So does Apple have another Copeland type situation on its hands, desperately trying to catch up which will lead to a purchase of some outside tech, or do they take the wraps off something they have been developing for sometime but waiting until it’s perfected?
People just don't get it. Apple is rarely a techno-feature company but intensely focus on user/useable features. Oh look we've got this new techno-gimmick you can ... use (for what exactly we're not sure) ... that's not Apple. I would guess they're probably working on a Siri Improvement, that can hold a conversation (eventually having in part generative AI working in the background) .. and that you can sell to the average user (and that is what an average user would care about). ... and beyond that, they won't talk about it until it is done.
Or to put it in hype cycle terms Apple will enter during the rise phase, work through the peak phase (usually in quiet) and then suddenly show up with something useful during the through of disillusionment phase and prbably be the reason we'll eventually rise to the plateau of productivity, because something truely useful comes out of it ... or will silently let it die if nothing useful comes out of it.
Where are we with generative AI!? Probably at the heights of the Peak going to fall down soon. Because essentially right now it’s more of a toy.
Bingo. Even here on an Apple-centric site, people seem surprised when Apple isn’t first to the market with some new thing. Then they’re critical when Apple enters the market “late” with a thing. Finally, they forget all that when Apple’s version of said thing becomes the gold standard, because they came at it from a different direction that makes it actually useful, instead of just a novelty.
Apple’s path as a vertical computer company gets it right in a more practical manner, when compared to their competition, Apple simply over the years gets too much stuff, right over the long-haul, iMac, OS X, iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Maps, Metal, Face ID, Touch ID, Apple Watch, AirPods, Studio Display, Pro Display XDR, Apple Silicon, VisionOS and the Apple Vision Pro (which features the new R1 co-processor, nothing wrong with that pathway, the only criticism is not getting they’re all in one Mac’s back on track with the latest M series SOC’s being made available to the public to have at least a chance of buying one.
Alexa is on life-support, Cortana is dead, and Google, keeps begging Apple to support their undercover spy schemes, Apple however, is on the better more profitable, user-friendly, usable, constant, more practical pathway.
The lack of constancy among the primarily software only companies, Google, Microsoft, and Meta, make it is easy to dabble in the latest flash, fad tech buzzword of the year, this year, it appears to be AI that will save all. Next year, I think a more pedestrian down to earth co-processor (the R1) made by Apple will be the star.
How is any of that not applicable to other manufacturers?
Apple Maps was a direct reaction to Google Maps and an utter disaster at launch. Google Maps remains the gold standard along with other maps options.
Apple maps will not get me to some places as it can't find them in the first place. On other occasions it will think it's found the place but its hundreds of kilometres away. It's got better over the years but still isn't up to Google Maps in many places.
The less said about Siri the better.
IM? It's Whatsapp all the way in most of the world.
Mail? I wonder how many Apple users don't have a Gmail account.
Home Automation? Why do you think Matter/Thread are on the lips of Apple users?
What happened to the notch? What replaced it? Something that has been around on other devices for years.
The TV? The car? The periscope lens? Where are they?
Nothing in your statement hasn't been provided by other vertically integrated manufacturers over the years.
Both in terms of hardware and software.
Today (just a couple of hours ago) NearLink was announced. Scarce on details at the moment but obviously a lot of work has gone into it.
I always laugh when you list technological bits that Apple is late to, or deficient, and yet, Apple always seems to get the technological synergy right in new platforms, all while making the bulk of revenue and profits. Next up, Apple Vision Pro. That you advocate for bleeding edge tech is wonderful, like Huawei's Nearlink, but, it isn't a panacea for success, especially with even the EU reevaluating China as a competitor, more so than a trading partner.
The whole bloc is figuring out what de-risking from China means. Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, described it as raising specific concerns that the EU has with Beijing, including over human rights, but also negotiating fairer competition and market access.
On Tuesday, the commission suggested the EU should review its foreign investment screening policy as well as toughen up its export control regulations. The institution did not say these ideas had been developed because of China directly, but it said the bloc needs to minimize risks “in the context of increased geopolitical tensions and accelerated technological shifts.”
Earlier this month, the European Commission called on more EU nations to ban the Chinese telecoms groups Huawei and ZTE.
Perhaps being early or first isn't a great paradigm for success, but mostly, Apple continues to define its platforms as a unique ecosystem that is valuable to consumers.
I hope you realise that China has nothing to do with anything here. You are just injecting that for the heck of it.
In fact, your entire post was just for the heck of it.
Go back and actually read what I was replying to and tell me where it isn't correct. Read the post I was responding to.
It has nothing to do with 'being first'.
All ecosystems are unique in their own way. Even Android!
All ecosystems are valuable to consumers to some degree but both Apple and Google are on the hook for also being NOT beneficial to consumers, too.
Alrighty then, you might want to withhold your Huawei announcements if you don't want comments about China.
I have no clue what you are stating about Apple and Google, not being beneficial to customers, when obviously, warts and all, they are overall, and absolutely, beneficial to consumers.
Huawei isn't China and again, read what I was responding to.
I could have gone into Huawei's massive AI technology portfolio which was also a large part of the HarmonyOS 4 presentation but it wasn't central to the point I was responding to although I could have easily used it as a direct reference to the article.
The point being, no matter what Apple says, it is behind in the GPT aspect. There is no getting away from that. They have nothing and have not mentioned anything on the subject with regards to a real product or use case.
There is no point denying that. It's fact as of today.
Is it important? I don't think so. It's why I didn't comment on much of the GPT stuff.
I get what you’re saying, but I’m not sure they’re “behind” — we don’t know.
As of right now, the public GPT/AI engines are interesting and promising, but ultimately useless unless operated by experts, because of their tendency to fail catastrophically and completely intransparently in unpredictable ways.
Apple isn’t interested in making anything public until it can be operated by laymen, reliably and above all SAFELY.
Siri fails in unpredictable and utterly infuriating ways, but is harmless when it does.
A service that produces misinformation or mangles crucial steps of a process without any indication that it is … “improvising” is potentially dangerous in a thousand ways.
I don’t think we’ll see a public “Apple GPT” until they’ve figured out how to solve these problems and release a useful product.
I’m HOPING that the reason why Siri isn’t moving forward is because they’re putting all their work towards a replacement.
Yes, of course. My point is that trying to argue it's not behind when there is simply no equivalent product from them on the market is a pretty pointless exercise.
The article spells it out very clearly:
"Many pundits have said Apple is behind in AI, specifically because they do not have a chatbot or answer to tools like Google Bard"
That situation puts them into that position and the best thing to do is admit it.
It's like arguing they are not behind on folding phones because they filed patents for them. It's a bit silly.
Whatever they are working on, and to what kind of level, inevitably follows on from the acceptance of being 'behind', but the fact right now, is that there is nothing available so they can only accept the facts as they stand today.
Another debate is how damaging these tools may turn out to be (or not). It's almost like the internet in its teens. Easy access to porn by kids, misinformation, disinformation, privacy concerns, tracking scamming etc.
Most of us have learnt to deal with the shortcomings to a degree and then legislation eventually comes in to try and put some order into things.
The EU has been working on its AI directive for a while now.
It would have been better if the input information for the training of the headline grabbing technologies were of higher quality but I can understand why some decisions were taken.
Tmay, won't like me saying this but Huawei's models have been trained with pre-filtered data in an attempt to achieve better quality results. That's why they are being used in science, health and industry with stellar results. Each use case is carefully studied.
The integration of Pangu Model 3 with Huawei's digital assistant on CE devices will hopefully provide more pros than contras. It will also be on-device for privacy/security reasons.
In case you weren't able to digest my point, it is that Huawei is tightly integrated into the CCP and PLA, so whatever Huawei is doing, it isn't the equivalent of private enterprise in the West. Yet you continue to champion Huawei as if it is.
Case in point; Huawei implicated itself in the AI software that was created to filter out minorities, especially Uyghur, in China's mass surveillance.
People just don't get it. Apple is rarely a techno-feature company but intensely focus on user/useable features. Oh look we've got this new techno-gimmick you can ... use (for what exactly we're not sure) ... that's not Apple. I would guess they're probably working on a Siri Improvement, that can hold a conversation (eventually having in part generative AI working in the background) .. and that you can sell to the average user (and that is what an average user would care about). ... and beyond that, they won't talk about it until it is done.
Or to put it in hype cycle terms Apple will enter during the rise phase, work through the peak phase (usually in quiet) and then suddenly show up with something useful during the through of disillusionment phase and prbably be the reason we'll eventually rise to the plateau of productivity, because something truely useful comes out of it ... or will silently let it die if nothing useful comes out of it.
Where are we with generative AI!? Probably at the heights of the Peak going to fall down soon. Because essentially right now it’s more of a toy.
Bingo. Even here on an Apple-centric site, people seem surprised when Apple isn’t first to the market with some new thing. Then they’re critical when Apple enters the market “late” with a thing. Finally, they forget all that when Apple’s version of said thing becomes the gold standard, because they came at it from a different direction that makes it actually useful, instead of just a novelty.
Apple’s path as a vertical computer company gets it right in a more practical manner, when compared to their competition, Apple simply over the years gets too much stuff, right over the long-haul, iMac, OS X, iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Maps, Metal, Face ID, Touch ID, Apple Watch, AirPods, Studio Display, Pro Display XDR, Apple Silicon, VisionOS and the Apple Vision Pro (which features the new R1 co-processor, nothing wrong with that pathway, the only criticism is not getting they’re all in one Mac’s back on track with the latest M series SOC’s being made available to the public to have at least a chance of buying one.
