5 ms·

The basic problem here for Apple is that LLMs will never actually be able to avoid prompt injection issues, and the entire "personal awareness" set of functiona

The basic problem here for Apple is that LLMs will never actually be able to avoid prompt injection issues, and the entire "personal awareness" set of functionality they're trying to make uses LLMs. Unless somebody at Apple invents a new state of the art, it's not going to happen. With that said, I'm surprised they haven't yet at least replaced the 'dumb' Siri commands with something that's effectively an LLM translation layer for an internal API. That would get significantly better experience (even a dumb LLM is way better at understanding natural language directions than Siri) with no 'personal awareness' stuff needed.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
krackers 2y ago
All Apple needs to do is allow 3rd party apps to integrate with Siri, then use an LLM as a way to convert natural language into the set of allowed API calls. Basically similar what chatGPT does with function calling. And on osx, they should have already had a head start due to applescript integration everywhere in most apps. I have no idea why they're trying to reinvent the wheel with "Shortcuts" which is severely limited. They already have everything waiting there for their taking, and they're squandering it for no reason. Siri on osx should have been built on top of AppleScript from the get-go, then the switch to LLM would have been easy. For that matter, I wonder why on osx I haven't seen any 3rd party apps be a siri replacement using applescript to drive applications directly. So much effort is spent on screen scraping and trying to get "agents" to use computers like humans do, but for decades osx has already had a parallel set of APIs built into every application specifically for machine consumption. And most good 3rd party apps even make use of it.
- justonceokay 2y ago
  What you are describing is definitely how Alexa used to work, no idea about now. My only point being that I’m sure this has been thought of before
- tsujamin 2y ago
  They already have a compostable automation api with 3rd party integrations: Shortcuts! It’s not perfect, but surely you could natural language -> llm -> temporary shortcut script and that gets you a decent part of the way to a smarter Siri
  - krackers 2y ago
    I'm not as familiar with Shortcuts API but from a quick glance it seems less rich than apple events/apple script. With LLM + apple script you could achieve computer use agents on easy mode. Not just one-off "what's the weather" queries but complex multi-step interactions like "send the latest photo I took to John". To start with, Automator on mac would be the perfect place for LLM integration. And Script Editor too. Being perhaps one of the few read-only languages, people would probably _prefer_ an LLM spit out applescript for them. And Apple probably has the highest quality data set internally. Combined with the fact that there there is a uniform way to specify the API surface (sdef), this is a task that is possible by most LLMs today. Just apply a little marketing spin to change the angle from "niche power user feature" to "apple uses computer-use agent AI to allow average joe to automate their entire workflow" and it's a smash hit. From there it's not much of a stretch to slap some speech recognition (just take Whisper, it already beats whatever iOS uses), add some guardrails, and have it be orders of magnitude better than what Siri currently is capable of. And this is all possible with today's LLMs, and thanks to deepseek without paying a cent to anyone else. When interactive computer-use does get mostly solved, that can be added in as a fallback for anything where applescript doesn't cut it (e.g. web navigation, electron apps, etc.). But there's a clear logical progression that allows you to easily evolve the user experience as the technology matures without having to throw out your stack the entire time. But to me I think their fate was sealed was Shortcuts was shipped on mac when Automator already existed. And it's clear apple events has been a languishing feature, with integration in native apps already breaking.
