4 ms·

They are using Google Cloud. https://security.apple.com/blog/expanding-pcc/?linkId=100000425571569 https://security.apple.com/blog/expanding-pcc/?linkId=100000

They are using Google Cloud. https://security.apple.com/blog/expanding-pcc/?linkId=100000425571569 https://security.apple.com/blog/expanding-pcc/?linkId=100000... "Now, we are collaborating with Google and NVIDIA to run new Apple Intelligence workloads on Google Cloud, extending our industry-leading PCC privacy commitments to third-party data centers for the first time."

dofm 4mo ago
That is news — I guess not very surprising that they'd need more data centres than before. But again there is no Apple-to-Google transfer in the inference in the sense of the comment I was originally replying to (I am not suggesting you're implying otherwise, obviously) But I stand happily corrected where I said they aren't in the picture at all. That is an interesting press release because it outlines what they would have had to do with any data centre they were outsourcing to.
- impulser_ 4mo ago
  This is probably why Google had to rent compute from SpaceX. They needed to free up NVIDIA GPUs for Apple so they probably moved internal workloads to SpaceX compute.
  - didibus 4mo ago
    Google likely won't rent compute from SpaceX, they have a substantial share of SpaceX (they own 5% of it) and need the IPO to be valued highly, so to prop up the IPO stock, they made this announcement, but if you read the fine print, both SpaceX and Google are allowed to cancel it at any time, as-in, after they cash out from the IPO.
materielle 4mo ago
That’s not so special, though? There’s a difference between Google infra running Google services. Versus any F500 company running their services on GCP. It’s a bit whacky to think about because Apple will operate Google owned software on GCP. But it should be sandboxed just the same. I’m not making a normative privacy argument here. Just pointing out that this is cloud business as usual. Perhaps it’s interesting Apple is doing it, but basically everything else is already using either AWS or GCP at this point.
- airstrike 4mo ago
  I think the difference is scale. This is Apple, so it's an enormous amount of devices. And it's a seamless experience, to the user, going from local model to cloud models. So the question about which model Apple was going to use and where has been highly anticipated, especially by the likes of OpenAI and Anthropic. Imagine if either one could say they have Apple as their customer? Apple certainly has the cash to burn if they wanted to train their own model, but it also always seemed out of their core competency. This is a major win for Google. So "business as usual" but with huge implications for the AI ecosystem in general.
  - tibbar 4mo ago
    [dead]
ezfe 4mo ago
iCloud already uses Google Cloud, so that still doesn't change the operational boundaries of where data goes
LoganDark 4mo ago
I hope they are still using PCC hardware rather than running private data through third-party servers.
btown 4mo ago
Per that link: I think there's an interesting question about whether a nefarious actor who's infiltrated a cloud provider with physical access to machines that are running signed operating systems, with signed binaries, with TDX remote attestation, and with hardware supply chain verification, has the ability to break the privacy guarantees of a tenant with Apple's sophistication. Certainly, one could tamper with the hardware, but could one do it in a way that wouldn't get that machine immediately flagged, removed from the routing pool, and told to wipe its memory immediately, by a watchtower (perhaps even the routing layer itself) that runs in a separate secure Apple datacenter?
- SoftTalker 4mo ago
  Why bother with all that cloak and dagger stuff when they can just buy the data? You believe Apple and/or Google isn't selling it? I have some land in Florida I'd like to talk about.
  - appplication 4mo ago
    Having worked at Apple, I will say I firmly believe they do not sell data. I worked in data science and we had the shittiest inference because we had essentially no access, even internally, to longitudinal or cross-app user data. Best we had was 15 minute rotating sessions for a single app. There are internal teams dedicated to deanonymizing data to try to narrow down users - if they can successfully do so, and relevant fields that lead to deanonymization get permanently purged from internal logging. I can’t speak to the current architecture but Apple has shown a consistent willingness to sacrifice access to user data in the name of selling privacy instead at a premium price (you could argue precisely because no one of their competition have any meaningful posture on this). I do believe they are quite serious in their commitment to that, as they have found this strategy to be more valuable than the data itself.
    - tjoff 4mo ago
      But sending sensitive private audio recordings to the lowest bidder is par for the course? https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-49502292 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-49502292
huslage 4mo ago
They are not _only_ using Google Cloud. They continue to build and invest in their own datacenters. It's not a binary choice.
- impulser_ 4mo ago
  Yeah, but the models are running in Google Cloud which makes sense they are based on Gemini.
  - huslage 4mo ago
    They appear to be running them on both GCP and in their datacenter.
Someone 4mo ago
Google Cloud, but, the way I read it, not Google’s AI offerings. They, basically, hire Google servers to run their software on it. They also (claim to) ensure those servers run only software they have approved to run on it. (Part of their software are models derived from Google Gemini, but that’s orthogonal to this)
- fauigerzigerk 4mo ago
  >(Part of their software are models derived from Google Gemini, but that’s orthogonal to this) You're right that it is orthogonal to the privacy promises Apple makes to its own users. The moralistic and righteous undertone in their marketing material is questionable though given that these Apple services might not exist if Google didn't exploit Gemini app user data on Android the way it does. That's fine with me. Users have a choice here. In fact, it's a big improvement over the search deal with Google where Apple sends its own users directly to Google.