Alexa is on life-support, Cortana is dead, and Google, keeps begging Apple to support their undercover spy schemes, Apple however, is on the better more profitable, user-friendly, usable, constant, more practical pathway.
The lack of constancy among the primarily software only companies, Google, Microsoft, and Meta, make it is easy to dabble in the latest flash, fad tech buzzword of the year, this year, it appears to be AI that will save all. Next year, I think a more pedestrian down to earth co-processor (the R1) made by Apple will be the star.
How is any of that not applicable to other manufacturers?
Apple Maps was a direct reaction to Google Maps and an utter disaster at launch. Google Maps remains the gold standard along with other maps options.
Apple maps will not get me to some places as it can't find them in the first place. On other occasions it will think it's found the place but its hundreds of kilometres away. It's got better over the years but still isn't up to Google Maps in many places.
The less said about Siri the better.
IM? It's Whatsapp all the way in most of the world.
Mail? I wonder how many Apple users don't have a Gmail account.
Home Automation? Why do you think Matter/Thread are on the lips of Apple users?
What happened to the notch? What replaced it? Something that has been around on other devices for years.
The TV? The car? The periscope lens? Where are they?
Nothing in your statement hasn't been provided by other vertically integrated manufacturers over the years.
Both in terms of hardware and software.
Today (just a couple of hours ago) NearLink was announced. Scarce on details at the moment but obviously a lot of work has gone into it.
I always laugh when you list technological bits that Apple is late to, or deficient, and yet, Apple always seems to get the technological synergy right in new platforms, all while making the bulk of revenue and profits. Next up, Apple Vision Pro. That you advocate for bleeding edge tech is wonderful, like Huawei's Nearlink, but, it isn't a panacea for success, especially with even the EU reevaluating China as a competitor, more so than a trading partner.
The whole bloc is figuring out what de-risking from China means. Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, described it as raising specific concerns that the EU has with Beijing, including over human rights, but also negotiating fairer competition and market access.
On Tuesday, the commission suggested the EU should review its foreign investment screening policy as well as toughen up its export control regulations. The institution did not say these ideas had been developed because of China directly, but it said the bloc needs to minimize risks “in the context of increased geopolitical tensions and accelerated technological shifts.”
Earlier this month, the European Commission called on more EU nations to ban the Chinese telecoms groups Huawei and ZTE.
Perhaps being early or first isn't a great paradigm for success, but mostly, Apple continues to define its platforms as a unique ecosystem that is valuable to consumers.
I hope you realise that China has nothing to do with anything here. You are just injecting that for the heck of it.
In fact, your entire post was just for the heck of it.
Go back and actually read what I was replying to and tell me where it isn't correct. Read the post I was responding to.
It has nothing to do with 'being first'.
All ecosystems are unique in their own way. Even Android!
All ecosystems are valuable to consumers to some degree but both Apple and Google are on the hook for also being NOT beneficial to consumers, too.
Alrighty then, you might want to withhold your Huawei announcements if you don't want comments about China.
I have no clue what you are stating about Apple and Google, not being beneficial to customers, when obviously, warts and all, they are overall, and absolutely, beneficial to consumers.
Huawei isn't China and again, read what I was responding to.
I could have gone into Huawei's massive AI technology portfolio which was also a large part of the HarmonyOS 4 presentation but it wasn't central to the point I was responding to although I could have easily used it as a direct reference to the article.
The point being, no matter what Apple says, it is behind in the GPT aspect. There is no getting away from that. They have nothing and have not mentioned anything on the subject with regards to a real product or use case.
There is no point denying that. It's fact as of today.
Is it important? I don't think so. It's why I didn't comment on much of the GPT stuff.
I get what you’re saying, but I’m not sure they’re “behind” — we don’t know.
As of right now, the public GPT/AI engines are interesting and promising, but ultimately useless unless operated by experts, because of their tendency to fail catastrophically and completely intransparently in unpredictable ways.
Apple isn’t interested in making anything public until it can be operated by laymen, reliably and above all SAFELY.
Siri fails in unpredictable and utterly infuriating ways, but is harmless when it does.
A service that produces misinformation or mangles crucial steps of a process without any indication that it is … “improvising” is potentially dangerous in a thousand ways.
I don’t think we’ll see a public “Apple GPT” until they’ve figured out how to solve these problems and release a useful product.
I’m HOPING that the reason why Siri isn’t moving forward is because they’re putting all their work towards a replacement.
Yes, of course. My point is that trying to argue it's not behind when there is simply no equivalent product from them on the market is a pretty pointless exercise.
The article spells it out very clearly:
"Many pundits have said Apple is behind in AI, specifically because they do not have a chatbot or answer to tools like Google Bard"
That situation puts them into that position and the best thing to do is admit it.
It's like arguing they are not behind on folding phones because they filed patents for them. It's a bit silly.
Whatever they are working on, and to what kind of level, inevitably follows on from the acceptance of being 'behind', but the fact right now, is that there is nothing available so they can only accept the facts as they stand today.
Another debate is how damaging these tools may turn out to be (or not). It's almost like the internet in its teens. Easy access to porn by kids, misinformation, disinformation, privacy concerns, tracking scamming etc.
Most of us have learnt to deal with the shortcomings to a degree and then legislation eventually comes in to try and put some order into things.
The EU has been working on its AI directive for a while now.
It would have been better if the input information for the training of the headline grabbing technologies were of higher quality but I can understand why some decisions were taken.
Tmay, won't like me saying this but Huawei's models have been trained with pre-filtered data in an attempt to achieve better quality results. That's why they are being used in science, health and industry with stellar results. Each use case is carefully studied.
The integration of Pangu Model 3 with Huawei's digital assistant on CE devices will hopefully provide more pros than contras. It will also be on-device for privacy/security reasons.
In case you weren't able to digest my point, it is that Huawei is tightly integrated into the CCP and PLA, so whatever Huawei is doing, it isn't the equivalent of private enterprise in the West. Yet you continue to champion Huawei as if it is.
Case in point; Huawei implicated itself in the AI software that was created to filter out minorities, especially Uyghur, in China's mass surveillance.
China is a Totalitarian autocracy, and Huawei is "on the hook" for that association, as it should be.
It’s funny, whenever I write something critical of China, my post gets deleted.
It's not funny, actually, but I've noticed that as well, and I've also noted on more than a few occasions that certain pro-China posters can get away with massive misinformation.
So does Apple have another Copeland type situation on its hands, desperately trying to catch up which will lead to a purchase of some outside tech, or do they take the wraps off something they have been developing for sometime but waiting until it’s perfected?
In essence, this is a case of the Market speaking, less so than the technology, so I don't find that Apple will be "behind" at all when it comes to integration into products; it will wait until it is mature enough for consumers, as always.
In the meantime, the West, and China, are in a race to militarize AI, hence why the U.S. is restricting AI hardware technology sales to China.
The converse applies: it’s not legitimate to claim that they are “behind” simply because others have released non-viable products.
Your example of foldable phones is interesting, because it implies a) that the currently available phones are actually products people aspire to, and b) that Apple has the slightest interest in competing in that space at all. a) is debatable. They’re not selling terribly well, from what I’ve read, and they don’t seem to be all that thoroughly engineered at this point. b), we really don’t know.
I’d throw Vision Pro in the argument. Is it legitimate to say that Apple was “behind” in VR tech, as everyone was claiming — even though it is now clear that they were at least at level, if not way ahead of the incomplete products that others were throwing at a market that didn’t want them?
I wouldn't use legitimate or illegitimate in this case.
I would limit things to what the article points out.
There are companies with solutions on the market and there are companies without solutions on the market.
Apple is behind in that context (which is the context I was using).
That should be clear to everyone and it's what made the comparison to folding phones work because it is exactly the same situation.
It is clear that for all its potential shortcomings, the GPT and wider LLM markets are proving compelling in many cases. They are already proving viable. So viable that they can be dangerous.
Reaching a point where a company or organisation produces a shipping product or technology that is useful, puts it ahead of anyone aspiring to do the same but without a shipping product.
That is the current state of play with regards to Apple.
It's quite true that Apple could launch something that throws shade over everything else. That could be tomorrow or in five years, but until then, it is behind the competition.
I could name quite a few examples where Apple is behind. Some of its camera offerings have been behind for years for exactly the same reasons. If a phone can take zoomed macro photos using the periscope lens but another phone can't (simply because it lacks the hardware to do it), it is 'behind' for the same reasons. It's simplistic but nothing new.
Folding phones have, and continue, to exceed expectations. They are showing tremendous growth potential and coming down in price.
To the point that I have yet to see any analyst (usual suspects: Counterpoint, IDC, Gartner...) or industry watcher put a damper on growth estimates.
The Mate X3 has not been able to keep supply in line with demand from launch. As more players enter the market, prices are coming down.
The Vision Pro situation is completely different because the product has been announced. Even if not shipping, it can be compared to current products.
That said, it cannot be compared well to existing products because there is still a lot that we don't know about the Vision Pro. But at least there is something to go on.
I'm a fan of what I've seen so far but until it ships we won't know how it actually performs.
At least with that product, things aren't as clear cut as they are right now with the different GPT solutions.
People just don't get it. Apple is rarely a techno-feature company but intensely focus on user/useable features. Oh look we've got this new techno-gimmick you can ... use (for what exactly we're not sure) ... that's not Apple. I would guess they're probably working on a Siri Improvement, that can hold a conversation (eventually having in part generative AI working in the background) .. and that you can sell to the average user (and that is what an average user would care about). ... and beyond that, they won't talk about it until it is done.
