Apple finds difficulty recruiting AI experts thanks to tough user privacy stance

245

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 90
    Apple should let users OPT IN to share their data if they want to. I would be happy to share data with Apple to improve their products as long as it was clear that I CHOSE to participate.

    OPT IN vs OPT OUT huge difference...
  • Reply 22 of 90
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    jameskatt2 wrote: »
    I would rather have Apple kill Siri than lose privacy.

    If AI experts need private data, then they aren't that bright to begin with.

    If you don't understand why they need this data, then perhaps it isn't them that aren't too bright.

    There is general purpose AI, and there is AI that is more personally oriented. I had an assistant in my company. She knew about much of what I needed to do, and she would take care of a lot of things that I didn't have time for, as well as reminding me of appointments, and other matters that required my attention. If she didn't know all about my needs, based on what I knew, and did, then she wouldn't have been very useful. The same is true of Siri and the rest of these "assistants". The more they know of what you know, and do, the more helpful they will be.

    I've read a few articles that stated, correctly, that Apple will never have a personal assistant as useful as Google Now and Cortana because most personal data is out of bounds for them. And yes, that is correct. It's a matter of priorities.

    So trying to hire an expert in these matters for personal assistants, and then telling them that most personal data is off bounds, is discouraging, and they may decide to stay away.

    I believe that Apple should do what it's doing with health data. Keep it private, but allow the user to decide if a specific usage model is ok for some data to be released to it, such as the medical studies which seem to be increasingly popular in iOS. So, people should be asked if they want to participate in Apple's AI research by allowing specific data to be used for that purpose, with the proviso that people can shut the tap to that data at any time, and that the data will never leave Apple's labs. That could solve many of these requitment problems, and with the hundreds of millions of people around the world using iOS devices, enough would choose to participate in this for it to be useful.
  • Reply 23 of 90
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    canukstorm wrote: »
    I agree. Here it is from the man himself.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39iKLwlUqBo

    And another great article on the balance between privacy and user experience;

    http://dcurt.is/privacy-vs-user-experience

    "The real issue that Apple is trying to address is not really privacy, but rather security. Though Google has all of my data, it is still private. Google does not sell access to my data; it sells access to my attention. Advertisers do not get my information from Google."

    "The vast improvements in user experience far, far outweigh the potential security risks to private information."

    Google both uses, and sells your data. But they claim that that data is anonymised.
  • Reply 24 of 90
    Originally Posted by GrangerFX View Post

    What good is privacy if you have to wear shackles?

     

    Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

    – Benjamin Franklin

     

    And no, that isn’t ‘backward’ here; the liberty is the right to privacy. The “safety” is the government (et. al.) collection of data.

  • Reply 25 of 90
    Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
    – Benjamin Franklin

    And no, that isn’t ‘backward’ here; the liberty is the right to privacy. The “safety” is the government (et. al.) collection of data.

    Are you sure that wasn't Benjamin Frost?¡


    PS: Safari in the most recent El Cap beta, probably last before GM, still opens up multiple tabs what we consider the right way. Here's hoping that doesn't change.
  • Reply 26 of 90
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,309member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by melgross View Post





    Google both uses, and sells your data. But they claim that that data is anonymised.

    Anonymized data can get very granular with the right filters, and while it isn't individual data per se, it could be a very, very small set of resultant "anonymous" individuals that are being marketed to. Google doesn't 'sell' their data, they "sell" the resulting set of that data analyzed per the request of the "client".

  • Reply 27 of 90
    wigbywigby Posts: 692member
    GrangerFX wrote: »
    What good is privacy if you have to wear shackles?

    You are only wearing shackles if you know it. Most users don't know or care so long as the features they expect to work just work. Apple is playing the long game. That means they might trail technically for now but there will be so much more concern over privacy and security and AI in the near future so they are building a reputation and aligning their tech with policy now in order to avoid a future mess that Google is going to have to deal with.
  • Reply 28 of 90
    Originally Posted by wigby View Post

    You are only wearing shackles if you know it. Most users don’t know…

     

    Eh? Are you a proponent of The Secret?

