Have you heard of Apple's decision on the rollout of Siri AI in Europe?
-
At the end of the day the questions is still this: does it benefit us as customers to spend time on that because a regulation requires it? What I see in the case of alternative stores, and 3rd-party browser engines is that nobody uses these things, because Apple made them intentionally crappy, and the EU still accepted it as compliant. (2/3)
@algernon @gklka @EUCommissionBut if nobody uses them, then what’s the point? (3/3)
@algernon @gklka @EUCommission -
@zsolt @gklka @EUCommission I disagree. A company being hellbent on not playing by the rules is not on the rulemaker to fix.
The fix is easy: either provide the same level of access to third party AI stuff, or drive Apple's own through the same sandbox or w/e the others are subjected to. It's not hard.
If people really don't want third party AI, or third party app stores, they can simply... not install them, and use their devices as-is.
The only thing they'd lose is being able to play victim. Doing so will sooner or later stop being a wise play anyway.
(Obviously, the optics of "every AI has full access to your phone" is not a good look. I consider that as a happy accident.)
@algernon @gklka @EUCommission Well, it is hard to do. It takes a lot of engineering / design effort to make something open, but also well integrated within a system. (1/3)
-
@samueljohnson @EUCommission that's a different thing.
By not wearing masks you're endangering other people, so you might end up harming society. Personal freedom ends where other people get affected, and that should be regulated, as minimally as necessary.
@webjac @EUCommission It's not different. Unless you use your phone to talk to yourself, it never contains data about other EU citizens, and your actions don't impinge on others.
In any case the EU regulates for the single market and if you don't like it your choices are to break the law, lobby for deregulation, or move to a place where corporations don't have to obey the laws, if they even exist.
-
@richlv @mr_harm @EUCommission You know what? i'll do so, and they won't reply most likely.
But maybe, if enough people end up writing like me, they will have an announcement on their next WWDC just as apologetic as they were about liquid glass this time.
because the backlash did make them revert those changes.
And in this case, they're should offer the choice to the user, yes.
But I much rather see them do it because people complained, and not because they forced to by a regulatory body.
@webjac @richlv @EUCommission again: the problem wouldn't be one if apple did their homework. They chose not to. Now we're here.
And not holding apple to known law would mean a competitive disadvantage to anybody else.
And regarding the writing to apple thing: they would not reply because I'm not important to them. And that is exactly why we need the EU to hold them accountable.
And the "I don't need/like the DMR so it can go away" argument is pretty bad for you in the long run as well.
-
@zsolt@mastodon.decoding.io @EUCommission@ec.social-network.europa.eu @gklka@mastodon.social that overcomplicated EU law allows you to remove Edge on Windows.
@tragivictoria @EUCommission @gklka Great, I don’t use Windows…
-
@webjac @richlv @EUCommission again: the problem wouldn't be one if apple did their homework. They chose not to. Now we're here.
And not holding apple to known law would mean a competitive disadvantage to anybody else.
And regarding the writing to apple thing: they would not reply because I'm not important to them. And that is exactly why we need the EU to hold them accountable.
And the "I don't need/like the DMR so it can go away" argument is pretty bad for you in the long run as well.
@webjac @richlv @EUCommission .. exactly for the reason that apple wouldn't give a crap about any of you(including me) if nobody held them accountable
-
@webjac @EUCommission It's not different. Unless you use your phone to talk to yourself, it never contains data about other EU citizens, and your actions don't impinge on others.
In any case the EU regulates for the single market and if you don't like it your choices are to break the law, lobby for deregulation, or move to a place where corporations don't have to obey the laws, if they even exist.
@samueljohnson @EUCommission and that squat in doing, lobbying for deregulation.
-
@algernon @gklka @EUCommission Well, it is hard to do. It takes a lot of engineering / design effort to make something open, but also well integrated within a system. (1/3)
@zsolt @gklka @EUCommission Then let the other things access the same stuff. Then it's on them to integrate well.
And yes, EU accepted the crappy malicious compliance. It shouldn't have. The rules should be stricter, not more lax.
As for what's the point: Android. Without Apple being forced, Google wouldn't allow third party stores either (they fight tooth and nail against it! The difference is that they made the "mistake" of allowing them early, without being forced, to gain market share I guess).
Rules apply to and affect more than just one company's customers. It sucks for Apple users that Apple only does malicious compliance, but that's on Apple. It helps everyone else. It would help Apple users too, if the rules were stricter.
-
or Americans to fucking vote and make the USA more like the EU
but cynicism and perfectionism and just plain laziness
@benroyce @EUCommission it is sooo tiring to witness people not voting or worst: voting against their own interest
-
Have you heard of Apple's decision on the rollout of Siri AI in Europe? Let's get the facts straight
️@EUCommission 70 megabyte video of just man speaking and no alt text? cmon, you can do better
-
@tragivictoria @EUCommission @gklka What are we protecting with these overcomplicated rules that end up in annoying cookie alerts at the end? Are we forcing “interoperability” on customers who clearly don’t care? I’ll buy an Android phone if I want interoperability and replaceable services.