Or to put it in hype cycle terms Apple will enter during the rise phase, work through the peak phase (usually in quiet) and then suddenly show up with something useful during the through of disillusionment phase and prbably be the reason we'll eventually rise to the plateau of productivity, because something truely useful comes out of it ... or will silently let it die if nothing useful comes out of it.
Where are we with generative AI!? Probably at the heights of the Peak going to fall down soon. Because essentially right now it’s more of a toy.
Bingo. Even here on an Apple-centric site, people seem surprised when Apple isn’t first to the market with some new thing. Then they’re critical when Apple enters the market “late” with a thing. Finally, they forget all that when Apple’s version of said thing becomes the gold standard, because they came at it from a different direction that makes it actually useful, instead of just a novelty.
Apple’s path as a vertical computer company gets it right in a more practical manner, when compared to their competition, Apple simply over the years gets too much stuff, right over the long-haul, iMac, OS X, iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Maps, Metal, Face ID, Touch ID, Apple Watch, AirPods, Studio Display, Pro Display XDR, Apple Silicon, VisionOS and the Apple Vision Pro (which features the new R1 co-processor, nothing wrong with that pathway, the only criticism is not getting they’re all in one Mac’s back on track with the latest M series SOC’s being made available to the public to have at least a chance of buying one.
Alexa is on life-support, Cortana is dead, and Google, keeps begging Apple to support their undercover spy schemes, Apple however, is on the better more profitable, user-friendly, usable, constant, more practical pathway.
The lack of constancy among the primarily software only companies, Google, Microsoft, and Meta, make it is easy to dabble in the latest flash, fad tech buzzword of the year, this year, it appears to be AI that will save all. Next year, I think a more pedestrian down to earth co-processor (the R1) made by Apple will be the star.
How is any of that not applicable to other manufacturers?
Apple Maps was a direct reaction to Google Maps and an utter disaster at launch. Google Maps remains the gold standard along with other maps options.
Apple maps will not get me to some places as it can't find them in the first place. On other occasions it will think it's found the place but its hundreds of kilometres away. It's got better over the years but still isn't up to Google Maps in many places.
The less said about Siri the better.
IM? It's Whatsapp all the way in most of the world.
Mail? I wonder how many Apple users don't have a Gmail account.
Home Automation? Why do you think Matter/Thread are on the lips of Apple users?
What happened to the notch? What replaced it? Something that has been around on other devices for years.
The TV? The car? The periscope lens? Where are they?
Nothing in your statement hasn't been provided by other vertically integrated manufacturers over the years.
Both in terms of hardware and software.
Today (just a couple of hours ago) NearLink was announced. Scarce on details at the moment but obviously a lot of work has gone into it.
I always laugh when you list technological bits that Apple is late to, or deficient, and yet, Apple always seems to get the technological synergy right in new platforms, all while making the bulk of revenue and profits. Next up, Apple Vision Pro. That you advocate for bleeding edge tech is wonderful, like Huawei's Nearlink, but, it isn't a panacea for success, especially with even the EU reevaluating China as a competitor, more so than a trading partner.
The whole bloc is figuring out what de-risking from China means. Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, described it as raising specific concerns that the EU has with Beijing, including over human rights, but also negotiating fairer competition and market access.
On Tuesday, the commission suggested the EU should review its foreign investment screening policy as well as toughen up its export control regulations. The institution did not say these ideas had been developed because of China directly, but it said the bloc needs to minimize risks “in the context of increased geopolitical tensions and accelerated technological shifts.”
Earlier this month, the European Commission called on more EU nations to ban the Chinese telecoms groups Huawei and ZTE.
Perhaps being early or first isn't a great paradigm for success, but mostly, Apple continues to define its platforms as a unique ecosystem that is valuable to consumers.
I hope you realise that China has nothing to do with anything here. You are just injecting that for the heck of it.
In fact, your entire post was just for the heck of it.
Go back and actually read what I was replying to and tell me where it isn't correct. Read the post I was responding to.
It has nothing to do with 'being first'.
All ecosystems are unique in their own way. Even Android!
All ecosystems are valuable to consumers to some degree but both Apple and Google are on the hook for also being NOT beneficial to consumers, too.
Alrighty then, you might want to withhold your Huawei announcements if you don't want comments about China.
I have no clue what you are stating about Apple and Google, not being beneficial to customers, when obviously, warts and all, they are overall, and absolutely, beneficial to consumers.
Huawei isn't China and again, read what I was responding to.
I could have gone into Huawei's massive AI technology portfolio which was also a large part of the HarmonyOS 4 presentation but it wasn't central to the point I was responding to although I could have easily used it as a direct reference to the article.
The point being, no matter what Apple says, it is behind in the GPT aspect. There is no getting away from that. They have nothing and have not mentioned anything on the subject with regards to a real product or use case.
There is no point denying that. It's fact as of today.
Is it important? I don't think so. It's why I didn't comment on much of the GPT stuff.
I get what you’re saying, but I’m not sure they’re “behind” — we don’t know.
As of right now, the public GPT/AI engines are interesting and promising, but ultimately useless unless operated by experts, because of their tendency to fail catastrophically and completely intransparently in unpredictable ways.
Apple isn’t interested in making anything public until it can be operated by laymen, reliably and above all SAFELY.
Siri fails in unpredictable and utterly infuriating ways, but is harmless when it does.
A service that produces misinformation or mangles crucial steps of a process without any indication that it is … “improvising” is potentially dangerous in a thousand ways.
I don’t think we’ll see a public “Apple GPT” until they’ve figured out how to solve these problems and release a useful product.
I’m HOPING that the reason why Siri isn’t moving forward is because they’re putting all their work towards a replacement.
Yes, of course. My point is that trying to argue it's not behind when there is simply no equivalent product from them on the market is a pretty pointless exercise.
The article spells it out very clearly:
"Many pundits have said Apple is behind in AI, specifically because they do not have a chatbot or answer to tools like Google Bard"
That situation puts them into that position and the best thing to do is admit it.
It's like arguing they are not behind on folding phones because they filed patents for them. It's a bit silly.
Whatever they are working on, and to what kind of level, inevitably follows on from the acceptance of being 'behind', but the fact right now, is that there is nothing available so they can only accept the facts as they stand today.
Another debate is how damaging these tools may turn out to be (or not). It's almost like the internet in its teens. Easy access to porn by kids, misinformation, disinformation, privacy concerns, tracking scamming etc.
Most of us have learnt to deal with the shortcomings to a degree and then legislation eventually comes in to try and put some order into things.
The EU has been working on its AI directive for a while now.
It would have been better if the input information for the training of the headline grabbing technologies were of higher quality but I can understand why some decisions were taken.
Tmay, won't like me saying this but Huawei's models have been trained with pre-filtered data in an attempt to achieve better quality results. That's why they are being used in science, health and industry with stellar results. Each use case is carefully studied.
The integration of Pangu Model 3 with Huawei's digital assistant on CE devices will hopefully provide more pros than contras. It will also be on-device for privacy/security reasons.
In case you weren't able to digest my point, it is that Huawei is tightly integrated into the CCP and PLA, so whatever Huawei is doing, it isn't the equivalent of private enterprise in the West. Yet you continue to champion Huawei as if it is.
Case in point; Huawei implicated itself in the AI software that was created to filter out minorities, especially Uyghur, in China's mass surveillance.
The exact same Huawei technology is capable of identifying pig faces too! There are massive use cases for it. Livestock farming is a multi billion dollar industry and perfect for AI and massive datasets.
The same core technology was used to evaluate image scans of lungs for Covid-19 detection during the height of the pandemic.
People just don't get it. Apple is rarely a techno-feature company but intensely focus on user/useable features. Oh look we've got this new techno-gimmick you can ... use (for what exactly we're not sure) ... that's not Apple. I would guess they're probably working on a Siri Improvement, that can hold a conversation (eventually having in part generative AI working in the background) .. and that you can sell to the average user (and that is what an average user would care about). ... and beyond that, they won't talk about it until it is done.
Or to put it in hype cycle terms Apple will enter during the rise phase, work through the peak phase (usually in quiet) and then suddenly show up with something useful during the through of disillusionment phase and prbably be the reason we'll eventually rise to the plateau of productivity, because something truely useful comes out of it ... or will silently let it die if nothing useful comes out of it.
Where are we with generative AI!? Probably at the heights of the Peak going to fall down soon. Because essentially right now it’s more of a toy.
Bingo. Even here on an Apple-centric site, people seem surprised when Apple isn’t first to the market with some new thing. Then they’re critical when Apple enters the market “late” with a thing. Finally, they forget all that when Apple’s version of said thing becomes the gold standard, because they came at it from a different direction that makes it actually useful, instead of just a novelty.
Apple’s path as a vertical computer company gets it right in a more practical manner, when compared to their competition, Apple simply over the years gets too much stuff, right over the long-haul, iMac, OS X, iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Maps, Metal, Face ID, Touch ID, Apple Watch, AirPods, Studio Display, Pro Display XDR, Apple Silicon, VisionOS and the Apple Vision Pro (which features the new R1 co-processor, nothing wrong with that pathway, the only criticism is not getting they’re all in one Mac’s back on track with the latest M series SOC’s being made available to the public to have at least a chance of buying one.
Alexa is on life-support, Cortana is dead, and Google, keeps begging Apple to support their undercover spy schemes, Apple however, is on the better more profitable, user-friendly, usable, constant, more practical pathway.
