"Audio Intelligence features are private by design, combining hardware, software, and services to protect user privacy in a way that only Apple can. These features do not create or store audio recordings, and raw audio used for processing is completely inaccessible to the operating systems, apps, the user, or Apple. By design, Audio Intelligence features do not identify and attribute speakers, to protect the privacy of both the user and those around them. Siri Recap produces a brief, high-level summary of conversations — not a transcript — and is designed to exclude sensitive information like financial information or government-assigned identifiers. Live Rewind text snippets and Siri Recap summaries are end-to-end encrypted in the Siri app with iCloud syncing, and are not accessible even by Apple. Read more about how Audio Intelligence protects privacy:" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49632685
The whole point of the debate is that "those around them" didn't agree to send their so-called "de-identified" data to Apple. In fact, "those around them" had no chance to agree/disagree at all.
Notice how they focus on “audio recordings” specifically, meaning other types of recording (like transcripts used to generate summaries) are fair game.
"We know our product is an unlawful violation of federal wiretap law since it will make zero-party-consent recordings, not that we care about violating the law at Apple because we know we can out spend anyone who would litigate against us, but we like to keep up appearances."
Might be related to today's yearly 'Prinsjesdag' in the Netherlands:
The day on which the reigning monarch of the Netherlands addresses a joint session of the States-General of the Netherlands (consisting of the Senate and the House of Representatives) to give the Speech from the Throne (Dutch: Troonrede), similar to the annual State of the Union in the United States or the British State Opening of Parliament. This speech sets out the main features of government policy for the coming parliamentary session.
Depends on how it's done I think: breaking stuff vs sitting on it. And sitting on a highway is also quite visibly claiming the action, that is not clear in this case.
If this is XR, would be very dumb and against their message.
Yes and no. "rede" is a noun and has two syllables (ray-də) and means address (as in Gettysburg address). It's an archaic word, nowadays we would use "toespraak" (speech) or "lezing" (lecture). The word does share its origin with the modern English "to read", but no Dutch speaker would interpret "rede" to mean the same as a parent reading a child a bedtime story.
So, it's a pistol on a robotic arm, or what? Kinetic weapon doesn't say much.
A pillar with a tiny engine that just incrementally increases the speed could be devastating at a distance though, I'm sure I've read this as some solution to a problem (or attempted solution to some problem) in some sci-fi book, can't remember which though.
Yeah im not sure what they are going on about, "Rods from God" and kinetic bombardment applies to things at the bottom of the gravity well getting hit from shit dropped from up above, it has nothing to do with satellite-to-satellite weapons. Like to launch up a few ton bullet of tungsten into orbit, then maneuver it in place when needed to deorbit and strike a major target, hits like a nuke but without the nuclear program.
But to me it really doesn't make more sense than using nukes though unless they are coming from another body in space, dropping shit from normal earth orbital altitudes is like throwing peanuts compared to something coming out of solar orbit, and actually hitting your target is 10,000x harder. And anyone with a space program large enough to put such weapons in place could more easily produce nukes instead.
reply