Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
> 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.

I don't want my apps that have AI implemented to be able to read my messages because Europe mandates feature parity. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. For Apple it means building all the APIs that probably already exist but this time to be requested by apps, which would be a huge attack surface, even Apple's own apps suffers from security breaches (like Message before the switch to closed container execution). AI breaks the separation of concerns, which can lead to disastrous consequences.

EU has great intentions, and of course, feature parity should be offered so that competition can exist, but I don't find it crazy that it is more complicated on a product like that. As tech people things are very obvious to us but we need to remember that we are talking about a product used by everyone.

It’s not clear how it is significantly different from allowing apps access to your contacts, calendar, photos, and so on. And Apple doesn’t say that they merely need more time to properly implement it, the claim that they are unable to implement it without compromising privacy and security. And the latter I don’t really see, with the proper set of permissions presented in the way users are already used to.

As an Apple user I feel more patronized than empowered here.

> It’s not clear how it is significantly different from allowing apps access to your contacts, calendar, photos, and so on

Those are allowed via contextual consent prompts, several of which are for specific contacts, specific photos you wish to share, and so on.

Examples of the level of access an AI agent has include:

1. To read all indexed personal data from every app installed on the device

2. To perform actions in every supporting app on the device on the user's behalf

3. To read the current displayed apps for additional context as well as sensor data like current location

If you were regulated such that you had to allow any organization this level of access, and if you were hand-tied in how much you could convey the seriousness of accepting that consent prompt to an ordinary end user, and felt that it would be you, not any legal authority, who would ultimately suffer the reputational and legal consequences for the results - what would your yes/no decision be on shipping the feature in that jurisdiction?

loading story #48453385
The law does not require Apple to grant all permissions to all apps for all users. It just requires Apple to ask users if the user wants to grant elevated permissions to specific apps that they download. The user can always say "no", which should obviously be the default.

The situation is that Apple won't even allow users to grant elevated permissions to any 3rd party app, even if the user wants to.

But then third party apps can force users to accept this before they work (here I am especially thinking of school and work apps that people might be forced to use).
> don't want my apps that have AI implemented to be able to read my messages because Europe mandates feature parit

App permissions.

Beside you don't have to install any third party app, I only have Google assistant installed on my Android.

I heard the same kind of talk when the eu forced apple to switch to USB C...

There is a real, strong, monopolistic issue with some American companies that their government refuse to deal with because it's so corrupt. It would be fine if it didn't impact us in Europe, but it does.

> I don't want my apps that have AI implemented to be able to read my messages because Europe mandates feature parity.

The AI provider would still be YOUR choice. You could stick with Apple's if you don't trust the other ones.