The lack of constancy among the primarily software only companies, Google, Microsoft, and Meta, make it is easy to dabble in the latest flash, fad tech buzzword of the year, this year, it appears to be AI that will save all. Next year, I think a more pedestrian down to earth co-processor (the R1) made by Apple will be the star.
How is any of that not applicable to other manufacturers?
Apple Maps was a direct reaction to Google Maps and an utter disaster at launch. Google Maps remains the gold standard along with other maps options.
Apple maps will not get me to some places as it can't find them in the first place. On other occasions it will think it's found the place but its hundreds of kilometres away. It's got better over the years but still isn't up to Google Maps in many places.
The less said about Siri the better.
IM? It's Whatsapp all the way in most of the world.
Mail? I wonder how many Apple users don't have a Gmail account.
Home Automation? Why do you think Matter/Thread are on the lips of Apple users?
What happened to the notch? What replaced it? Something that has been around on other devices for years.
The TV? The car? The periscope lens? Where are they?
Nothing in your statement hasn't been provided by other vertically integrated manufacturers over the years.
Both in terms of hardware and software.
Today (just a couple of hours ago) NearLink was announced. Scarce on details at the moment but obviously a lot of work has gone into it.
I always laugh when you list technological bits that Apple is late to, or deficient, and yet, Apple always seems to get the technological synergy right in new platforms, all while making the bulk of revenue and profits. Next up, Apple Vision Pro. That you advocate for bleeding edge tech is wonderful, like Huawei's Nearlink, but, it isn't a panacea for success, especially with even the EU reevaluating China as a competitor, more so than a trading partner.
The whole bloc is figuring out what de-risking from China means. Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, described it as raising specific concerns that the EU has with Beijing, including over human rights, but also negotiating fairer competition and market access.
On Tuesday, the commission suggested the EU should review its foreign investment screening policy as well as toughen up its export control regulations. The institution did not say these ideas had been developed because of China directly, but it said the bloc needs to minimize risks “in the context of increased geopolitical tensions and accelerated technological shifts.”
Earlier this month, the European Commission called on more EU nations to ban the Chinese telecoms groups Huawei and ZTE.
Perhaps being early or first isn't a great paradigm for success, but mostly, Apple continues to define its platforms as a unique ecosystem that is valuable to consumers.
I hope you realise that China has nothing to do with anything here. You are just injecting that for the heck of it.
In fact, your entire post was just for the heck of it.
Go back and actually read what I was replying to and tell me where it isn't correct. Read the post I was responding to.
It has nothing to do with 'being first'.
All ecosystems are unique in their own way. Even Android!
All ecosystems are valuable to consumers to some degree but both Apple and Google are on the hook for also being NOT beneficial to consumers, too.
Alrighty then, you might want to withhold your Huawei announcements if you don't want comments about China.
I have no clue what you are stating about Apple and Google, not being beneficial to customers, when obviously, warts and all, they are overall, and absolutely, beneficial to consumers.
Huawei isn't China and again, read what I was responding to.
I could have gone into Huawei's massive AI technology portfolio which was also a large part of the HarmonyOS 4 presentation but it wasn't central to the point I was responding to although I could have easily used it as a direct reference to the article.
The point being, no matter what Apple says, it is behind in the GPT aspect. There is no getting away from that. They have nothing and have not mentioned anything on the subject with regards to a real product or use case.
There is no point denying that. It's fact as of today.
Is it important? I don't think so. It's why I didn't comment on much of the GPT stuff.
I get what you’re saying, but I’m not sure they’re “behind” — we don’t know.
As of right now, the public GPT/AI engines are interesting and promising, but ultimately useless unless operated by experts, because of their tendency to fail catastrophically and completely intransparently in unpredictable ways.
Apple isn’t interested in making anything public until it can be operated by laymen, reliably and above all SAFELY.
Siri fails in unpredictable and utterly infuriating ways, but is harmless when it does.
A service that produces misinformation or mangles crucial steps of a process without any indication that it is … “improvising” is potentially dangerous in a thousand ways.
I don’t think we’ll see a public “Apple GPT” until they’ve figured out how to solve these problems and release a useful product.
I’m HOPING that the reason why Siri isn’t moving forward is because they’re putting all their work towards a replacement.
Yes, of course. My point is that trying to argue it's not behind when there is simply no equivalent product from them on the market is a pretty pointless exercise.
The article spells it out very clearly:
"Many pundits have said Apple is behind in AI, specifically because they do not have a chatbot or answer to tools like Google Bard"
That situation puts them into that position and the best thing to do is admit it.
It's like arguing they are not behind on folding phones because they filed patents for them. It's a bit silly.
Whatever they are working on, and to what kind of level, inevitably follows on from the acceptance of being 'behind', but the fact right now, is that there is nothing available so they can only accept the facts as they stand today.
Another debate is how damaging these tools may turn out to be (or not). It's almost like the internet in its teens. Easy access to porn by kids, misinformation, disinformation, privacy concerns, tracking scamming etc.
Most of us have learnt to deal with the shortcomings to a degree and then legislation eventually comes in to try and put some order into things.
The EU has been working on its AI directive for a while now.
It would have been better if the input information for the training of the headline grabbing technologies were of higher quality but I can understand why some decisions were taken.
Tmay, won't like me saying this but Huawei's models have been trained with pre-filtered data in an attempt to achieve better quality results. That's why they are being used in science, health and industry with stellar results. Each use case is carefully studied.
The integration of Pangu Model 3 with Huawei's digital assistant on CE devices will hopefully provide more pros than contras. It will also be on-device for privacy/security reasons.
In case you weren't able to digest my point, it is that Huawei is tightly integrated into the CCP and PLA, so whatever Huawei is doing, it isn't the equivalent of private enterprise in the West. Yet you continue to champion Huawei as if it is.
Case in point; Huawei implicated itself in the AI software that was created to filter out minorities, especially Uyghur, in China's mass surveillance.
The exact same Huawei technology is capable of identifying pig faces too! There are massive use cases for it. Livestock farming is a multi billion dollar industry and perfect for AI and massive datasets.
The same core technology was used to evaluate image scans of lungs for Covid-19 detection during the height of the pandemic.
Hhm, so Huawei is not guilty of creating that software because it was the Chinese Government that forced them to target Uyghur and other minorities. Good to know.
Since you brought up pigs, maybe China should encourage Huawei to use its AI prowess to reduce the spread of African Swine Fever, which is a massive issue in China;
People just don't get it. Apple is rarely a techno-feature company but intensely focus on user/useable features. Oh look we've got this new techno-gimmick you can ... use (for what exactly we're not sure) ... that's not Apple. I would guess they're probably working on a Siri Improvement, that can hold a conversation (eventually having in part generative AI working in the background) .. and that you can sell to the average user (and that is what an average user would care about). ... and beyond that, they won't talk about it until it is done.
Or to put it in hype cycle terms Apple will enter during the rise phase, work through the peak phase (usually in quiet) and then suddenly show up with something useful during the through of disillusionment phase and prbably be the reason we'll eventually rise to the plateau of productivity, because something truely useful comes out of it ... or will silently let it die if nothing useful comes out of it.
Where are we with generative AI!? Probably at the heights of the Peak going to fall down soon. Because essentially right now it’s more of a toy.
Bingo. Even here on an Apple-centric site, people seem surprised when Apple isn’t first to the market with some new thing. Then they’re critical when Apple enters the market “late” with a thing. Finally, they forget all that when Apple’s version of said thing becomes the gold standard, because they came at it from a different direction that makes it actually useful, instead of just a novelty.
Apple’s path as a vertical computer company gets it right in a more practical manner, when compared to their competition, Apple simply over the years gets too much stuff, right over the long-haul, iMac, OS X, iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Maps, Metal, Face ID, Touch ID, Apple Watch, AirPods, Studio Display, Pro Display XDR, Apple Silicon, VisionOS and the Apple Vision Pro (which features the new R1 co-processor, nothing wrong with that pathway, the only criticism is not getting they’re all in one Mac’s back on track with the latest M series SOC’s being made available to the public to have at least a chance of buying one.
Alexa is on life-support, Cortana is dead, and Google, keeps begging Apple to support their undercover spy schemes, Apple however, is on the better more profitable, user-friendly, usable, constant, more practical pathway.
The lack of constancy among the primarily software only companies, Google, Microsoft, and Meta, make it is easy to dabble in the latest flash, fad tech buzzword of the year, this year, it appears to be AI that will save all. Next year, I think a more pedestrian down to earth co-processor (the R1) made by Apple will be the star.
How is any of that not applicable to other manufacturers?
Apple Maps was a direct reaction to Google Maps and an utter disaster at launch. Google Maps remains the gold standard along with other maps options.
Apple maps will not get me to some places as it can't find them in the first place. On other occasions it will think it's found the place but its hundreds of kilometres away. It's got better over the years but still isn't up to Google Maps in many places.
The less said about Siri the better.
IM? It's Whatsapp all the way in most of the world.
Mail? I wonder how many Apple users don't have a Gmail account.
Home Automation? Why do you think Matter/Thread are on the lips of Apple users?
What happened to the notch? What replaced it? Something that has been around on other devices for years.
The TV? The car? The periscope lens? Where are they?
Nothing in your statement hasn't been provided by other vertically integrated manufacturers over the years.
Both in terms of hardware and software.
Today (just a couple of hours ago) NearLink was announced. Scarce on details at the moment but obviously a lot of work has gone into it.