    - walterbell 2y ago
      They have since added App Intents to the LLM automation stew.
- seec 2y ago
  Shortcuts takes precedence because it was originally created on iOS and TC want absolute convergence between the OS. They don't realize (or don't care) how restricting it is to go this route. To be honest that may be the desired result. I have tried to use Shortcuts a few times, and if Automator could be frustrating, Shortcuts is even worse. It seems to have improved with th recent scripting additions, but in my opinion it doesn't a lot of sense. On the phone it seems only useful to make up for lacking software with mediocre voice assistant and on the desktop, it is very lacking and limited. Applescript is an obtuse language but at least it's a programming language still, with the Shortcut toolkit it seems like you need to approach everything in a roundabout way. In any case, it shows the failing of Apple ideology of "easy" computing for everyone. At some point you need to admit that some things are going to need some learning and competency and the best thing you can do is provide tools to enable the competent user. Not create some Frankenstein thing and the incompetent won't understand better anyway. Apple has really failed, chasing "simplicity" at the expense of actual usefulness. And this has permeated even the desktop OS which is just dumb.
timewizard 2y ago
Everyone thought LLMs would scale exponentially like everything else in computer science. It's actually linear and they're all stuck holding a bag of mostly worthless goods.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
softwaredoug 2y ago
I’m not sure I want / need an LLM for the handful of basic commands I want Siri to do in the car with no complication. Siri is good at some straightforward command patterns. And that’s how users have been trained. Adding an LLM feels like a solution looking for a problem
- wongarsu 2y ago
  Yes, for users that have been conditioned on how to talk to Siri, there is no point adding an LLM layer. But for everyone else an LLM might add a more natural and forgiving interface. Also an interface that might be more open to exploration, if you can describe a goal and the LLM picks whatever command it feels fits that intent. I can absolutely see an argument that it should be a feature power users can turn off to keep the "original" Siri experience
- mikodin 2y ago
  As another mentioned, many of us haven't been trained. Every time I've reached for Siri I've been let down and just did it myself or didn't do it at all. When I bought the new iphone (coming from Android most recently and iphone before that) I figured that Siri would actually become good because of this translation layer, and then them just not doing that has been a huge let down for me on the phone.
- kibibu 2y ago
  > how users have been trained Palm's Graffiti handwriting system, for people who took the time to learn it, was strictly better and less frustrating than natural handwriting systems at the time. It lost to keyboard-based systems, which honestly are worse. In my experience, "good enough" systems that need far less training will win * I also only use Google Assistant to choose music and make calls in the car, but that's also because it kinda sucks at anything else and I haven't learned all the commands. --- * except for hr systems, for some reason
- netsharc 2y ago
  LLMs are probably better at "understanding" what the user wants, e.g. "Hey Siri, I have to take my kids to the doctor tomorrow" would reply "Do you want me to make a calendar event?". Asking ChatGPT, it even has suggestions like "Do you want me to check traffic, do you want me to make a checklist for what to bring?". If I continue with "but I can't make it", one of the suggestions ChatGPT imagine possible is: "Would you like me to send a message to your partner, babysitter, or anyone else involved?"

