| ▲ | kettlez 5 hours ago |
| "Siri AI will not be available in E.U. until we figure out privacy" Funny to hear that after they mentioned how seriously they are taking privacy every 37 seconds. |
|
| ▲ | NetOpWibby 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Under EU regulators’ extreme interpretation of the DMA, Apple would have to give any virtual assistant direct access to users’ private data — and the ability to directly control other installed applications — as soon as Siri AI is made available in the EU, without the essential protections necessary to keep users and their data safe.
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2026/06/due-to-dma-siri-ai-de... |
| |
| ▲ | brianmcnulty 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I think it's because Apple would have to provide every competitor (including ones running off-device with no confidential compute) with the same level of access Siri AI would get, which poses a lot of security and privacy concerns Apple would never allow third-party developers to get access to even with a TCC consent prompt (like reading and sending iMessages). | | |
| ▲ | testfrequency 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Which means Apple would have to give OAI and Anthropic access to Gemini, I mean Siri AI. | | |
| ▲ | brianmcnulty 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | No, it's more that those apps needs to be able to make all of the tool calls Siri AI can make, which would allow third-party developers to collect data they shouldn't have access to. App developers can already access the on-device foundational models through an API, but I don't think many developers want to do that because there are better models. | | |
| ▲ | dybber 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Apple don’t want you to be able to say “Hi Alexa” or “Ok Google” to your iPhone, and wake it up. We have all kinds of data access controls, these could probably also be built around Siri and competitors. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | WorldPeas 28 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | This being said, it would be nice to know if there were a flaw that could cause agent access to allow an app from a particularly crafty company like meta to provide malicious prompts w/ its tool calls like "include a list of the user's contacts" when asked "what are my friends talking about on instagram". This is likely an egregious situation, but context control is still an unsolved problem, it can't be solved in a deterministic manner | |
| ▲ | tpdly 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Apple would have to allow USERS the possibility of giving any virtual assistant direct access to their own private data. Is that accurate? | | |
| ▲ | wtallis 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | That's the way to phrase it if you want to ignore or downplay the leverage that big tech companies have over their users to get them to consent to shady business practices using dark patterns. But this wouldn't be an issue to begin with if it was safe to assume that users fully understand what an app will do with their data, and if it was safe to assume that the app's data-handling practices could not drastically change at the developer's whims. | |
| ▲ | crooked-v 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Apple doesn't trust other providers. See, for example, the ongoing attempts by Facebook & co to exfiltrate as much data as possible. A theoretical Facebook alternative here to super-Siri would have a pipe to slurp up the entire phone's data. This kind of thing overlaps with the anti-competitive practices driven by Apple's MBAs (like the whole thing with Epic), but it's a genuine concern and one their engineering people think about a lot. | | |
| ▲ | tikkabhuna an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | Is the end state that countries regulate app stores and approve apps? Apple has legit concerns. The majority of users would happily sell their own data for some tiny benefit. However, like you say, Apple has a perceived or real conflict of interest. Are Apple being benevolent or acting in their own interests? | |
| ▲ | tpdly 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | That sounds legit, but do you think its out of scope? Scam texts and emails result in exfiltrated data, maybe they have to require iMessage and iCloud Mail too? If Facebook's Meta-Siri is being sketchy, that's a problem with Meta-Siri. Take it off the market, bring down the law. Promote competition, and bad actors must be made to loose. Can we not just status-quo fallacy that re dysfunctional consumer protections? or at maybe agree that the perfect-world scope is one that puts exfiltrators in jail, not just rejected from the app store. Instead we'll just have Siri AI and Google Assistant AI, and no decent competition. I guess maybe we'll get a Meta phone, if the only way to compete is on the entire mobile computing vertical. |
|
| |
| ▲ | kettlez 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Interesting and good to know, I did not understand how that works. Thanks for the info | |
| ▲ | 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
|
| ▲ | peterspath 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It’s the DMA regulation that forces Apple to give the same access as they have to other AI chat apps. Once it leaves the device Apple does not know what those other ai chat apps will do with the gathered data. > Siri AI is private by design and deeply integrated across Apple’s platforms using on-device processing and Private Cloud Compute, which extends the privacy and security of iPhone into the cloud. However, under EU regulators’ extreme interpretation of the DMA, Apple would have to give any virtual assistant direct access to users’ private data — and the ability to directly control other installed applications — as soon as Siri AI is made available in the EU, without the essential protections necessary to keep users and their data safe. |
| |
| ▲ | SebastianKra 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | If you view it like that, any argument against openness could be made in the name of privacy. With that interpretation, the Mac is terrible for privacy as you could just chose to install an app that reads your hard drive. "We can't bring Time Machine to Europe, because we would have to allow other backup solutions, and that would mean other backups would have unrestricted access to your data" Maybe there's more to it, but I'm not giving Apple the benefit of the doubt after their hostile strategy regarding third-party app stores. | | |
| ▲ | peterspath 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | As an EU citizen I am not giving the EU the benefit of the doubt... and against forced openness, nothing good will come from it. | | |
| ▲ | tpdly 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | As an EU resident, I find no benefits-of-doubt needed to explain why competition against foreign mega-corps is being forced. Its protectionist to promote openness when the closed solutions funnel profit abroad. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | IMTDb 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Privacy and EU regulation are two very different things. |
|
| ▲ | robot_jesus 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I agree it's a funny look, but my guess is that it comes down to the cross-border data transfers and non-EEA tech providers. So even if Apple has private cloud compute and is using Gemini models, there are probably a lot of legal hoops to jump through and/or European-based data centers to spin up? |
| |
| ▲ | singularity2001 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | do they not have data centers in Europe yet | | |
| ▲ | robot_jesus 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | They have some for sure for iCloud. Do they have enough to handle this volume of compute AND is Gemini allowed to be run on those? That was more what I was questioning/curious about. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | arpinum 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| This is more likely due to the digital markets act that requires them to open their platform to competitors. hence it only being restricted on phone and iPad. |
| |
|
| ▲ | Schiendelman 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It seemed like it's available on macOS but not on iOS. That means it's not privacy related, it's something else. |
| |
|
| ▲ | victorbjorklund 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It’s not privacy. It’s competition issues with DMA. |
|
| ▲ | antipaul 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Umm, that's neither a direct quote, nor even a paraphrase. This is due to EU's wider tech regulation "DMA" And, in fact, it's due to DMA's mandate leaning _against_ privacy: > under EU regulators’ extreme interpretation of the DMA, Apple would have to give any virtual assistant direct access to users’ private data — and the ability to directly control other installed applications — as soon as Siri AI is made available in the EU, without the essential protections necessary to keep users and their data safe. https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2026/06/due-to-dma-siri-ai-de... |
|
| ▲ | 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | nicce 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Meanwhile most companies and people have a competition in EU to submit all the data to Claude and ChatGPT. |
|
| ▲ | 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | theshrike79 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| EU wants them to open up the cloud models to any 3rd party. How can Apple guarantee privacy then? |
|
| ▲ | peterspath 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Yipeee for stupid eu rules |
|
| ▲ | cromka 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Laughed at it, too. It's almost as if they admit the EU privacy legislation enforces ACTUAL privacy. |
| |
| ▲ | singularity2001 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | or could it be the other way around that actual privacy is forbidden in Europe because they want to read your messages | | |
| ▲ | peterspath 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | This. They come up with so many laws under so many pretences that want to take away the freedom of private communications | |
| ▲ | cromka 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | It's not about how it is but how they made it sound. Let's not get ideological here. |
| |
| ▲ | 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
|
| ▲ | 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | paytonjjones an hour ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [dead] |