I always laugh when you list technological bits that Apple is late to, or deficient, and yet, Apple always seems to get the technological synergy right in new platforms, all while making the bulk of revenue and profits. Next up, Apple Vision Pro. That you advocate for bleeding edge tech is wonderful, like Huawei's Nearlink, but, it isn't a panacea for success, especially with even the EU reevaluating China as a competitor, more so than a trading partner.
The whole bloc is figuring out what de-risking from China means. Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, described it as raising specific concerns that the EU has with Beijing, including over human rights, but also negotiating fairer competition and market access.
On Tuesday, the commission suggested the EU should review its foreign investment screening policy as well as toughen up its export control regulations. The institution did not say these ideas had been developed because of China directly, but it said the bloc needs to minimize risks “in the context of increased geopolitical tensions and accelerated technological shifts.”
Earlier this month, the European Commission called on more EU nations to ban the Chinese telecoms groups Huawei and ZTE.
Perhaps being early or first isn't a great paradigm for success, but mostly, Apple continues to define its platforms as a unique ecosystem that is valuable to consumers.
I hope you realise that China has nothing to do with anything here. You are just injecting that for the heck of it.
In fact, your entire post was just for the heck of it.
Go back and actually read what I was replying to and tell me where it isn't correct. Read the post I was responding to.
It has nothing to do with 'being first'.
All ecosystems are unique in their own way. Even Android!
All ecosystems are valuable to consumers to some degree but both Apple and Google are on the hook for also being NOT beneficial to consumers, too.
Alrighty then, you might want to withhold your Huawei announcements if you don't want comments about China.
I have no clue what you are stating about Apple and Google, not being beneficial to customers, when obviously, warts and all, they are overall, and absolutely, beneficial to consumers.
Huawei isn't China and again, read what I was responding to.
I could have gone into Huawei's massive AI technology portfolio which was also a large part of the HarmonyOS 4 presentation but it wasn't central to the point I was responding to although I could have easily used it as a direct reference to the article.
The point being, no matter what Apple says, it is behind in the GPT aspect. There is no getting away from that. They have nothing and have not mentioned anything on the subject with regards to a real product or use case.
There is no point denying that. It's fact as of today.
Is it important? I don't think so. It's why I didn't comment on much of the GPT stuff.
I get what you’re saying, but I’m not sure they’re “behind” — we don’t know.
As of right now, the public GPT/AI engines are interesting and promising, but ultimately useless unless operated by experts, because of their tendency to fail catastrophically and completely intransparently in unpredictable ways.
Apple isn’t interested in making anything public until it can be operated by laymen, reliably and above all SAFELY.
Siri fails in unpredictable and utterly infuriating ways, but is harmless when it does.
A service that produces misinformation or mangles crucial steps of a process without any indication that it is … “improvising” is potentially dangerous in a thousand ways.
I don’t think we’ll see a public “Apple GPT” until they’ve figured out how to solve these problems and release a useful product.
I’m HOPING that the reason why Siri isn’t moving forward is because they’re putting all their work towards a replacement.
Yes, of course. My point is that trying to argue it's not behind when there is simply no equivalent product from them on the market is a pretty pointless exercise.
The article spells it out very clearly:
"Many pundits have said Apple is behind in AI, specifically because they do not have a chatbot or answer to tools like Google Bard"
That situation puts them into that position and the best thing to do is admit it.
It's like arguing they are not behind on folding phones because they filed patents for them. It's a bit silly.
Whatever they are working on, and to what kind of level, inevitably follows on from the acceptance of being 'behind', but the fact right now, is that there is nothing available so they can only accept the facts as they stand today.
Another debate is how damaging these tools may turn out to be (or not). It's almost like the internet in its teens. Easy access to porn by kids, misinformation, disinformation, privacy concerns, tracking scamming etc.
Most of us have learnt to deal with the shortcomings to a degree and then legislation eventually comes in to try and put some order into things.
The EU has been working on its AI directive for a while now.
It would have been better if the input information for the training of the headline grabbing technologies were of higher quality but I can understand why some decisions were taken.
Tmay, won't like me saying this but Huawei's models have been trained with pre-filtered data in an attempt to achieve better quality results. That's why they are being used in science, health and industry with stellar results. Each use case is carefully studied.
The integration of Pangu Model 3 with Huawei's digital assistant on CE devices will hopefully provide more pros than contras. It will also be on-device for privacy/security reasons.
In case you weren't able to digest my point, it is that Huawei is tightly integrated into the CCP and PLA, so whatever Huawei is doing, it isn't the equivalent of private enterprise in the West. Yet you continue to champion Huawei as if it is.
Case in point; Huawei implicated itself in the AI software that was created to filter out minorities, especially Uyghur, in China's mass surveillance.
The exact same Huawei technology is capable of identifying pig faces too! There are massive use cases for it. Livestock farming is a multi billion dollar industry and perfect for AI and massive datasets.
The same core technology was used to evaluate image scans of lungs for Covid-19 detection during the height of the pandemic.
Hhm, so Huawei is not guilty of creating that software because it was the Chinese Government that forced them to target Uyghur and other minorities. Good to know.
Once again you have no counterargument.
AI (or whatever you want to call it) is proving to be a game changer with the use of LLM. It's nothing new! Hence my reference to the 2019 Covid-19 image evaluation technology.
There are huge potential dangers in how it is used but that has been the case with many technological advances. Don't let that cloud your vision for the good that can be done.
The main difference perhaps is that AI has the potential to impact just about everything out there. Literally.
That is because most of the biggest technological breakthroughs nowadays make use of gigantic datasets.
That means science of all kinds, medicine, industry, education...
People just don't get it. Apple is rarely a techno-feature company but intensely focus on user/useable features. Oh look we've got this new techno-gimmick you can ... use (for what exactly we're not sure) ... that's not Apple. I would guess they're probably working on a Siri Improvement, that can hold a conversation (eventually having in part generative AI working in the background) .. and that you can sell to the average user (and that is what an average user would care about). ... and beyond that, they won't talk about it until it is done.
Or to put it in hype cycle terms Apple will enter during the rise phase, work through the peak phase (usually in quiet) and then suddenly show up with something useful during the through of disillusionment phase and prbably be the reason we'll eventually rise to the plateau of productivity, because something truely useful comes out of it ... or will silently let it die if nothing useful comes out of it.
Where are we with generative AI!? Probably at the heights of the Peak going to fall down soon. Because essentially right now it’s more of a toy.
Bingo. Even here on an Apple-centric site, people seem surprised when Apple isn’t first to the market with some new thing. Then they’re critical when Apple enters the market “late” with a thing. Finally, they forget all that when Apple’s version of said thing becomes the gold standard, because they came at it from a different direction that makes it actually useful, instead of just a novelty.
Apple’s path as a vertical computer company gets it right in a more practical manner, when compared to their competition, Apple simply over the years gets too much stuff, right over the long-haul, iMac, OS X, iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Maps, Metal, Face ID, Touch ID, Apple Watch, AirPods, Studio Display, Pro Display XDR, Apple Silicon, VisionOS and the Apple Vision Pro (which features the new R1 co-processor, nothing wrong with that pathway, the only criticism is not getting they’re all in one Mac’s back on track with the latest M series SOC’s being made available to the public to have at least a chance of buying one.
Alexa is on life-support, Cortana is dead, and Google, keeps begging Apple to support their undercover spy schemes, Apple however, is on the better more profitable, user-friendly, usable, constant, more practical pathway.
The lack of constancy among the primarily software only companies, Google, Microsoft, and Meta, make it is easy to dabble in the latest flash, fad tech buzzword of the year, this year, it appears to be AI that will save all. Next year, I think a more pedestrian down to earth co-processor (the R1) made by Apple will be the star.
How is any of that not applicable to other manufacturers?
Apple Maps was a direct reaction to Google Maps and an utter disaster at launch. Google Maps remains the gold standard along with other maps options.
Apple maps will not get me to some places as it can't find them in the first place. On other occasions it will think it's found the place but its hundreds of kilometres away. It's got better over the years but still isn't up to Google Maps in many places.
The less said about Siri the better.
IM? It's Whatsapp all the way in most of the world.
Mail? I wonder how many Apple users don't have a Gmail account.
Home Automation? Why do you think Matter/Thread are on the lips of Apple users?
What happened to the notch? What replaced it? Something that has been around on other devices for years.
The TV? The car? The periscope lens? Where are they?
Nothing in your statement hasn't been provided by other vertically integrated manufacturers over the years.
Both in terms of hardware and software.
Today (just a couple of hours ago) NearLink was announced. Scarce on details at the moment but obviously a lot of work has gone into it.
I always laugh when you list technological bits that Apple is late to, or deficient, and yet, Apple always seems to get the technological synergy right in new platforms, all while making the bulk of revenue and profits. Next up, Apple Vision Pro. That you advocate for bleeding edge tech is wonderful, like Huawei's Nearlink, but, it isn't a panacea for success, especially with even the EU reevaluating China as a competitor, more so than a trading partner.
The whole bloc is figuring out what de-risking from China means. Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, described it as raising specific concerns that the EU has with Beijing, including over human rights, but also negotiating fairer competition and market access.
On Tuesday, the commission suggested the EU should review its foreign investment screening policy as well as toughen up its export control regulations. The institution did not say these ideas had been developed because of China directly, but it said the bloc needs to minimize risks “in the context of increased geopolitical tensions and accelerated technological shifts.”
