• Reyali@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      45
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 day ago

      Tell me you didn’t read the article without telling me you didn’t read the article.

      The entire thing is explaining how they are upholding privacy to do this training.

      1. It’s opt-in only (if you don’t choose to share analytics, nothing is collected).
      2. They use differential privacy (adding noise so they get trends, not individual data).
      3. They developed a new method to train on text patterns without collecting actual messages or emails from devices. (link to research on arXiv)
      • MurrayL@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        43
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        Right. There’s plenty to criticise Apple for, both in general and for chasing the AI trend, but looking at it purely in terms of user privacy within AI features they’re miles ahead of the competition.

      • deleted@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        22 hours ago

        To be honest, it’s important to the point it should be in the title since privacy is the selling point for apple.

        • Reyali@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 hours ago

          Yeah, that’s on OP. The article is actually titled, “Understanding Aggregate Trends for Apple Intelligence Using Differential Privacy.”

      • hobovision@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 day ago

        I had scanned through it, and it looked like the exact same stuff that Google and Microsoft say. Paraphrasing: “we value your privacy” “we’re de-identifying your data” “the processing occurs on-device”…

        Apple probably is better on privacy than other big tech corpos, but it’s a race to the bottom, and they’re definitely participating in the race.

          • Nalivai@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            11 hours ago

            I call bullshit. They might say they’re opt-in, I bet they have some way to use the personal data that technically doesn’t violate very specific wording of the rule.

            • dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              11 hours ago

              Rather than betting on conjecture you might do well to search for blog posts of security researchers that test these kinds of claims. Then you could have posted that instead of going on feelings.

              Like this.

              Lawsuit based on research by mysk not sure in the outcome of this though and whether the the claims that there is a difference between data collection for selling to data brokers vs data collection to improve the user experience. As I developer myself we will collect data to help us understand our software better and with no intention to do anything with it.

              Another one appears to be about a flaw in how they anonymise data, specifically local differential privacy.

              So it does appear that there are claims about opt-in, but I didn’t see anything concrete in my cursory look and I’m not afraid to post articles attacking my own point.

          • deleted@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            22 hours ago

            I wanted to know the battery cycle for my iPhone 7 in 2019 and the only way was to enable analytics and diagnostics data collection with Apple.

            Thankfully, now it’s in the settings.