@zsolt @tragivictoria @EUCommission @gklka There is a misunderstanding of cookie alert here : alert is when the site tracks you and steal your data. Not about cookies. Sites not tracking the user do not have the alert
-
@richlv @Javensbukan @EUCommission But Apple should be allowed to offer their limited product as they want it, and if people don't like they won't buy it. I'm not a fan of the idea of the EU forcing any company to sell something they don’t want to sell
@webjac @richlv @EUCommission The reasons we have crappy products is because people think "the invisible hand of the market" will fix all problems (it doesn't).
We'd still have bias-ply tires, leaded gas and lap belts if it was up to companies to sell whatever they wanted.
-
@webjac @richlv @EUCommission again: the problem wouldn't be one if apple did their homework. They chose not to. Now we're here.
And not holding apple to known law would mean a competitive disadvantage to anybody else.
And regarding the writing to apple thing: they would not reply because I'm not important to them. And that is exactly why we need the EU to hold them accountable.
And the "I don't need/like the DMR so it can go away" argument is pretty bad for you in the long run as well.
@mr_harm @richlv @EUCommission fair enough yes, they should be held to the law. I just think that should not be a law, at least not at this extent. That’s what I’m advocating for here. Just as I will advocate to apple to do the right thing for their customers and offer them choice.
From my point of view they’re both wrong
Apple should offer it because the market demands it and the government bodies should not meddle so much. -
@zsolt @tragivictoria @EUCommission @gklka There is a misunderstanding of cookie alert here : alert is when the site tracks you and steal your data. Not about cookies. Sites not tracking the user do not have the alert
@uzakl @tragivictoria @EUCommission @gklka The cookie alert was the result of a regulation. It made some things better (privacy) and others worse (UX). Lawmakers should think about the worse part.
-
@webjac @richlv @EUCommission The reasons we have crappy products is because people think "the invisible hand of the market" will fix all problems (it doesn't).
We'd still have bias-ply tires, leaded gas and lap belts if it was up to companies to sell whatever they wanted.
@Javensbukan @richlv @EUCommission the invisible hand of the market is not good enough of its own. Regulation is needed in markets where competition is scarce, I agree. I just disagree in this level of regulation on this market, I think it end up hurting more than helping.
But that balance is hard to get right, it fluctuates and not everyone thinks the same, so I’m pushing for what I think is right in this case.
Also radial tires? Is there a better choice? I have no idea! Tell me more!
-
@zsolt @gklka @EUCommission Then let the other things access the same stuff. Then it's on them to integrate well.
And yes, EU accepted the crappy malicious compliance. It shouldn't have. The rules should be stricter, not more lax.
As for what's the point: Android. Without Apple being forced, Google wouldn't allow third party stores either (they fight tooth and nail against it! The difference is that they made the "mistake" of allowing them early, without being forced, to gain market share I guess).
Rules apply to and affect more than just one company's customers. It sucks for Apple users that Apple only does malicious compliance, but that's on Apple. It helps everyone else. It would help Apple users too, if the rules were stricter.
@algernon @zsolt @gklka @EUCommission
to gain market share I guess
from what i know a lot of the people who worked on android in the early days actually cared about not being evil. it was built out with a very explicit intent of making it an open platform. then at some point management started getting uppity about that i suppose
-
or Americans to fucking vote and make the USA more like the EU
but cynicism and perfectionism and just plain laziness
@benroyce Multiple ancestors of mine left Europe for some very good reasons. I'll stay and fight it out here--starting at the ballot box. @FrancoisPrague @EUCommission
-
@uzakl @tragivictoria @EUCommission @gklka The cookie alert was the result of a regulation. It made some things better (privacy) and others worse (UX). Lawmakers should think about the worse part.
@zsolt @uzakl @tragivictoria @EUCommission @gklka Bzzt. The cookie alert is malicious compliance. If you respect your users, you do not need a cookie alert.
The correct thing to do is respecting your users.
If you see a cookie banner, it is due to either of these things:
- "We and 1k partners with legitimate interest" bullshit.
- Someone who doesn't know it's only mandatory if they abuse tracking.
The regulation is fine. Malicious compliance is what hurts the end user, not the regulation. You do not relax regulation because of malicious actors. You make it stricter and fine them.
-
Have you heard of Apple's decision on the rollout of Siri AI in Europe? Let's get the facts straight
️@EUCommission
What's the idea in this being edited and clipped so heavily? I cannot listen to stuff like this, no matter how accurately this may convey the point, I have no faith watching heavily edited dialog.
It seems to be becomming the norm, and I hate it. Is it to fit into some yt shorts, tiktok or insta max time limit? Or is it thought that I haven't the time to let the speaker take a breather, or pause for effect, or think?? -
@zsolt @uzakl @tragivictoria @EUCommission @gklka Bzzt. The cookie alert is malicious compliance. If you respect your users, you do not need a cookie alert.
The correct thing to do is respecting your users.
If you see a cookie banner, it is due to either of these things:
- "We and 1k partners with legitimate interest" bullshit.
- Someone who doesn't know it's only mandatory if they abuse tracking.
The regulation is fine. Malicious compliance is what hurts the end user, not the regulation. You do not relax regulation because of malicious actors. You make it stricter and fine them.
@algernon @uzakl @tragivictoria @EUCommission @gklka I didn’t say to relax it. That one needs to be stricter, yes.