Earlier this month, the European Commission called on more EU nations to ban the Chinese telecoms groups Huawei and ZTE.
Perhaps being early or first isn't a great paradigm for success, but mostly, Apple continues to define its platforms as a unique ecosystem that is valuable to consumers.
I hope you realise that China has nothing to do with anything here. You are just injecting that for the heck of it.
In fact, your entire post was just for the heck of it.
Go back and actually read what I was replying to and tell me where it isn't correct. Read the post I was responding to.
It has nothing to do with 'being first'.
All ecosystems are unique in their own way. Even Android!
All ecosystems are valuable to consumers to some degree but both Apple and Google are on the hook for also being NOT beneficial to consumers, too.
Alrighty then, you might want to withhold your Huawei announcements if you don't want comments about China.
I have no clue what you are stating about Apple and Google, not being beneficial to customers, when obviously, warts and all, they are overall, and absolutely, beneficial to consumers.
Huawei isn't China and again, read what I was responding to.
I could have gone into Huawei's massive AI technology portfolio which was also a large part of the HarmonyOS 4 presentation but it wasn't central to the point I was responding to although I could have easily used it as a direct reference to the article.
The point being, no matter what Apple says, it is behind in the GPT aspect. There is no getting away from that. They have nothing and have not mentioned anything on the subject with regards to a real product or use case.
There is no point denying that. It's fact as of today.
Is it important? I don't think so. It's why I didn't comment on much of the GPT stuff.
I get what you’re saying, but I’m not sure they’re “behind” — we don’t know.
As of right now, the public GPT/AI engines are interesting and promising, but ultimately useless unless operated by experts, because of their tendency to fail catastrophically and completely intransparently in unpredictable ways.
Apple isn’t interested in making anything public until it can be operated by laymen, reliably and above all SAFELY.
Siri fails in unpredictable and utterly infuriating ways, but is harmless when it does.
A service that produces misinformation or mangles crucial steps of a process without any indication that it is … “improvising” is potentially dangerous in a thousand ways.
I don’t think we’ll see a public “Apple GPT” until they’ve figured out how to solve these problems and release a useful product.
I’m HOPING that the reason why Siri isn’t moving forward is because they’re putting all their work towards a replacement.
Yes, of course. My point is that trying to argue it's not behind when there is simply no equivalent product from them on the market is a pretty pointless exercise.
The article spells it out very clearly:
"Many pundits have said Apple is behind in AI, specifically because they do not have a chatbot or answer to tools like Google Bard"
That situation puts them into that position and the best thing to do is admit it.
It's like arguing they are not behind on folding phones because they filed patents for them. It's a bit silly.
Whatever they are working on, and to what kind of level, inevitably follows on from the acceptance of being 'behind', but the fact right now, is that there is nothing available so they can only accept the facts as they stand today.
Another debate is how damaging these tools may turn out to be (or not). It's almost like the internet in its teens. Easy access to porn by kids, misinformation, disinformation, privacy concerns, tracking scamming etc.
Most of us have learnt to deal with the shortcomings to a degree and then legislation eventually comes in to try and put some order into things.
The EU has been working on its AI directive for a while now.
It would have been better if the input information for the training of the headline grabbing technologies were of higher quality but I can understand why some decisions were taken.
Tmay, won't like me saying this but Huawei's models have been trained with pre-filtered data in an attempt to achieve better quality results. That's why they are being used in science, health and industry with stellar results. Each use case is carefully studied.
The integration of Pangu Model 3 with Huawei's digital assistant on CE devices will hopefully provide more pros than contras. It will also be on-device for privacy/security reasons.
In case you weren't able to digest my point, it is that Huawei is tightly integrated into the CCP and PLA, so whatever Huawei is doing, it isn't the equivalent of private enterprise in the West. Yet you continue to champion Huawei as if it is.
Case in point; Huawei implicated itself in the AI software that was created to filter out minorities, especially Uyghur, in China's mass surveillance.
The exact same Huawei technology is capable of identifying pig faces too! There are massive use cases for it. Livestock farming is a multi billion dollar industry and perfect for AI and massive datasets.
The same core technology was used to evaluate image scans of lungs for Covid-19 detection during the height of the pandemic.
Hhm, so Huawei is not guilty of creating that software because it was the Chinese Government that forced them to target Uyghur and other minorities. Good to know.
Once again you have no counterargument.
AI (or whatever you want to call it) is proving to be a game changer with the use of LLM. It's nothing new! Hence my reference to the 2019 Covid-19 image evaluation technology.
There are huge potential dangers in how it is used but that has been the case with many technological advances. Don't let that cloud your vision for the good that can be done.
The main difference perhaps is that AI has the potential to impact just about everything out there. Literally.
That is because most of the biggest technological breakthroughs nowadays make use of gigantic datasets.
That means science of all kinds, medicine, industry, education...
People just don't get it. Apple is rarely a techno-feature company but intensely focus on user/useable features. Oh look we've got this new techno-gimmick you can ... use (for what exactly we're not sure) ... that's not Apple. I would guess they're probably working on a Siri Improvement, that can hold a conversation (eventually having in part generative AI working in the background) .. and that you can sell to the average user (and that is what an average user would care about). ... and beyond that, they won't talk about it until it is done.
Or to put it in hype cycle terms Apple will enter during the rise phase, work through the peak phase (usually in quiet) and then suddenly show up with something useful during the through of disillusionment phase and prbably be the reason we'll eventually rise to the plateau of productivity, because something truely useful comes out of it ... or will silently let it die if nothing useful comes out of it.
Where are we with generative AI!? Probably at the heights of the Peak going to fall down soon. Because essentially right now it’s more of a toy.
Bingo. Even here on an Apple-centric site, people seem surprised when Apple isn’t first to the market with some new thing. Then they’re critical when Apple enters the market “late” with a thing. Finally, they forget all that when Apple’s version of said thing becomes the gold standard, because they came at it from a different direction that makes it actually useful, instead of just a novelty.
Apple’s path as a vertical computer company gets it right in a more practical manner, when compared to their competition, Apple simply over the years gets too much stuff, right over the long-haul, iMac, OS X, iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Maps, Metal, Face ID, Touch ID, Apple Watch, AirPods, Studio Display, Pro Display XDR, Apple Silicon, VisionOS and the Apple Vision Pro (which features the new R1 co-processor, nothing wrong with that pathway, the only criticism is not getting they’re all in one Mac’s back on track with the latest M series SOC’s being made available to the public to have at least a chance of buying one.
Alexa is on life-support, Cortana is dead, and Google, keeps begging Apple to support their undercover spy schemes, Apple however, is on the better more profitable, user-friendly, usable, constant, more practical pathway.
The lack of constancy among the primarily software only companies, Google, Microsoft, and Meta, make it is easy to dabble in the latest flash, fad tech buzzword of the year, this year, it appears to be AI that will save all. Next year, I think a more pedestrian down to earth co-processor (the R1) made by Apple will be the star.
How is any of that not applicable to other manufacturers?
Apple Maps was a direct reaction to Google Maps and an utter disaster at launch. Google Maps remains the gold standard along with other maps options.
Apple maps will not get me to some places as it can't find them in the first place. On other occasions it will think it's found the place but its hundreds of kilometres away. It's got better over the years but still isn't up to Google Maps in many places.
The less said about Siri the better.
IM? It's Whatsapp all the way in most of the world.
Mail? I wonder how many Apple users don't have a Gmail account.
Home Automation? Why do you think Matter/Thread are on the lips of Apple users?
What happened to the notch? What replaced it? Something that has been around on other devices for years.
The TV? The car? The periscope lens? Where are they?
Nothing in your statement hasn't been provided by other vertically integrated manufacturers over the years.
Both in terms of hardware and software.
Today (just a couple of hours ago) NearLink was announced. Scarce on details at the moment but obviously a lot of work has gone into it.
I always laugh when you list technological bits that Apple is late to, or deficient, and yet, Apple always seems to get the technological synergy right in new platforms, all while making the bulk of revenue and profits. Next up, Apple Vision Pro. That you advocate for bleeding edge tech is wonderful, like Huawei's Nearlink, but, it isn't a panacea for success, especially with even the EU reevaluating China as a competitor, more so than a trading partner.
The whole bloc is figuring out what de-risking from China means. Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, described it as raising specific concerns that the EU has with Beijing, including over human rights, but also negotiating fairer competition and market access.
On Tuesday, the commission suggested the EU should review its foreign investment screening policy as well as toughen up its export control regulations. The institution did not say these ideas had been developed because of China directly, but it said the bloc needs to minimize risks “in the context of increased geopolitical tensions and accelerated technological shifts.”
Earlier this month, the European Commission called on more EU nations to ban the Chinese telecoms groups Huawei and ZTE.
Perhaps being early or first isn't a great paradigm for success, but mostly, Apple continues to define its platforms as a unique ecosystem that is valuable to consumers.
I hope you realise that China has nothing to do with anything here. You are just injecting that for the heck of it.
In fact, your entire post was just for the heck of it.
Go back and actually read what I was replying to and tell me where it isn't correct. Read the post I was responding to.
It has nothing to do with 'being first'.
All ecosystems are unique in their own way. Even Android!
All ecosystems are valuable to consumers to some degree but both Apple and Google are on the hook for also being NOT beneficial to consumers, too.
Alrighty then, you might want to withhold your Huawei announcements if you don't want comments about China.
I have no clue what you are stating about Apple and Google, not being beneficial to customers, when obviously, warts and all, they are overall, and absolutely, beneficial to consumers.