dofm 4mo ago

That is news — I guess not very surprising that they'd need more data centres than before. But again there is no Apple-to-Google transfer in the inference in the sense of the comment I was originally replying to (I am not suggesting you're implying otherwise, obviously) But I stand happily corrected where I said they aren't in the picture at all. That is an interesting press release because it outlines what they would have had to do with any data centre they were outsourcing to.

impulser_ 4mo ago
This is probably why Google had to rent compute from SpaceX. They needed to free up NVIDIA GPUs for Apple so they probably moved internal workloads to SpaceX compute.
- didibus 4mo ago
  Google likely won't rent compute from SpaceX, they have a substantial share of SpaceX (they own 5% of it) and need the IPO to be valued highly, so to prop up the IPO stock, they made this announcement, but if you read the fine print, both SpaceX and Google are allowed to cancel it at any time, as-in, after they cash out from the IPO.

materielle 4mo ago

That’s not so special, though? There’s a difference between Google infra running Google services. Versus any F500 company running their services on GCP. It’s a bit whacky to think about because Apple will operate Google owned software on GCP. But it should be sandboxed just the same. I’m not making a normative privacy argument here. Just pointing out that this is cloud business as usual. Perhaps it’s interesting Apple is doing it, but basically everything else is already using either AWS or GCP at this point.

airstrike 4mo ago
I think the difference is scale. This is Apple, so it's an enormous amount of devices. And it's a seamless experience, to the user, going from local model to cloud models. So the question about which model Apple was going to use and where has been highly anticipated, especially by the likes of OpenAI and Anthropic. Imagine if either one could say they have Apple as their customer? Apple certainly has the cash to burn if they wanted to train their own model, but it also always seemed out of their core competency. This is a major win for Google. So "business as usual" but with huge implications for the AI ecosystem in general.
- tibbar 4mo ago
  [dead]

ezfe 4mo ago

iCloud already uses Google Cloud, so that still doesn't change the operational boundaries of where data goes

LoganDark 4mo ago

I hope they are still using PCC hardware rather than running private data through third-party servers.

btown 4mo ago

Per that link: I think there's an interesting question about whether a nefarious actor who's infiltrated a cloud provider with physical access to machines that are running signed operating systems, with signed binaries, with TDX remote attestation, and with hardware supply chain verification, has the ability to break the privacy guarantees of a tenant with Apple's sophistication. Certainly, one could tamper with the hardware, but could one do it in a way that wouldn't get that machine immediately flagged, removed from the routing pool, and told to wipe its memory immediately, by a watchtower (perhaps even the routing layer itself) that runs in a separate secure Apple datacenter?

SoftTalker 4mo ago
Why bother with all that cloak and dagger stuff when they can just buy the data? You believe Apple and/or Google isn't selling it? I have some land in Florida I'd like to talk about.
- appplication 4mo ago
  Having worked at Apple, I will say I firmly believe they do not sell data. I worked in data science and we had the shittiest inference because we had essentially no access, even internally, to longitudinal or cross-app user data. Best we had was 15 minute rotating sessions for a single app. There are internal teams dedicated to deanonymizing data to try to narrow down users - if they can successfully do so, and relevant fields that lead to deanonymization get permanently purged from internal logging. I can’t speak to the current architecture but Apple has shown a consistent willingness to sacrifice access to user data in the name of selling privacy instead at a premium price (you could argue precisely because no one of their competition have any meaningful posture on this). I do believe they are quite serious in their commitment to that, as they have found this strategy to be more valuable than the data itself.
  - tjoff 4mo ago
    But sending sensitive private audio recordings to the lowest bidder is par for the course? https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-49502292 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-49502292

huslage 4mo ago

They are not _only_ using Google Cloud. They continue to build and invest in their own datacenters. It's not a binary choice.

impulser_ 4mo ago
Yeah, but the models are running in Google Cloud which makes sense they are based on Gemini.
- huslage 4mo ago
  They appear to be running them on both GCP and in their datacenter.

Someone 4mo ago

Google Cloud, but, the way I read it, not Google’s AI offerings. They, basically, hire Google servers to run their software on it. They also (claim to) ensure those servers run only software they have approved to run on it. (Part of their software are models derived from Google Gemini, but that’s orthogonal to this)

fauigerzigerk 4mo ago
>(Part of their software are models derived from Google Gemini, but that’s orthogonal to this) You're right that it is orthogonal to the privacy promises Apple makes to its own users. The moralistic and righteous undertone in their marketing material is questionable though given that these Apple services might not exist if Google didn't exploit Gemini app user data on Android the way it does. That's fine with me. Users have a choice here. In fact, it's a big improvement over the search deal with Google where Apple sends its own users directly to Google.