5 ms·

Related: Apple nears $1B Google deal for custom Gemini model to power Siri (71 points, 2 months ago, 47 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45826975

by gnabgib 10mo ago

Related: Apple nears $1B Google deal for custom Gemini model to power Siri (71 points, 2 months ago, 47 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45826975 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45826975

johnthuss 10mo ago
The biggest NEW thing here is that this isn't white-labeled. Apple is officially acknowledging Google as the model that will be powering Siri. That explicit acknowledgment is a pretty big deal. It will make it harder for Apple to switch to its own models later on.
- insin 10mo ago
  They can also put "Google" in the forever-necessary disclaimer Google AI can make mistakes
- charliebwrites 10mo ago
  Why so? Apple explicitly acknowledged that they were using OpenAI’s GPT models before this, and now they’re quite easily switching to Google’s Gemini
  - hu3 10mo ago
    I guess the question is, when are they going to use their own model? Surely research money is not the problem. Can't be lack of competence either, I think.
    - nothercastle 10mo ago
      I think they want it to work well with web search. That’s why Google is the obvious choice. Also their ai offering is low risk of getting eliminated where as open ai could fail at any time
    - IOT_Apprentice 10mo ago
      It appears to be lack of competence given they lied about the initial features of Apple Intelligence. First, they touted features that no one actually built and then fired their AI figurehead “leader” who had no coherent execution plan—also, there appears to have been territorial squabbling going on, about who would build what. How on earth did Apple Senior Management allow this to unravel? Too much focus on Services, yet ignoring their absolute failures with Siri and the bullshit that was Apple Intelligence, when AI spending is in the trillions?
    - LexGray 10mo ago
      There is just too much money being burned in AI for Apple to keep researchers. Also models have no respect for original art which leads to a branding issue of being a platform for artists. Apple is competent at timing when to step into a market and I would guess they are waiting for AI to evolve beyond being considered untrustworthy slop.
  - johnthuss 10mo ago
    The ChatGPT integration was heavily gated by Apple and required explicit opt-in. That won't be the case with the Gemini integration. Apple wants this to just work. The privacy concerns will be mitigated because Apple will be hosting this model themselves in their Private Cloud Compute. This will be a much more tightly integrated solution than ChatGPT was.
    - Angostura 10mo ago
      And you don't think they will include an abstraction layer?
      - layer8 10mo ago
        An abstraction layer doesn’t prevent Google from seeing the data. Last year the story was that Apple would be running a Google model on their (Apple’s) own server hardware.
        Angostura 10mo ago
        Yes, and that's still the story, as far as I can tell. So an abstraction layer would let them swap out the underlying model
        WorldMaker 10mo ago
        This story says the custom model will run on-device and in Apple's Private Cloud Compute. The implication is that Google will not see the data. The "promise" of Private Cloud Compute is that Apple wants it to be trusted like "on-device". Presumably cutting Google out of getting the data from this is part of why this story first was mentioned last year but is only now sounds close to happening. I think it's the same story/project.
- Angostura 10mo ago
  I don't see why - iOS originally shipped with Google Maps as standard, for example. Macs shipped with Internet Explorer as standard before Safari existed
  - johnthuss 10mo ago
    The Google Maps situation is a great example of why this will be hard. When Apple switched to their own maps it was a huge failure resulting in a rare public apology from the company. In order to switch you have to be able to do absolutely everything that the previous solution offered without loss of quality. Given Google's competence in AI development that will be a high bar to meet.
    - thinkindie 10mo ago