Huawei isn't China and again, read what I was responding to.
I could have gone into Huawei's massive AI technology portfolio which was also a large part of the HarmonyOS 4 presentation but it wasn't central to the point I was responding to although I could have easily used it as a direct reference to the article.
The point being, no matter what Apple says, it is behind in the GPT aspect. There is no getting away from that. They have nothing and have not mentioned anything on the subject with regards to a real product or use case.
There is no point denying that. It's fact as of today.
Is it important? I don't think so. It's why I didn't comment on much of the GPT stuff.
I get what you’re saying, but I’m not sure they’re “behind” — we don’t know.
As of right now, the public GPT/AI engines are interesting and promising, but ultimately useless unless operated by experts, because of their tendency to fail catastrophically and completely intransparently in unpredictable ways.
Apple isn’t interested in making anything public until it can be operated by laymen, reliably and above all SAFELY.
Siri fails in unpredictable and utterly infuriating ways, but is harmless when it does.
A service that produces misinformation or mangles crucial steps of a process without any indication that it is … “improvising” is potentially dangerous in a thousand ways.
I don’t think we’ll see a public “Apple GPT” until they’ve figured out how to solve these problems and release a useful product.
I’m HOPING that the reason why Siri isn’t moving forward is because they’re putting all their work towards a replacement.
Yes, of course. My point is that trying to argue it's not behind when there is simply no equivalent product from them on the market is a pretty pointless exercise.
The article spells it out very clearly:
"Many pundits have said Apple is behind in AI, specifically because they do not have a chatbot or answer to tools like Google Bard"
That situation puts them into that position and the best thing to do is admit it.
It's like arguing they are not behind on folding phones because they filed patents for them. It's a bit silly.
Whatever they are working on, and to what kind of level, inevitably follows on from the acceptance of being 'behind', but the fact right now, is that there is nothing available so they can only accept the facts as they stand today.
Another debate is how damaging these tools may turn out to be (or not). It's almost like the internet in its teens. Easy access to porn by kids, misinformation, disinformation, privacy concerns, tracking scamming etc.
Most of us have learnt to deal with the shortcomings to a degree and then legislation eventually comes in to try and put some order into things.
The EU has been working on its AI directive for a while now.
It would have been better if the input information for the training of the headline grabbing technologies were of higher quality but I can understand why some decisions were taken.
Tmay, won't like me saying this but Huawei's models have been trained with pre-filtered data in an attempt to achieve better quality results. That's why they are being used in science, health and industry with stellar results. Each use case is carefully studied.
The integration of Pangu Model 3 with Huawei's digital assistant on CE devices will hopefully provide more pros than contras. It will also be on-device for privacy/security reasons.
In case you weren't able to digest my point, it is that Huawei is tightly integrated into the CCP and PLA, so whatever Huawei is doing, it isn't the equivalent of private enterprise in the West. Yet you continue to champion Huawei as if it is.
Case in point; Huawei implicated itself in the AI software that was created to filter out minorities, especially Uyghur, in China's mass surveillance.
The exact same Huawei technology is capable of identifying pig faces too! There are massive use cases for it. Livestock farming is a multi billion dollar industry and perfect for AI and massive datasets.
The same core technology was used to evaluate image scans of lungs for Covid-19 detection during the height of the pandemic.
Hhm, so Huawei is not guilty of creating that software because it was the Chinese Government that forced them to target Uyghur and other minorities. Good to know.
Once again you have no counterargument.
AI (or whatever you want to call it) is proving to be a game changer with the use of LLM. It's nothing new! Hence my reference to the 2019 Covid-19 image evaluation technology.
There are huge potential dangers in how it is used but that has been the case with many technological advances. Don't let that cloud your vision for the good that can be done.
The main difference perhaps is that AI has the potential to impact just about everything out there. Literally.
That is because most of the biggest technological breakthroughs nowadays make use of gigantic datasets.
That means science of all kinds, medicine, industry, education...
BTW, there was no AI image evaluation software in 2019 for COVID19. Huawei didn't announce its diagnostics software until March of 2020, and COVID19 wasn't even registering as the virus until the very end of the year.
People just don't get it. Apple is rarely a techno-feature company but intensely focus on user/useable features. Oh look we've got this new techno-gimmick you can ... use (for what exactly we're not sure) ... that's not Apple. I would guess they're probably working on a Siri Improvement, that can hold a conversation (eventually having in part generative AI working in the background) .. and that you can sell to the average user (and that is what an average user would care about). ... and beyond that, they won't talk about it until it is done.
Or to put it in hype cycle terms Apple will enter during the rise phase, work through the peak phase (usually in quiet) and then suddenly show up with something useful during the through of disillusionment phase and prbably be the reason we'll eventually rise to the plateau of productivity, because something truely useful comes out of it ... or will silently let it die if nothing useful comes out of it.
Where are we with generative AI!? Probably at the heights of the Peak going to fall down soon. Because essentially right now it’s more of a toy.
Bingo. Even here on an Apple-centric site, people seem surprised when Apple isn’t first to the market with some new thing. Then they’re critical when Apple enters the market “late” with a thing. Finally, they forget all that when Apple’s version of said thing becomes the gold standard, because they came at it from a different direction that makes it actually useful, instead of just a novelty.
Apple’s path as a vertical computer company gets it right in a more practical manner, when compared to their competition, Apple simply over the years gets too much stuff, right over the long-haul, iMac, OS X, iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Maps, Metal, Face ID, Touch ID, Apple Watch, AirPods, Studio Display, Pro Display XDR, Apple Silicon, VisionOS and the Apple Vision Pro (which features the new R1 co-processor, nothing wrong with that pathway, the only criticism is not getting they’re all in one Mac’s back on track with the latest M series SOC’s being made available to the public to have at least a chance of buying one.
Alexa is on life-support, Cortana is dead, and Google, keeps begging Apple to support their undercover spy schemes, Apple however, is on the better more profitable, user-friendly, usable, constant, more practical pathway.
The lack of constancy among the primarily software only companies, Google, Microsoft, and Meta, make it is easy to dabble in the latest flash, fad tech buzzword of the year, this year, it appears to be AI that will save all. Next year, I think a more pedestrian down to earth co-processor (the R1) made by Apple will be the star.
How is any of that not applicable to other manufacturers?
Apple Maps was a direct reaction to Google Maps and an utter disaster at launch. Google Maps remains the gold standard along with other maps options.
Apple maps will not get me to some places as it can't find them in the first place. On other occasions it will think it's found the place but its hundreds of kilometres away. It's got better over the years but still isn't up to Google Maps in many places.
The less said about Siri the better.
IM? It's Whatsapp all the way in most of the world.
Mail? I wonder how many Apple users don't have a Gmail account.
Home Automation? Why do you think Matter/Thread are on the lips of Apple users?
What happened to the notch? What replaced it? Something that has been around on other devices for years.
The TV? The car? The periscope lens? Where are they?
Nothing in your statement hasn't been provided by other vertically integrated manufacturers over the years.
Both in terms of hardware and software.
Today (just a couple of hours ago) NearLink was announced. Scarce on details at the moment but obviously a lot of work has gone into it.
I always laugh when you list technological bits that Apple is late to, or deficient, and yet, Apple always seems to get the technological synergy right in new platforms, all while making the bulk of revenue and profits. Next up, Apple Vision Pro. That you advocate for bleeding edge tech is wonderful, like Huawei's Nearlink, but, it isn't a panacea for success, especially with even the EU reevaluating China as a competitor, more so than a trading partner.
The whole bloc is figuring out what de-risking from China means. Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, described it as raising specific concerns that the EU has with Beijing, including over human rights, but also negotiating fairer competition and market access.
On Tuesday, the commission suggested the EU should review its foreign investment screening policy as well as toughen up its export control regulations. The institution did not say these ideas had been developed because of China directly, but it said the bloc needs to minimize risks “in the context of increased geopolitical tensions and accelerated technological shifts.”
Earlier this month, the European Commission called on more EU nations to ban the Chinese telecoms groups Huawei and ZTE.
Perhaps being early or first isn't a great paradigm for success, but mostly, Apple continues to define its platforms as a unique ecosystem that is valuable to consumers.
I hope you realise that China has nothing to do with anything here. You are just injecting that for the heck of it.
In fact, your entire post was just for the heck of it.
Go back and actually read what I was replying to and tell me where it isn't correct. Read the post I was responding to.
It has nothing to do with 'being first'.
All ecosystems are unique in their own way. Even Android!
All ecosystems are valuable to consumers to some degree but both Apple and Google are on the hook for also being NOT beneficial to consumers, too.
Alrighty then, you might want to withhold your Huawei announcements if you don't want comments about China.
I have no clue what you are stating about Apple and Google, not being beneficial to customers, when obviously, warts and all, they are overall, and absolutely, beneficial to consumers.
Huawei isn't China and again, read what I was responding to.
I could have gone into Huawei's massive AI technology portfolio which was also a large part of the HarmonyOS 4 presentation but it wasn't central to the point I was responding to although I could have easily used it as a direct reference to the article.
The point being, no matter what Apple says, it is behind in the GPT aspect. There is no getting away from that. They have nothing and have not mentioned anything on the subject with regards to a real product or use case.
There is no point denying that. It's fact as of today.
Is it important? I don't think so. It's why I didn't comment on much of the GPT stuff.
I get what you’re saying, but I’m not sure they’re “behind” — we don’t know.
As of right now, the public GPT/AI engines are interesting and promising, but ultimately useless unless operated by experts, because of their tendency to fail catastrophically and completely intransparently in unpredictable ways.
