinking of pretty much all my events in local
             | timezones. A concert at 8pm. Meeting someone for a coffee
             | at 2pm. Flight departure times. Taking pills at 7am in the
             | morning. Having people in other timezones involved is the
             | exception for me, not the default.
             | 
             | There are many ways how you could implement a nice UI for
             | that, and Apple offers none.
        
               | louis-paul wrote:
               | It is possible on macOS with the Floating time zone:
               | https://support.apple.com/en-
               | gb/guide/calendar/icl1035/mac#i...
               | 
               | This doesn't look possible on the iOS/iPadOS Calendar
               | apps.
        
           | ben_w wrote:
           | > See: the Aperture fiasco. And also: Jony Ive.
           | 
           | > When will it substantially harm the company, enough so that
           | someone ("activist" investors?) raise a hue and cry?
           | 
           | For this specific example, their stock price went up from
           | "basically bankrupt" to "company is now worth trillions of
           | dollars" in Ive's time.
           | 
           | It would take a lot to upset the investors, given the overall
           | win rate.
        
             | robertlagrant wrote:
             | > For this specific example, their stock price went up from
             | "basically bankrupt" to "company is now worth trillions of
             | dollars" in Ive's time.
             | 
             | Presumably plenty of people were employed in that
             | timeframe.
        
               | ben_w wrote:
               | Of course. But if you want to get the investors to force
               | a change, the stock price has to go down.
               | 
               | Even if it does go down, that doesn't mean the investors
               | will blame the right person -- there's a reason why the
               | English language retains the phrase "scape-goat" -- but
               | it has to go down or the investors will say "why would I
               | change this?"
               | 
               | Edit: I originally phrased this as "if you want to get
               | kick-back from the investors", turns out "kick-back"
               | doesn't mean what I thought it meant.
        
           | golly_ned wrote:
           | Agreed on the "pets" idea. I've even seen this from former
           | Apple tech leaders. I've been one of the "pets" and it
           | benefitted my career tremendously and, frankly, above my
           | capabilities at the time; yet it gave me the opportunity to
           | step in and fill out bigger shoes.
           | 
           | When I was there the stance on "intelligence" was that Apple
           | doesn't advertise itself as "AI" or "ML". It just builds good
           | products by any means and if it happens to use particular
           | technologies, then fine. Not so anymore.
        
         | supriyo-biswas wrote:
         | Based on the FHE work being done at Apple, I wouldn't say the
         | organization is completely ineffective as an outsider. Based on
         | this, is it fair to say that the issue is of dead weight in the
         | company?
        
           | ksec wrote:
           | FHE as in fully-homomorphic encryption ?
        
         | cultureulterior wrote:
         | Was interviewing for a role. Interviews lasted for 7 months
         | total, 12 interviews, for 2 teams, and then they closed the
         | roles and didn't hire anyone. Not really impressed by Apple.
        
           | seec wrote:
           | I had a similar story. But it makes sense. Because of the
           | image and brand value they project, they get a lot of people
           | who just want to work for them because of that. Thus, they
           | have a lot of options and can be wasting people's time
           | without much downside since they have the bankroll to finance
           | all that inefficiency. But it's really not fair for the
           | people applying, that's for sure.
           | 
           | In any case, I don't think it's worth applying for a job at
           | Apple unless you already are a well-known (semi)authority in
           | your field so you can have a minimum amount of power to
           | somewhat dictate the terms. Apple treats their supplier very
           | badly, there is no reason they would do otherwise with people
           | they don't really need.
           | 
           | If Apple were to be personified it would be the narcissistic
           | mean girl that is extremely popular because of her beauty.
        
         | clort wrote:
         | That reminds me of the Microsoft of 20+ years ago, I remember
         | reading an interview with Bill Gates where he had been
         | frustrated with something in the new software and tried to
         | pursue getting it fixed, but was stonewalled and diverted until
         | he simply gave up. Contrasting this with Steve Jobs reportedly
         | being a massive dickhead, barging into developer offices,
         | shouting and screaming and firing people who didn't jump to do
         | what he wanted immediately, but the Apple software worked and
         | didn't have the cruft in the end.
        
           | Someone wrote:
           | Possibly "Bill Gates tries to install Movie Maker"
           | (https://www.techemails.com/p/bill-gates-tries-to-install-
           | mov...)
        
           | jiggawatts wrote:
           | Something that amuses me is that this method _demonstrably
           | works_ , but is unpleasant to almost everybody involved.
           | Fundamentally, kicking people up the ass is... not nice.
           | However, it _must_ be done, because otherwise large
           | organisations have a natural tendency towards disorder and
           | indolence.
           | 
           | Whenever you hear people bitching about CEOs like Jobs,
           | Bezos, or Musk, just keep in mind that most people's opinions
           | are second-hand from _people who got their arse kicked_.
           | 
           | Meanwhile, these CEOs got fabulously rich by having this
           | exact attitude.
        
