2 ms·

> But the question is whether they are committed enough to AI to do it, and whether they have the required ML talent. Given how business leaders throughout tec

> But the question is whether they are committed enough to AI to do it, and whether they have the required ML talent. Given how business leaders throughout tech feel that AI is going to be transformative, I don't think commitment is really going to be a problem. Many leaders feel that "you either get good at AI or you don't exist in 10 years". In terms of attracting talent, there are 3 main things top AI folks look for: 1. Money (they are people after all) 2. The infrastructure (both hardware and people/organization-wise) to support large AI projects. 3. The willingness to release these AI projects to a large swath of people (to have "impact" as folks like to say). E.g. Google had 1 and 2 but their reticence to release their models and corporate infighting made many of the top Google researchers leave for gigs elsewhere. I think it remains to be seen how Apple will handle #3 as well.

jroesch 3y ago
To chime in Apple already has a lot of great ML talent they are just far more deliberate and slow to change their products. People forget that FaceID was/is one of the most cutting edge ML features ever developed/deployed when it was released a few years ago. Siri is sort of a red herring because its built by teams and tech that existed before Apple acquired most of its ML talent and some of its inability to evolve has been due to internal politics not the inability to build tech. iOS 17 is an example of Apple moving towards more deep learning speech/text work. I would bet heavily we will see them catch up with well integrated pieces as they have Money, infra, and already the ability to go wide (i.e all iOS users, again think FaceID).