Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
It’s the DMA regulation that forces Apple to give the same access as they have to other AI chat apps.

Once it leaves the device Apple does not know what those other ai chat apps will do with the gathered data.

> Siri AI is private by design and deeply integrated across Apple’s platforms using on-device processing and Private Cloud Compute, which extends the privacy and security of iPhone into the cloud. However, under EU regulators’ extreme interpretation of the DMA, Apple would have to give any virtual assistant direct access to users’ private data — and the ability to directly control other installed applications — as soon as Siri AI is made available in the EU, without the essential protections necessary to keep users and their data safe.

https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2026/06/due-to-dma-siri-ai-de...

Apple loves to play dumb about this stuff. The EU imposes a pretty straightforward regulation regarding equality of access. Apple seems to come up with all sorts of "solutions" to this "problem", and each one never amounts to true equality of access. They could easily just allow users to decide "Do you want to give this app unfettered access to all your device data, including other apps' data?". Let users decide. 99% of Apple users in the EU will probably click "no". I'm sure they'll make the user warnings scary enough to ward off anybody who doesn't know what's going on.

There are 2 potential outcomes: either the sky really does fall, and there's a meaningful uptick in bad things happening to iPhone users, in which Apple can easily point the finger at the EC and say "they made us do this". Apple looks like the good guys who put up a good fight for their users, but ultimately their hands were tied, and they'll probably get the revisions to EU law they're so desperately fighting for.

The other possibility is that the sky does not fall, and Apple looks both silly and malicious at the same time for ever having suggested that it would, which was clearly in bad faith.

Clearly, Apple cannot afford scenario #2, so I think they will probably never give their users the actual freedom that the MDA requires them to. They will just exit Europe entirely before allowing that to happen.

> There are 2 potential outcomes: either the sky really does fall, and there's a meaningful uptick in bad things happening to iPhone users, in which Apple can easily point the finger at the EC and say "they made us do this". Apple looks like the good guys who put up a good fight for their users, but ultimately their hands were tied, and they'll probably get the revisions to EU law they're so desperately fighting for. > > The other possibility is that the sky does not fall, and Apple looks both silly and malicious at the same time for ever having suggested that it would, which was clearly in bad faith.

I think the most likely outcome is between these two extremes. My personal data ends up sold to shady companies who use it to target ever more invasive advertising at me in places I wouldn't expect/. Like a boiling frog, I won't really notice the difference and my life will gradually become a little shittier.

loading story #48457187
> Do you want to give this app unfettered access to all your device data, including other apps' data?

Which Facebook and instagram will present as “tee hee updated terms of service” in the first 15 seconds, and people will tick it, because they’re not interested in reading T&C’s, just want to message their friend about dinner, and aren’t suddenly expected be deceived like that.

loading story #48453466
loading story #48453190
loading story #48453529
> There are 2 potential outcomes: either the sky really does fall, and there's a meaningful uptick in bad things happening to iPhone users, in which Apple can easily point the finger at the EC and say "they made us do this". Apple looks like the good guys who put up a good fight for their users, but ultimately their hands were tied, and they'll probably get the revisions to EU law they're so desperately fighting for.

I'd prefer they focus on safeguarding my data instead of playing a ridiculous game of brinksmanship with regulators to make a point.

loading story #48455235
> There are 2 potential outcomes: either the sky really does fall, and there's a meaningful uptick in bad things happening to iPhone users, in which Apple can easily point the finger at the EC and say "they made us do this". Apple looks like the good guys who put up a good fight for their users, but ultimately their hands were tied, and they'll probably get the revisions to EU law they're so desperately fighting for.

I don't think that is what will happen. People, and the media, will blame Apple: it is them after all giving that data over because they hold it. No that doesn't make logical sense, but that has never mattered before why would it matter now.

Once Apple loses that trust re. data privacy, its gone forever. I get why they're being particular about it.

loading story #48453506
loading story #48454066
> EU regulators’ extreme interpretation of the DMA

It's not extreme interpretation, it's the intent.

Just say it would break your vendor lock-in.

loading story #48452269
so to translate:

- Apple has powerful capabilities in iOS to enable Siri AI.

- EU's DMA requires them to allow users to install third-party AI backends.

- Apple doesn't think parties other than themselves should be trusted with those iOS permissions.

I guess it'd be like if Apple allowed a first-party screen reader for iOS, so they refused to allow third-party screen readers.

loading story #48451814
loading story #48451286
loading story #48451298
loading story #48452688
> It’s the DMA regulation that forces Apple to give the same access as they have to other AI chat apps.