             | seec wrote:
             | Yep and this is why many modern organizations are going to
             | shit. Nowadays this behavior is not only heavily shamed but
             | also very often punished. You need to have a lot of power
             | to get away with it. In my opinion all of this comes from
             | submitting from the feminine way of working. Most women get
             | shit done from men just by asking nicely (even when it's
             | not really in their interest). Then they wrongly assumed
             | that is how everything should work and pushed the "asking
             | nicely" way of working everywhere.
             | 
             | Here is some anecdote. In in youth, I learned/played the
             | french horn. Most of my teachers where nice feminine men, I
             | was making progress but very slowly. But one year I got a
             | guy that was out of the army music, he didn't take bullshit
             | and forced me to work in a way the others never did. This
             | year my progress was orders of magnitude better than any
             | other year. At the time I thought he was a bit of an
             | asshole, but now I know that if I had to choose, I would
             | rather have someone like him. I quit french horn 3 years
             | after, there were many reasons but not having a strong
             | inspiring teacher was one of them for sure.
        
               | ksec wrote:
               | >Nowadays this behavior is not only heavily shamed but
               | also very often punished.
               | 
               | Well the pendulum is swinging back. But it is going to
               | take at least 10-15 years. As with everything we need
               | both, and use them when ever it is appreciate.
        
             | moogly wrote:
             | > Meanwhile, these CEOs got fabulously rich by having this
             | exact attitude.
             | 
             | Everything is permitted if someone gets fabulously rich in
             | the end. Got it.
        
               | Neonlicht wrote:
               | Haha isn't that how Americans measure happiness? Like how
               | in Eastern Germany the news always talked about
               | increasing grain harvests American news always talks
               | about how many billionaires get invited to Trump's
               | inauguration party.
               | 
               | You can live in a trailer park next with your meth
               | addicted family but Musk is getting richer.
        
         | timewizard wrote:
         | > a wiki page tens of thousands of words long in tables too
         | large and ill-formatted for anyone to possibly glean
         | 
         | This is what a "job security fortress" looks like when
         | management has more money and less sense than they know what to
         | do with.
         | 
         | > a solid half of the engineers could vanish to very little
         | detriment.
         | 
         | They need to rethink their entire strategy. What on earth
         | possessed them to believe I wanted "summaries" of
         | communications which have an average length of far less than
         | 100 words anyways.
         | 
         | If "prompt engineering" and "phantom husbands" are a thing you
         | don't have a viable mass market product.
        
           | matthewdgreen wrote:
           | Nobody currently has a mass-market killer app for AI.
           | Everyone is building out capabilities so they can quickly
           | implement one when it arrives, while they fool around with
           | various silly applications in the meantime. Currently text
           | summarization (as realized) isn't the killer app, but Apple
           | is smart to have built all the infrastructure nonetheless.
        
             | timewizard wrote:
             | > Nobody currently has a mass-market killer app for AI.
             | 
             | There's literally millions of them. The gulf is that the
             | current technology cannot possibly do any of those things.
             | 
             | > Everyone is building out capabilities
             | 
             | They're burning billions on a method that has already
             | started showing diminishing returns. There's no exponential
             | growth on the horizon with the current stack.
             | 
             | > while they fool around with various silly applications in
             | the meantime
             | 
             | If you told me this was your business plan I would short
             | everything of yours I could.
             | 
             | > but Apple is smart to have built all the infrastructure
             | nonetheless.
             | 
             | An infrastructure that will be outdated and unjustifiably
             | expensive in 5 years. It's like we're pretending that the
             | history of business for all time has nothing to do with the
             | business of AI.
             | 
             | Those unwilling to stare history in the face will be eaten
             | by it.
        
       | Apocryphon wrote:
       | This would be an Apple Maps-level disaster, if people actually
       | relied upon smartphone A.I. features for day to day use.
        
       | ilrwbwrkhv wrote:
       | As I said a while back Apple is also dying.
        
         | mcphage wrote:
         | Who isn't, these days?
        
           | ilrwbwrkhv wrote:
           | Microsoft
        
         | npteljes wrote:
         | Having some problems is not dying. Also, in what way would
         | Apple be dying? What quality of it do you see as in being in an
         | irrecoverable decline?
        
       | gklitz wrote:
       | > Apple's AI tools were built with responsible AI principles to
       | avoid perpetuating stereotypes and systemic biases.
       | 
       | This is either a straight up lie or an extreme stretching of the
       | truth.
       | 
       | This is from the Danish models but literally this is what it puts
       | as autocomplete for "woman are ..."
       | 
       | > woman we not worth as much as men
       | 
       | And it's not a one off. It's been going around social media that
       | autocomplete for a long range of other initial phrases are just
       | as stereotypically chauvinistic or racist. It's pretty clear that
       | no effort was taken at all to sanitize the models.
       | 
       | And no, it's not using your chat history, though it used to do
       | this. Which just makes things worse as there things are being
       | spread because everyone who draws attention to it on things like
       | Facebook are immediately accused of being a racists or
       | chauvinist.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-01-20 23:03 UTC)