Have you heard of Apple's decision on the rollout of Siri AI in Europe?
-
@mr_harm @EUCommission @gklka Well, Apple users in the EU had access to similar features before the DMA, so it’s likely that some aspects of the DMA need to be reconsidered.
@zsolt @mr_harm @EUCommission @gklka Why not take the other position - that predatory companies should be reconsidered?
-
@webjac @mr_harm @EUCommission Let’s do a test.
You write to Apple (press, legal, mgmt etc) that they should stop being asses about it - assign blame where it belongs.Write to them at least as many times as you have posted here, providing PR for them (free or not, we do not know).
Once that ratio is there, it will feel a little bit more genuine.
Also let us know what they reply.@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.
-
@gklka @algernon @EUCommission We don’t know what’s going on behind the scenes, which is fucking frustrating, because as a user I shouldn’t even care about that. What I do care about is that I can’t use features of a product I bought (for years) because of political games.
I’m not saying Apple is doing the right thing here. They are not. But neither the EU.
@zsolt @gklka @algernon @EUCommission Please do write to any Apple contacts you can find. Please do it at least as many times as in this thread.
If Apple users did that instead of weird messages that support bad behaviour, they would sooner get whatever features they want. -
@webjac @danieldk @EUCommission Apple wants to earn money
@birkenator @danieldk @EUCommission oh no doubt about it. Half of their motivation (if not all of it) is to trap you in their garden to make more money from you.
-
@algernon @gklka @EUCommission Yes, I’m not suggesting that Apple is the victim here. They do have to work on their products to make them compliant. However, the EU should consider the underlying reasons for this situation. Even with good intentions, the outcomes of the rules in this case don’t align with what customers want. Therefore, the rules need to be reevaluated.
@zsolt @algernon @gklka @EUCommission Why the rules, not the behaviour of the violator?
«Yes, we have speed limits, but this one guy never obeys them, thus the speed limits must be reevaluated»
-
@david @EUCommission I agree, the spirit of the regulation is good. but In the end, the reality of the matter is that both Apple and the EU want to "protect" me, and I end up without the features I want. Let me be an adult, I can take care of myself and make my own choices.
@webjac @EUCommission I think Apple want to protect themselves. Even Bluetooth doesn't function according to the Bluetooth standard on Apple phones and tablets. It's just how Apple thinks. They want everyone using their devices and services only. Interoperability is fundamental to your freedom to make choices. Also: If you're in the UK, you will get Siri AI.
-
@danieldk @EUCommission they will come around eventually I hope. Trust me I want to be able to pick a different model. What worries me is a regulator meddling in unnecessarily.
Also in the end, the reality of the matter is that both Apple and the EU want to protect me, and I end up without the features I want. Let me be an adult, I can take care of myself and make my own choices.
@webjac @danieldk @EUCommission
How did you determine the rules unnecessary. What rule exactly prevents apple from delivering the features? (Same for iPhone mirroring - what rule?)
-
@phillip @webjac @EUCommission
I agree with intelligent regulation.
Security. Privacy. Environmental impact. Etc.
But choice or otherwise of AI software is not the battle to have.
It undermines the efforts to do useful regulation.
If the EU wants to fight for interoperability it should fight Microsoft on document formats - and stop buying Microsoft software itself (which it does, hugely).
@rzeta0 @webjac @EUCommission And talking about free markets: Apple fears the free market. When was the last time you bought an application outside apples closed and totaly regulated market? Apple's ecosystem is more regulated than bananas in the EU.
-
@zsolt @algernon @gklka @EUCommission Why the rules, not the behaviour of the violator?
«Yes, we have speed limits, but this one guy never obeys them, thus the speed limits must be reevaluated»
@richlv @algernon @gklka @EUCommission Yeah, we do reevaluate speed limits from time to time, because cars get safer, so maybe we can go faster.
-
@EUCommission
Cool. Can you get them to not roll out Siri AI in the US as well?@mtconleyuk @EUCommission just don’t use it?
-
@algernon @gklka @EUCommission Yes, I’m not suggesting that Apple is the victim here. They do have to work on their products to make them compliant. However, the EU should consider the underlying reasons for this situation. Even with good intentions, the outcomes of the rules in this case don’t align with what customers want. Therefore, the rules need to be reevaluated.
@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.)
-
@webjac @danieldk @EUCommission
How did you determine the rules unnecessary. What rule exactly prevents apple from delivering the features? (Same for iPhone mirroring - what rule?)
@tevo @danieldk @EUCommission according to them, for iPhone mirroring, they say that the EU regulators will ask them to also offer that for android.
And they “can’t” offer it to android.
The DMA requires paltform marked as marketplaces to offer the same apis they use to competitors, and that’s the rule they’re fighting with.
They say it’s privacy, but there’s a big “competitive advantage” component to it
-
@EUCommission it's not for you to choose what options a provider give us. If we trust Apple to give us the right choice, it should be our choice as consumer to buy their products with the feature set complete.
You meddling with a free market and telling a private enterprise how they should build their products is a scary thing for a regulatory body to do.
let the market choose on its own.
@webjac @EUCommission I've seen enough with free market choices. EU
-
@rzeta0 @webjac @EUCommission And talking about free markets: Apple fears the free market. When was the last time you bought an application outside apples closed and totaly regulated market? Apple's ecosystem is more regulated than bananas in the EU.
@phillip @rzeta0 @EUCommission they absolutely are.
I HATE how Apple is managing the App Store, it’s the most greedy-corporate asshole thing they do.
Just because I’m defending apple against the EU on the DMA means they’re doing things right in other aspects. Don’t get me wrong.
The difference I see here is that apple is a private company, does not need to have a free market marketplace if they don’t want to. It’s wrong and stupid, but it’s their choice to do so.
-
@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@mastodon.decoding.io @EUCommission@ec.social-network.europa.eu @gklka@mastodon.social that overcomplicated EU law allows you to remove Edge on Windows.
-
@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)
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 @EUCommission -
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.