  • Reply 29 of 90
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post





    At 60 posts you're not at expert level yet. image

    I'll have you know I'm a legend in my own mind :)

  • Reply 30 of 90
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ascii View Post

     

    It's because no one yet knows how to do real, thinking, AI, so they are trying to put lipstick on a search engine. And search engines need big DBs.




    Here's the thing. ALL search engines suck at the moment and have ZERO intelligence to them.

     

    A real AI search engine would use natural language queries to search.

     

    How come I can't do a search for "How do I replace the glass on a Samsung Galaxy 4 Active?" (don't ask but essentially cheap friends buying cheap equipment and going the cheap route to get it fixed) and not get a bunch of videos for a Samsung Galaxy 4? I'll tell you why it's because a search engine query actually looks like this:

     

    How+do+I+replace+the+glass+on+a+Samsung+Galaxy+4+Active

     

    This will give me a search for every word not the entire phrase. I cannot be the only person on the planet to want to have searched that exact phrase so straight away the search engine's lack of intelligence comes to light.

     

    Oh and don't give me that whole use quotes or set to search phrase because it still gives me the crap results I get with the boolean search.

     

    If Apple can crack natural language queries then not only will they be onto a winner but they will CRUSH Google and Google will never recover.

  • Reply 31 of 90
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    tmay wrote: »
    Anonymized data can get very granular with the right filters, and while it isn't individual data per se, it could be a very, very small set of resultant "anonymous" individuals that are being marketed to. Google doesn't 'sell' their data, they "sell" the resulting set of that data analyzed per the request of the "client".

    Selling the supposed "set" is selling anonomized data. It's yours, because your data makes up part of that so called set. No matter how you look at it, they're selling your data. The millions of people who unknowingly, or unhappily, contribute to that sea of data, are all having their data sold, because if Google wasn't collecting it in the first p,ace, they wouldn't have anything to sell. It's pretty simple, really.
  • Reply 32 of 90
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,176member
    melgross wrote: »
    Selling the supposed "set" is selling anonomized data. It's yours, because your data makes up part of that so called set. No matter how you look at it, they're selling your data. The millions of people who unknowingly, or unhappily, contribute to that sea of data, are all having their data sold, because if Google wasn't collecting it in the first p,ace, they wouldn't have anything to sell. It's pretty simple, really.
    Google is selling data? News to me. Where did you find proof of that claim Mel?
  • Reply 33 of 90
    zoetmbzoetmb Posts: 2,654member

    I find it hard to believe that Apple is finding it hard to recruit AI experts because of security issues.   If Apple is offering the right compensation, title and work experience, people will want to work for them regardless.    

     

    Also, a lot of the current limitations in Siri have nothing to do with having reams of user data to work from.   They're just common sense.   If I ask Siri to find a street or a restaurant by name or type, it should prioritize on the ones closest to my current location.    If I search "hamburger", Siri frequently manages to find burger restaurants 1000 miles from me.   Same if I give a street name without a city.  

     

    Siri frequently takes you to a website instead of announcing the answer.   This doesn't require much user data either.

     

    Siri should be smart enough to know which apps I have and be able to launch them.   It should, as just one example, be capable of understanding that "Play WNYC FM" means open the WNYC app and stream the radio station.       

     

    Most of what an AI expert would need to know is what are the questions that are being asked of Siri.   They don't need to know anything of individual users, IMO.

     

    I've been less than impressed with the enhancements and quality improvements to Siri since launch.   What are those AI people doing exactly?

  • Reply 34 of 90
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by williamlondon View Post

     

    Sounds like this is a good job candidate filtering tool, meaning it's easier to do the job when you have more data to build models and "innovate" in this field, but it takes real genius to provide similar if not equal or superior services when you have access to less information. Filter out the people who can't do their jobs without the easy (comprehensive) information and you'll have the people who are really going to shake things up with access only to privacy respecting data, because that's where the talent is required and that's where genius will be found.