Apple isn’t interested in making anything public until it can be operated by laymen, reliably and above all SAFELY.
Siri fails in unpredictable and utterly infuriating ways, but is harmless when it does.
A service that produces misinformation or mangles crucial steps of a process without any indication that it is … “improvising” is potentially dangerous in a thousand ways.
I don’t think we’ll see a public “Apple GPT” until they’ve figured out how to solve these problems and release a useful product.
I’m HOPING that the reason why Siri isn’t moving forward is because they’re putting all their work towards a replacement.
Yes, of course. My point is that trying to argue it's not behind when there is simply no equivalent product from them on the market is a pretty pointless exercise.
The article spells it out very clearly:
"Many pundits have said Apple is behind in AI, specifically because they do not have a chatbot or answer to tools like Google Bard"
That situation puts them into that position and the best thing to do is admit it.
It's like arguing they are not behind on folding phones because they filed patents for them. It's a bit silly.
Whatever they are working on, and to what kind of level, inevitably follows on from the acceptance of being 'behind', but the fact right now, is that there is nothing available so they can only accept the facts as they stand today.
Another debate is how damaging these tools may turn out to be (or not). It's almost like the internet in its teens. Easy access to porn by kids, misinformation, disinformation, privacy concerns, tracking scamming etc.
Most of us have learnt to deal with the shortcomings to a degree and then legislation eventually comes in to try and put some order into things.
The EU has been working on its AI directive for a while now.
It would have been better if the input information for the training of the headline grabbing technologies were of higher quality but I can understand why some decisions were taken.
Tmay, won't like me saying this but Huawei's models have been trained with pre-filtered data in an attempt to achieve better quality results. That's why they are being used in science, health and industry with stellar results. Each use case is carefully studied.
The integration of Pangu Model 3 with Huawei's digital assistant on CE devices will hopefully provide more pros than contras. It will also be on-device for privacy/security reasons.
In case you weren't able to digest my point, it is that Huawei is tightly integrated into the CCP and PLA, so whatever Huawei is doing, it isn't the equivalent of private enterprise in the West. Yet you continue to champion Huawei as if it is.
Case in point; Huawei implicated itself in the AI software that was created to filter out minorities, especially Uyghur, in China's mass surveillance.
The exact same Huawei technology is capable of identifying pig faces too! There are massive use cases for it. Livestock farming is a multi billion dollar industry and perfect for AI and massive datasets.
The same core technology was used to evaluate image scans of lungs for Covid-19 detection during the height of the pandemic.
Hhm, so Huawei is not guilty of creating that software because it was the Chinese Government that forced them to target Uyghur and other minorities. Good to know.
Once again you have no counterargument.
AI (or whatever you want to call it) is proving to be a game changer with the use of LLM. It's nothing new! Hence my reference to the 2019 Covid-19 image evaluation technology.
There are huge potential dangers in how it is used but that has been the case with many technological advances. Don't let that cloud your vision for the good that can be done.
The main difference perhaps is that AI has the potential to impact just about everything out there. Literally.
That is because most of the biggest technological breakthroughs nowadays make use of gigantic datasets.
That means science of all kinds, medicine, industry, education...
BTW, there was no AI image evaluation software in 2019 for COVID19. Huawei didn't announce its diagnostics software until March of 2020, and COVID19 wasn't even registering as the virus until the very end of the year.
Yes, you are correct on the COVID-19 AI diagnosis part. I was a few months off.
That is because the foundational technology it uses is from a few years before. It basically went live in 2019 but for other types of illnesses (like cervical cancer scans), and came with genome, mutation tools etc.
The system just needed to be trained to deal with Covid-19 usage. That was ready in early 2020.
I'm a big Apple fan - have all their devices - and was very enthusiastic when Siri first came out. But over the years, Siri has moved inches, while competitors have moved miles - I can't believe a company that spends $22b on R&D can't make its voice assistant more useful in people's day-to-day lives. So disappointing.
Siri will NEVER EVER be as “smart” as other voice assistants, so you’d better get over this right now. The reason? Because Siri doesn’t heavily rely on the collected data about you that encompasses more than even your parents know about you.
Siri continues to work very well for me, because I know what it can do and I don’t have much need outside of it helping me organise my day/life. I am fully aware that if you ask it some random question, probably phrased poorly, it will punt to web results. This is because it doesn’t have access to everything you have ever searched for or asked about ever in your life to help piece together what you actually want.
Maybe my needs are unusually simple, but I appreciate that Siri isn’t spying on me to get “smarter,” because it currently does 95+ percent of what I want it to do. I think the main area where Siri actually needs work is on accent recognition, and I could certainly see where Siri may in the future ask you to train it to your voice with more phrases than it does now.
It is much harder to develop a system that uses “AI” (in quotes on purpose) without scraping and selling all your personal data, which is why progress on Siri has been very slow (though it has in fact improved a great deal in recent years, at least in my use of it) compared to the companies that raid your brain for your every thought. But this is like praising the child who answers the algebra question by looking over another student’s shoulder, and failing the child who did all the work themselves because it took too long IMO.
Siri isn't AI, it's a relatively straightforward templated search system. Which is why it's hard to expand it. Great when it was designed, bad now that there are much better alternatives. You can be sure Apple will roll out a Siri that is based on AI when they have it right. And it will use your personal data, it's will just be partially trained on-device, with inference running local, like everything that happens in Photos for example.
My primary problem with Siri is it doesn't remember context. So if I ask about where someone lives or the address of a company and it gives me the answer, I can't request, "Take me there" because it doesn't know what "there" means. I'm afraid I've gotten spoiled by GPTchat engines with which I can make backward references.
It’s even worse than that. I’m trying to remember the example, but I think I was selecting a navigation target, and “she” completely lost context and started asking why I was talking about the target.
“Yea, we’re doing AI too, you just can’t tell because it lives in Canada.”
Comments
But, it's AI's website, so whatever.
In the meantime, the West, and China, are in a race to militarize AI, hence why the U.S. is restricting AI hardware technology sales to China.
Good.
I would limit things to what the article points out.
There are companies with solutions on the market and there are companies without solutions on the market.
Apple is behind in that context (which is the context I was using).
That should be clear to everyone and it's what made the comparison to folding phones work because it is exactly the same situation.
It is clear that for all its potential shortcomings, the GPT and wider LLM markets are proving compelling in many cases. They are already proving viable. So viable that they can be dangerous.
Reaching a point where a company or organisation produces a shipping product or technology that is useful, puts it ahead of anyone aspiring to do the same but without a shipping product.
That is the current state of play with regards to Apple.
It's quite true that Apple could launch something that throws shade over everything else. That could be tomorrow or in five years, but until then, it is behind the competition.
I could name quite a few examples where Apple is behind. Some of its camera offerings have been behind for years for exactly the same reasons. If a phone can take zoomed macro photos using the periscope lens but another phone can't (simply because it lacks the hardware to do it), it is 'behind' for the same reasons. It's simplistic but nothing new.
Folding phones have, and continue, to exceed expectations. They are showing tremendous growth potential and coming down in price.
To the point that I have yet to see any analyst (usual suspects: Counterpoint, IDC, Gartner...) or industry watcher put a damper on growth estimates.
https://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS50531423
The Mate X3 has not been able to keep supply in line with demand from launch. As more players enter the market, prices are coming down.
The Vision Pro situation is completely different because the product has been announced. Even if not shipping, it can be compared to current products.
That said, it cannot be compared well to existing products because there is still a lot that we don't know about the Vision Pro. But at least there is something to go on.
I'm a fan of what I've seen so far but until it ships we won't know how it actually performs.
At least with that product, things aren't as clear cut as they are right now with the different GPT solutions.
Absolutely every modern facial recognition technology solution is capable of ethnicity recognition. They are capable of many things.
I remember one Bulgarian company that had that particular functionality on its front page. No one has issues with it. No one.
https://www.folio3.ai/prebuilt-models/ethnicity-detection-with-ai-facial-recognition/
You are confusing technology with politics. Why?
Don't confuse recognition with discrimination.
The exact same Huawei technology is capable of identifying pig faces too! There are massive use cases for it. Livestock farming is a multi billion dollar industry and perfect for AI and massive datasets.
The same core technology was used to evaluate image scans of lungs for Covid-19 detection during the height of the pandemic.
https://e.huawei.com/se/case-studies/intelligent-computing/2020/when-ai-can-save-lives
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/14/technology/china-surveillance-artificial-intelligence-racial-profiling.html
Since you brought up pigs, maybe China should encourage Huawei to use its AI prowess to reduce the spread of African Swine Fever, which is a massive issue in China;
https://www.reuters.com/world/china/chinas-pig-farms-battle-new-surge-african-swine-fever-2023-03-15/
AI (or whatever you want to call it) is proving to be a game changer with the use of LLM. It's nothing new! Hence my reference to the 2019 Covid-19 image evaluation technology.
There are huge potential dangers in how it is used but that has been the case with many technological advances. Don't let that cloud your vision for the good that can be done.
The main difference perhaps is that AI has the potential to impact just about everything out there. Literally.
That is because most of the biggest technological breakthroughs nowadays make use of gigantic datasets.
That means science of all kinds, medicine, industry, education...
That is because the foundational technology it uses is from a few years before. It basically went live in 2019 but for other types of illnesses (like cervical cancer scans), and came with genome, mutation tools etc.
The system just needed to be trained to deal with Covid-19 usage. That was ready in early 2020.