      several years after that they still have their own Maps though, they didn't go back to Google Maps.
      - robertlagrant 10mo ago
        That's the point of what the person you replied to is saying.
        thinkindie 10mo ago
        it's hard but not impossible. Unless Apple didn't learn the Google Maps/Maps lesson.
        alt227 10mo ago
        It is pretty much impossible. How are they going to build the data centers on the scale required when all the RAM and GPUs in the world are bought up for the foreseeable future?
    - drcongo 10mo ago
      I was in agreement with the parent before I read this, and now I'm in agreement with you. It is a great example, I know so many people who never switched back to Apple Maps because it was so poor initially. Personally I find it a considerably better experience than Google Maps these days, but those lost users still aren't coming back.
- mdasen 10mo ago
  Where does it say that it won't be white-labeled? Yes, Apple is acknowledging that Google's Gemini will be powering Siri and that is a big deal, but are they going to be acknowledging it in the product or is this just an acknowledgment to investors? Apple doesn't hide where many of their components come from, but that doesn't mean that those brands are credited in the product. There's no "fab by TSMC" or "camera sensors by Sony" or "display by Samsung" on an iPhone box. It's possible that Apple will credit Gemini within the UI, but that isn't contained in the article or video. If Apple uses a Gemini-based model anonymously, it would be easy to switch away from it in the future - just as Apple had used both Samsung and TSMC fabs, or how Apple has used both Samsung and Japan Display. Heck, we know that Apple has bought cloud services from AWS and Google, but we don't have "iCloud by AWS and GCP." Yes, this is a more public announcement than Apple's display and camera part suppliers, but those aren't really hidden. Apple's dealings with Qualcomm have been extremely public. Apple's use of TSMC is extremely public. To me, this is Apple saying "hey CNBC/investors, we've settled on using Gemini to get next-gen Siri happening so you all can feel safe that we aren't rudderless on next-gen Siri."
  - a_paddy 10mo ago
    Apple won't take the risk of being blamed for AI answers being incorrect. They will attribute Google/Gemini so users know how to be mad at if it doesn't work as expected.
    - qnpnpmqppnp 10mo ago
      Apple is already taking the risk of being blamed for their own AI right now, though (an AI that is much more prone to incredibly dumb errors than Gemini), so I don't find it that obvious that they wouldn't just continue taking the blame for Siri as they already do, except with an actually smarter Siri.
    - freakynit 10mo ago
      This is a double-edged sword. Apple would love any failure to be blamed on Google, but not the branding to go with it. Apple's brand is so dominant that even if they say Siri is "powered by Google", most users will still perceive it as an Apple service. The only way that changes is if Apple consistently and prominently surfaces the Google name on Siri — which seems unlikely (but who knows when the stakes are so high).
- dewey 10mo ago
  Don't think that's an especially big deal, they've always included third party data in Siri or the OS which is usually credited (Example: Maps with Foursquare or TomTom, Flight information from FlightAware, Weather data and many more).
dylan604 10mo ago
Is this another one of those AI deals where no real money changes hands? In this case, doesn't this just offset the fee Google pays Apple for having their search as the default on Apple devices?
- aoeusnth1 10mo ago
  So changing cash flows (fee money) isn't real enough now?
- asadotzler 10mo ago
  I'll wager the accounting for the two contracts is separate. There may be stipulations that connect the two, but the payment from Google to Apple of $20B+/yr is a long-established contract (set of contracts, actually0 that Apple would not jeopardize for the relatively small Google to Apple $1B/yr contract, one still unproven and which may not stand the test of time. So, yes, practically speaking, the Apple to Google payment offsets a tiny fraction of the Google to Apple payment, but real money will change hands for each and very likely separately.