    I made a similar comment on Patently Apple. The lazy scientists want unfettered access to customer data so they can do analysis as they already know how to do it. The scientists who are truly interested in a challenge will begin to think outside the box sooner in an attempt to develop something equal or superior to other services.

     

    It is extraordinarily scary how many so called experts are okay with customers giving up their privacy to empower Google and other companies to provide services customers are supposedly demanding to have on their smartphones. Are customers demanding these services or are companies dictating the existence of these services as one more excuse for gathering even more customer data the companies can resell for billions of dollars?

     

    Only Apple is pushing for customer privacy and the experts are condemning the company for the push. These experts are not experts I want to have in more corner.

  • Reply 35 of 90
    Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post

    Siri should be smart enough to know which apps I have and be able to launch them.   It should, as just one example, be capable of understanding that "Play WNYC FM" means open the WNYC app and stream the radio station.




    What about “Open WNYC” or “Open the WNYC app”? Doesn’t that work?

     

    Offhand I’d say she currently isn’t able to do the first one but is the second. But I’ve never tried it. At the very least, Siri should understand that both the official name of the app and the displayed name are associated with the same item. Saying “Open Radiation” should open Tap Tap Radiation, for example (since the icon says ‘tap tap’ and the text–you get it…).

  • Reply 36 of 90
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by CanukStorm View Post

     

    I agree. Here it is from the man himself.

     

     

    And another great article on the balance between privacy and user experience;

     

    http://dcurt.is/privacy-vs-user-experience

     

    "The real issue that Apple is trying to address is not really privacy, but rather security. Though Google has all of my data, it is still private. Google does not sell access to my data; it sells access to my attention. Advertisers do not get my information from Google."

     

    "The vast improvements in user experience far, far outweigh the potential security risks to private information."




    When Target, Home Depot, other companies' and the US government's data systems were breached or when the US government wants unfettered access to data because the life of a child could be at risk otherwise, how does, "The vast improvements in user experience far, far outweigh the potential security risks to private information." fit in? 

     

    Some people just do not care about giving up their privacy for vast improvements in user experience. This is scary!

  • Reply 37 of 90
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

     



    What about “Open WNYC” or “Open the WNYC app”? Doesn’t that work?

     

    Offhand I’d say she currently isn’t able to do the first one but is the second. But I’ve never tried it. At the very least, Siri should understand that both the official name of the app and the displayed name are associated with the same item. Saying “Open Radiation” should open Tap Tap Radiation, for example (since the icon says ‘tap tap’ and the text–you get it…).




    Siri can do the first. I tested "Open Tapurist" on my iPhone 6 and after displaying the request, he opened the app.

  • Reply 38 of 90

    Apple should be inducing users to give up their secrets and activities so those AI Experts have full access to a users real day-day habits.

     

    They could offer a lifetime of free, unlimited iCloud storage and Music Match in return for one million users signing away their anonymity.

  • Reply 39 of 90
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by leavingthebigG View Post

     



    When Target, Home Depot, other companies' and the US government's data systems were breached or when the US government wants unfettered access to data because the life of a child could be at risk otherwise, how does, "The vast improvements in user experience far, far outweigh the potential security risks to private information." fit in? 

     

    Some people just do not care about giving up their privacy for vast improvements in user experience. This is scary!


    two totally different scenarios.  One is a lack of security issue, the other is about using customer data to improve online services.  And I'm not saying Apple has to force people to give up their data. Make it opt-in. And those who do opt-in, use their data / information in combination with cloud-based servers to make Siri powerful.

  • Reply 40 of 90
    I was just surprised at how Picasa from Google can identify people ... and then even find child and baby pictures from them.

    With high definition cameras and high computing power anywhere, does anyone else see what is possible here?

    I really think or better hope that hiring many of the best AI experts has really nothing to do with creating a service for people / users. I hope it's more than that because a great AI could surely solve more problems than which app I want to use next.

    I wonder if Apple pays better than any government or corporation that is after more than just knowing people's spending habits when they can have total control of all information about people. These phones all come with high def cameras and microphones, so is nobody at all wondering about that?
Sign In or Register to comment.