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

krackers 2y ago

All Apple needs to do is allow 3rd party apps to integrate with Siri, then use an LLM as a way to convert natural language into the set of allowed API calls. Basically similar what chatGPT does with function calling. And on osx, they should have already had a head start due to applescript integration everywhere in most apps. I have no idea why they're trying to reinvent the wheel with "Shortcuts" which is severely limited. They already have everything waiting there for their taking, and they're squandering it for no reason. Siri on osx should have been built on top of AppleScript from the get-go, then the switch to LLM would have been easy. For that matter, I wonder why on osx I haven't seen any 3rd party apps be a siri replacement using applescript to drive applications directly. So much effort is spent on screen scraping and trying to get "agents" to use computers like humans do, but for decades osx has already had a parallel set of APIs built into every application specifically for machine consumption. And most good 3rd party apps even make use of it.

justonceokay 2y ago
What you are describing is definitely how Alexa used to work, no idea about now. My only point being that I’m sure this has been thought of before
tsujamin 2y ago
They already have a compostable automation api with 3rd party integrations: Shortcuts! It’s not perfect, but surely you could natural language -> llm -> temporary shortcut script and that gets you a decent part of the way to a smarter Siri
- krackers 2y ago
  I'm not as familiar with Shortcuts API but from a quick glance it seems less rich than apple events/apple script. With LLM + apple script you could achieve computer use agents on easy mode. Not just one-off "what's the weather" queries but complex multi-step interactions like "send the latest photo I took to John". To start with, Automator on mac would be the perfect place for LLM integration. And Script Editor too. Being perhaps one of the few read-only languages, people would probably _prefer_ an LLM spit out applescript for them. And Apple probably has the highest quality data set internally. Combined with the fact that there there is a uniform way to specify the API surface (sdef), this is a task that is possible by most LLMs today. Just apply a little marketing spin to change the angle from "niche power user feature" to "apple uses computer-use agent AI to allow average joe to automate their entire workflow" and it's a smash hit. From there it's not much of a stretch to slap some speech recognition (just take Whisper, it already beats whatever iOS uses), add some guardrails, and have it be orders of magnitude better than what Siri currently is capable of. And this is all possible with today's LLMs, and thanks to deepseek without paying a cent to anyone else. When interactive computer-use does get mostly solved, that can be added in as a fallback for anything where applescript doesn't cut it (e.g. web navigation, electron apps, etc.). But there's a clear logical progression that allows you to easily evolve the user experience as the technology matures without having to throw out your stack the entire time. But to me I think their fate was sealed was Shortcuts was shipped on mac when Automator already existed. And it's clear apple events has been a languishing feature, with integration in native apps already breaking.
  - walterbell 2y ago
    They have since added App Intents to the LLM automation stew.
seec 2y ago
Shortcuts takes precedence because it was originally created on iOS and TC want absolute convergence between the OS. They don't realize (or don't care) how restricting it is to go this route. To be honest that may be the desired result. I have tried to use Shortcuts a few times, and if Automator could be frustrating, Shortcuts is even worse. It seems to have improved with th recent scripting additions, but in my opinion it doesn't a lot of sense. On the phone it seems only useful to make up for lacking software with mediocre voice assistant and on the desktop, it is very lacking and limited. Applescript is an obtuse language but at least it's a programming language still, with the Shortcut toolkit it seems like you need to approach everything in a roundabout way. In any case, it shows the failing of Apple ideology of "easy" computing for everyone. At some point you need to admit that some things are going to need some learning and competency and the best thing you can do is provide tools to enable the competent user. Not create some Frankenstein thing and the incompetent won't understand better anyway. Apple has really failed, chasing "simplicity" at the expense of actual usefulness. And this has permeated even the desktop OS which is just dumb.

timewizard 2y ago

Everyone thought LLMs would scale exponentially like everything else in computer science. It's actually linear and they're all stuck holding a bag of mostly worthless goods.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

softwaredoug 2y ago

I’m not sure I want / need an LLM for the handful of basic commands I want Siri to do in the car with no complication. Siri is good at some straightforward command patterns. And that’s how users have been trained. Adding an LLM feels like a solution looking for a problem

wongarsu 2y ago
Yes, for users that have been conditioned on how to talk to Siri, there is no point adding an LLM layer. But for everyone else an LLM might add a more natural and forgiving interface. Also an interface that might be more open to exploration, if you can describe a goal and the LLM picks whatever command it feels fits that intent. I can absolutely see an argument that it should be a feature power users can turn off to keep the "original" Siri experience
mikodin 2y ago
As another mentioned, many of us haven't been trained. Every time I've reached for Siri I've been let down and just did it myself or didn't do it at all. When I bought the new iphone (coming from Android most recently and iphone before that) I figured that Siri would actually become good because of this translation layer, and then them just not doing that has been a huge let down for me on the phone.
kibibu 2y ago
> how users have been trained Palm's Graffiti handwriting system, for people who took the time to learn it, was strictly better and less frustrating than natural handwriting systems at the time. It lost to keyboard-based systems, which honestly are worse. In my experience, "good enough" systems that need far less training will win * I also only use Google Assistant to choose music and make calls in the car, but that's also because it kinda sucks at anything else and I haven't learned all the commands. --- * except for hr systems, for some reason
netsharc 2y ago
LLMs are probably better at "understanding" what the user wants, e.g. "Hey Siri, I have to take my kids to the doctor tomorrow" would reply "Do you want me to make a calendar event?". Asking ChatGPT, it even has suggestions like "Do you want me to check traffic, do you want me to make a checklist for what to bring?". If I continue with "but I can't make it", one of the suggestions ChatGPT imagine possible is: "Would you like me to send a message to your partner, babysitter, or anyone else involved?"