In the EU case, Apple weaponizes people's ignorance about regulation. Apple pretends that the features everyone else has been shipping left and right somehow need extra paperwork and special approvals, because (…checks notes…) pro-privacy EU laws let zero-privacy competitors sail through, but block implementations that offer more privacy!?

What's really happening is Apple unilaterally withholding features while making vague noises about regulation as bargaining chips in talks with EU regulators where Apple is trying to weasel out of punishment for breaking anti-monopoly laws.

▲

nozzlegear 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I don't think it's unfair to say that the EU scrutinizes Apple (and a few other megacorps) a great deal more than most other companies. Some zero-privacy competitors might be sailing by right now simply because they aren't already caught up in the EU's red tape. Which isn't to say Apple doesn't also wield that red tape as their own bargaining chip, like you said.

▲

InTheArena 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This isn't really true. AI laws in the EU mandate that Apple give full access to everythign on the device to third parties.

It's legit to be skeptical on the privacy front, but giving deepseek access to my entire phone. Or the TrumpAI at some point in a dystopian future seems... not great.

▲

vages 3 hours ago | parent [-]

What’s your source for this?

Opening up an API does not mean that everything on the phone is accessible to anybody.

▲

e28eta 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

They’re actively asking developers to index all the content in their apps, to provide Personal Context that Siri can use for user requests. And to create/index the actions available in the app.

So, where developers comply, all of that content is now accessible to those alternative implementations.

It’s not full read/write of the phone, and it’d exclude obvious secrets like passwords, but it is quite far reaching access.

I don’t know what sort of restrictions they can put on the alternative implementations. Can I vibe code one and have it live in a week? or is there a minimum bar?

▲

gumby271 23 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Could the restriction not be the device owner choosing to use it? If some rando vibe coded an app and the os told me all the things it can access, I'd probably want to trust the developer before installing it. Why do I need to beg Apple's permission to use software better than their first party offering?

▲

Huppie an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

We may have a different view of what 'giving access' means in this context.

The way I see it: If a user willingly (1) installs another AI app like deepseek and (2) willingly gives it access to 'full phone and app data' with a warning screen or setting of whatever that seems... like a good thing?

I may not agree with those users that it's worthwhile providing their full private data to [some AI startup X] or [Some Chinese or US AI company that will hover up as much for their own use] but if the EU forces Apple to provide this as an option, that sounds good to me.

The whole point of the regulation is that the data on the device is _the user's_ data and if Apple can have its AI services work with the user's data, competitors should be able to do the same.

From my (admittedly European) perspective it looks like Apple is just throwing a tantrum here.

	▲	e28eta 16 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I don’t have the EU perspective, which might be changed by things like GDPR, but I prefer Apple’s stance that “no one should have this data, not even us”. One reason is that the data on a user’s phone isn’t solely owned by them. Some of it is shared with other people, or “belongs” to someone else: chat, email, shared documents, photos of people, contact information, etc. In a corporate environment, this is more explicit: you have access to company information, so the IT department controls what apps you can install / run, because individual EEs won’t always make the best choices. Second, I think app developers are more likely to share more data, if they know that the shared data doesn’t leave the user’s control. And that (presumably) makes the feature work better. If I’m developing an app, I’ll think twice about indexing any sensitive data, if I don’t know where it was going to end up.

▲

koolala 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I think because they themselves have it access everything on the phone so it has to be equivalent.

▲

dd8601fn 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It IS regulatory. The EU wants “anything Apple AI can do you have to let other AI providers do with equal access”.

Which is fucking stupid, and Apple will never, ever throw open the gates to something so dangerously braindead. Their entire reputation depends on it.

And China is kinda self-explanatory.

▲

Danox 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

China will get there first why because they’re run by engineers. Yes, they will have some stipulations but if you show them a good idea, it’s a good idea. They won’t stand on ceremony and say not invented here.

▲

aucisson_masque 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Yeah I hate freedom too.

	▲	dd8601fn an hour ago \| parent [-]
		You already have it. If you’re a fan of the “A loaded gun in every crib!” style of “freedom”, go buy something that isn’t an iPhone.