Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
jandrewrogers | on: Apple decided not to roll out Siri in EU after denied request for exemption
The technical problem is nothing like exchanging data with fitness trackers.

One of the issues here is that there are many people with strong opinions that don't understand the thing they have strong opinions about. Which is the normal state of human affairs.

simjnd | parent
Indeed but you ignore my second paragraph: they have developed (and 3rd-party audited) a way to handoff all the data (parts of your Personal Context, etc.) to their cloud servers in a privacy preserving way on-device. Why couldn't the same process could be used to handoff the data to a 3rd-party AI provider? (genuine why, if you have an understanding of the thing you have a strong opinion about I'd genuinely appreciate the answer)

It looks like Apple is framing this as a privacy issue as a marketing tactic so that consumers will blame the EU when Apple COULD implement it without endangering privacy.

theshrike79 | root | parent | next
Apple PCC is using completely mad and paranoid amounts of security down to hardware and firmware level making sure nobody at any point of the supply chain can access the data.

EU can’t and won’t enforce the same rigour for 3rd party cloud AI. Which is the problem for Apple.

If said 3rd party service leaks private data, guess which company is going to be in the BIG HEADLINE and which one will hardly be mentioned in the news?

benoau | root | parent | next
They've just announced PCC for Google Cloud using Nvidia GPUs and Intel CPUs so it would probably run on just about anything -

https://security.apple.com/blog/expanding-pcc/

loading story #48466850
simjnd | root | parent | next
Ah, I see. I overestimated the amount of stripping / anonymization that was being done on device. Thought the server-side could be quite generic. Thanks!
loading story #48466799
bigyabai | root | parent
> EU can’t and won’t enforce the same rigour for 3rd party cloud AI. Which is the problem for Apple.

Why should they? If the user decides to trust a third party, Apple shouldn't retain veto power for the customer's choice.

This is how macOS treats apps like OpenClaw. It can absolutely work for iOS too.

loading story #48466761
jnwatson | root | parent | next
In Apple's press release[1], they mention proposing something similar to what you're talking about.

"Given the serious risks to users, Apple designed a solution called Trusted System Agent — an intermediary that would allow virtual assistants to safely access the same features and capabilities as Siri AI for devices in the EU."

The European Commission rejected it.

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

JumpCrisscross | root | parent | next
> Why couldn't the same process could be used to handoff the data to a 3rd-party AI provider?

You have more safeguards if it’s running on your own metal. It’s reasonable to want to understand that better, perhaps with your own red team, before opening up customer data to actual potential hostiles.

simjnd | root | parent
Yeah I overestimated the amount of stripping / anonymization that was being done on device and didn't realize how much plumbing was required server-side too to have good enough privacy guarantees
spullara | root | parent
The 3rd party firm is the one that wants the data. No need for someone to steal it from them.