by gnabgib 10mo ago

johnthuss 10mo ago

The biggest NEW thing here is that this isn't white-labeled. Apple is officially acknowledging Google as the model that will be powering Siri. That explicit acknowledgment is a pretty big deal. It will make it harder for Apple to switch to its own models later on.

insin 10mo ago
They can also put "Google" in the forever-necessary disclaimer Google AI can make mistakes
charliebwrites 10mo ago
Why so? Apple explicitly acknowledged that they were using OpenAI’s GPT models before this, and now they’re quite easily switching to Google’s Gemini
- hu3 10mo ago
  I guess the question is, when are they going to use their own model? Surely research money is not the problem. Can't be lack of competence either, I think.
  - nothercastle 10mo ago
    I think they want it to work well with web search. That’s why Google is the obvious choice. Also their ai offering is low risk of getting eliminated where as open ai could fail at any time
  - IOT_Apprentice 10mo ago
    It appears to be lack of competence given they lied about the initial features of Apple Intelligence. First, they touted features that no one actually built and then fired their AI figurehead “leader” who had no coherent execution plan—also, there appears to have been territorial squabbling going on, about who would build what. How on earth did Apple Senior Management allow this to unravel? Too much focus on Services, yet ignoring their absolute failures with Siri and the bullshit that was Apple Intelligence, when AI spending is in the trillions?
  - LexGray 10mo ago
    There is just too much money being burned in AI for Apple to keep researchers. Also models have no respect for original art which leads to a branding issue of being a platform for artists. Apple is competent at timing when to step into a market and I would guess they are waiting for AI to evolve beyond being considered untrustworthy slop.
- johnthuss 10mo ago
  The ChatGPT integration was heavily gated by Apple and required explicit opt-in. That won't be the case with the Gemini integration. Apple wants this to just work. The privacy concerns will be mitigated because Apple will be hosting this model themselves in their Private Cloud Compute. This will be a much more tightly integrated solution than ChatGPT was.
  - Angostura 10mo ago
    And you don't think they will include an abstraction layer?
    - layer8 10mo ago
      An abstraction layer doesn’t prevent Google from seeing the data. Last year the story was that Apple would be running a Google model on their (Apple’s) own server hardware.
      - Angostura 10mo ago
        Yes, and that's still the story, as far as I can tell. So an abstraction layer would let them swap out the underlying model
      - WorldMaker 10mo ago
        This story says the custom model will run on-device and in Apple's Private Cloud Compute. The implication is that Google will not see the data. The "promise" of Private Cloud Compute is that Apple wants it to be trusted like "on-device". Presumably cutting Google out of getting the data from this is part of why this story first was mentioned last year but is only now sounds close to happening. I think it's the same story/project.
Angostura 10mo ago
I don't see why - iOS originally shipped with Google Maps as standard, for example. Macs shipped with Internet Explorer as standard before Safari existed
- johnthuss 10mo ago
  The Google Maps situation is a great example of why this will be hard. When Apple switched to their own maps it was a huge failure resulting in a rare public apology from the company. In order to switch you have to be able to do absolutely everything that the previous solution offered without loss of quality. Given Google's competence in AI development that will be a high bar to meet.
  - thinkindie 10mo ago
    several years after that they still have their own Maps though, they didn't go back to Google Maps.
    - robertlagrant 10mo ago
      That's the point of what the person you replied to is saying.
      - thinkindie 10mo ago
        it's hard but not impossible. Unless Apple didn't learn the Google Maps/Maps lesson.
        alt227 10mo ago
        It is pretty much impossible. How are they going to build the data centers on the scale required when all the RAM and GPUs in the world are bought up for the foreseeable future?
  - drcongo 10mo ago
    I was in agreement with the parent before I read this, and now I'm in agreement with you. It is a great example, I know so many people who never switched back to Apple Maps because it was so poor initially. Personally I find it a considerably better experience than Google Maps these days, but those lost users still aren't coming back.
mdasen 10mo ago
Where does it say that it won't be white-labeled? Yes, Apple is acknowledging that Google's Gemini will be powering Siri and that is a big deal, but are they going to be acknowledging it in the product or is this just an acknowledgment to investors? Apple doesn't hide where many of their components come from, but that doesn't mean that those brands are credited in the product. There's no "fab by TSMC" or "camera sensors by Sony" or "display by Samsung" on an iPhone box. It's possible that Apple will credit Gemini within the UI, but that isn't contained in the article or video. If Apple uses a Gemini-based model anonymously, it would be easy to switch away from it in the future - just as Apple had used both Samsung and TSMC fabs, or how Apple has used both Samsung and Japan Display. Heck, we know that Apple has bought cloud services from AWS and Google, but we don't have "iCloud by AWS and GCP." Yes, this is a more public announcement than Apple's display and camera part suppliers, but those aren't really hidden. Apple's dealings with Qualcomm have been extremely public. Apple's use of TSMC is extremely public. To me, this is Apple saying "hey CNBC/investors, we've settled on using Gemini to get next-gen Siri happening so you all can feel safe that we aren't rudderless on next-gen Siri."
- a_paddy 10mo ago
  Apple won't take the risk of being blamed for AI answers being incorrect. They will attribute Google/Gemini so users know how to be mad at if it doesn't work as expected.
  - qnpnpmqppnp 10mo ago
    Apple is already taking the risk of being blamed for their own AI right now, though (an AI that is much more prone to incredibly dumb errors than Gemini), so I don't find it that obvious that they wouldn't just continue taking the blame for Siri as they already do, except with an actually smarter Siri.
  - freakynit 10mo ago
    This is a double-edged sword. Apple would love any failure to be blamed on Google, but not the branding to go with it. Apple's brand is so dominant that even if they say Siri is "powered by Google", most users will still perceive it as an Apple service. The only way that changes is if Apple consistently and prominently surfaces the Google name on Siri — which seems unlikely (but who knows when the stakes are so high).
dewey 10mo ago
Don't think that's an especially big deal, they've always included third party data in Siri or the OS which is usually credited (Example: Maps with Foursquare or TomTom, Flight information from FlightAware, Weather data and many more).

dylan604 10mo ago

Is this another one of those AI deals where no real money changes hands? In this case, doesn't this just offset the fee Google pays Apple for having their search as the default on Apple devices?

aoeusnth1 10mo ago
So changing cash flows (fee money) isn't real enough now?
asadotzler 10mo ago
I'll wager the accounting for the two contracts is separate. There may be stipulations that connect the two, but the payment from Google to Apple of $20B+/yr is a long-established contract (set of contracts, actually0 that Apple would not jeopardize for the relatively small Google to Apple $1B/yr contract, one still unproven and which may not stand the test of time. So, yes, practically speaking, the Apple to Google payment offsets a tiny fraction of the Google to Apple payment, but real money will change hands for each and very likely separately.