But why can Tesla ship Grok to their cars in the EU without any problems? Why aren't they required to let me choose between Grok, OpenAI etc or even a custom endpoint?

loading story #48451804
loading story #48451826
loading story #48451832
loading story #48453057
loading story #48451818
> Once it leaves the device Apple does not know what those other ai chat apps will do with the gathered data.

It's the user's data. Not Apple's. And it should be the user's right to send it to whoever for whatever results, imo

loading story #48452437
loading story #48452063
loading story #48455597
loading story #48451865
> Once it leaves the device Apple does not know what those other ai chat apps will do with the gathered data.

Yeah, that's the whole fucking point.

Translation:

Since it's the user's device, not Apple's, EU correctly "interprets" this as the user has the right to do whatever they please, including installing third-party chat apps.

Apple are just bulshitters when it comes to actual users, and not their corporate definition of a user.

BTW, did you know that in Japan, and in Japan only, you can change the Siri shortcut button to start other voice assistants? https://mjtsai.com/blog/2025/11/18/ios-26-2-third-party-voic...

Or that they wouldn't let you set default maps app outside of the EU: https://mjtsai.com/blog/2025/03/14/dma-compliance-default-ma...

> Or that they wouldn't let you set default maps app outside of the EU

They were mandated to create a scheme in isolation on a deadline, without having input either from navigation apps or from consumers, and without any requirement that web browsers or other operating systems would need to support the same scheme.

As another comment pointed out - it doesn't work. Websites and apps still integrate with a navigation product directly, rather than use this scheme. And why wouldn't they? Even if it was launched worldwide on iOS, it still is just a defined subset of any particular navigation product functionality. It also is just yet another navigation option to integrate into your platform, since the feature still wouldn't be available on desktops/Android.

Until everyone is sitting at the table wanting to work towards interoperability, the feature simply can't work. So why perpetuate a broken chooser into other markets?

> They were mandated to create a scheme in isolation on a deadline

Self-imposed isolation and deadline.

> without having input either from navigation apps or from consumers

Because Apple never asked either navigation app developers or consumers since "Apple knows best" and spent several years fighting DMA instead of implementing these features.

> Websites and apps still integrate with a navigation product directly, rather than use this scheme.

Because there was no scheme to begin with, and when Apple finally relented and made it, it only made it available in the EU.

> Until everyone is sitting at the table wanting to work towards interoperability, the feature simply can't work.

Yes, Apple doesn't want to sit at the table to work towards interoperability.

Apple Maps was made default on iOS in 2012. They literally only implemented the "scheme" last year, 13 years later.

DMA entered force in 2022. Apple had known about it coming for at least two years before that.

And even without DMA that would be a proper thing to do to begin with which they had to be forced to do by government action.

This is such a shallow take. There are obvious privacy and security tradeoffs here. The EU competition framework is good in many ways, but this is actually something I don’t think we have the regulatory frameworks in place to handle yet , or social norms and understanding about why giving any Tom dick and Harry root on all your data is a bad idea.

It’s paternalistic, but I agree with Apple that free for all access to this kind of data is not a great idea. Ironically, before this could work we’d actually need much more EU style data regulation, and more consistently enforced.

I dunno, I trust the EU regulators more than I'd trust any US based company.
loading story #48453080
There's nothing shallow about my take.

Apple uses "privacy and security" as a cudgel to prevent anyone from breaking into the vendor lock in. To the point that EU actually had to explicitly tell Apple what to do [1], as Apple delayed features, made them extremely hard or convoluted for third-parties to use, and pulled every trick out of the malicious compliance manual.

This whole virtual assistants thing will drag on for another several years.

Edit: I mean they show their models accessing and changing a password on the user's bank site at the same time as accessing and changing passwords on another random site. Which is one prompt away from exfiltrating user data. So spare me the "Apple knows best about privacy and security so they should keep any access to their platforms locked down"

[1] https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/developer-portal/in...

It's shallow because it doesn't acknowledge that there is a real tradeoff. I share a lot of your cynicism about US tech companies, but I think you need to be realistic about the state of the market and how the incentives align.

Apples incentives are not, currently, as strongly misaligned with their user interests as many other tech firms (meta, google, random startups, etc). Going slowly might not be a bad idea for most people here.

That said, I hadn't seen the demo you mention. If they do do that (bank passwords etc) they are stupider than I thought they would be.

loading story #48454302
Sounds like Apple PR bullshit.

Unless Apple proves otherwise I'm more inclined to believe they're either 1. Using this to try and shape the DMA in their own interest (definitely not their users' interest) or 2. Doing something with the data that would not be allowed in the EU (also not in their users' interest at all) or both.

Because outsourcing to Google is so much trustworthy...
loading story #48451215