pardon my ignorance, but why does compute hardware pose any security concerns?

It's not the compute hardware itself. PCC used to be data centers owned and operated by Apple, running on chips designed by Apple.

With this announcement, Apple is expanding the definition of PCC to Google Cloud data centers. Theoretically, this is Google Cloud, not Google servers, so there should be a separation of access there.

From the Apple security blog:

> Originally built exclusively on Apple silicon with our world-class software security technologies, PCC set a new bar for AI privacy in the cloud, and continues to power the most demanding Apple Intelligence features. Since then, the wider industry has been working to provide a set of confidential inference primitives that could theoretically be combined to reach the security level of PCC. However, until today, those primitives have never been integrated into a comprehensive, end-to-end confidential inference pipeline capable of operating at global scale. That’s what we’ve done with PCC on Google Cloud, which incorporates PCC’s exceptional security and privacy properties at every stage, including the industry’s most comprehensive transparency guarantees that allow external security researchers to verify our privacy commitments.

From the information presented, the privacy case is not that your data is only accessible to you (which arguably can have a backdoor) but that the data is NOT stored at all, so it's not possible to build a backdoor. I know there are probably other ways around it, but it's my understanding is that no data is kept on any server when the response is sent back to your device

well, name an example of a thing that can never change then.

"research alternatives" meaning what exactly? You think open source is somehow not susceptible to the same issue, plus all of the malicious updates?

Security focused FOSS does signed commits, signed reviews, full source bootstrapping, and reproducible builds.

Proprietary software solutions are unable come close to that level of accountability.

Not all published source code is secure but all secure software has published source code.

I for the life of me could not solve the <18 example from wikipedia. but the number/color one is super easy

it included flights, hotels, food and travel expenses for 9000 for multiple days, as well as the "party". US-based travel for 1 person for 5 days is easily 4K, on top of that some people were probably international so it would be higher, and on top of that there are the "party" expenses like venue and catering which probably wasn't that significant.

it's a very simplistic take. the issue with ChatGPT is that it speaks with authority, vs webMD and such just provide information. to say that how the information is presented is irrelevant to the outcomes is reductionist at best

a friend of mine was a creative director and a big tech co until recently, she was replaced by AI

do you genuinely think that numerous meetups isn't a marketing push?

Well, you can argue that tech meetups in general are a form of marketing - but this wasn't really a 'company X hosts a react meetup trying to find people to work there' type of thing. Many drove for hours just to attend.

Getting dozens of people in the same room, excited about technology is not trivial, and having hundreds of people show up is relatively hard in a city like Vienna which doesn't have a vibrant tech scene. Sure, some people come to find job opportunities or for free food, but many 'established' meetups sometimes just have a few attendees, so this on its own is not a small task. Peter definitely didn't have time to focus on this given everything else that was going on. So for Vienna, this is pretty much as viral as it gets.

Not sure about other cities where this took place.

by your definition, what is marketing then?

I mean, do you think no one at OAI and every other lab has vibe-coded some agentic demo? The problem (?) is that when you work at a corporate job you have to think about security.

google search did have a killer UI though, you might be forgetting what search looked like before google

A list of results is not a killer UI.

The technology was the killer. Technology providing the right list of results and fast.

OH and believe it or not, this continues to be the core of Google today - they suck at product design and marketing.

It was killer compared to alternatives. All other "homepages" of the internet were the cluttered mess of ads.

I feel like we are arguing semantics though. But IMO any UI that does the job that consumers want well is good UI. Just because it was simple doesn't mean it wasn't good