Apple Spurned Idea of iPhone AI Partnership With Meta Months Ago (bloomberg.com) 10
An anonymous reader shares a report: Apple rejected overtures by Meta Platforms to integrate the social networking company's AI chatbot into the iPhone months ago, according to people with knowledge of the matter. The two companies aren't in discussions about using Meta's Llama chatbot in an AI partnership and only held brief talks in March, said the people, who asked not to be identified because the situation is private. The dialogue about a partnership didn't reach any formal stage, and Apple has no active plans to integrate Llama.
[...] Apple decided not to move forward with formal Meta discussions in part because it doesn't see that company's privacy practices as stringent enough, according to the people. Apple has spent years criticizing Meta's technology, and integrating Llama into the iPhone would have been a stark about-face.
[...] Apple decided not to move forward with formal Meta discussions in part because it doesn't see that company's privacy practices as stringent enough, according to the people. Apple has spent years criticizing Meta's technology, and integrating Llama into the iPhone would have been a stark about-face.
Meta as a Pariah? (Score:5, Interesting)
Good to see Meta's stance on privacy biting them in the ass. Apple have their own problems at the moment but good to see that the company has some principles, Google discarded theirs when they became inconvenient years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
(...) the United States intelligence community funded, nurtured and incubated Google as part of a drive to dominate the world through control of information. Seed-funded by the NSA and CIA, Google was merely the first among a plethora of private sector start-ups co-opted by US intelligence to retain ‘information superiority.’
In 1994 — the same year the Highlands Forum was founded under the stewardship of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the ONA, and DARPA — two young PhD students at Stanford University, Sergey Brin and Larry Page, made their breakthrough on the first automated web crawling and page ranking application. That application remains the core component of what eventually became Google’s search service. Brin and Page had performed their work with funding from the Digital Library Initiative (DLI), a multi-agency programme of the National Science Foundation (NSF), NASA and DARPA.
Throughout the development of the search engine, Sergey Brin reported regularly and directly to two people who were not Stanford faculty at all: Dr. Bhavani Thuraisingham and Dr. Rick Steinheiser. Both were representatives of a sensitive US intelligence community research programme on information security and data-mining.
“We funded Stanford University through the computer scientist Jeffrey Ullman, who had several promising graduate students working on many exciting areas,” Prof. Thuraisingham told me. “One of them was Sergey Brin, the founder of Google. The intelligence community’s MDDS program essentially provided Brin seed-funding, which was supplemented by many other sources, including the private sector.”
In an extraordinary document hosted by the website of the University of Texas, Thuraisingham recounts that from 1993 to 1999, “the Intelligence Community [IC] started a program called Massive Digital Data Systems (MDDS) that I was managing for the Intelligence Community when I was at the MITRE Corporation.” The program funded 15 research efforts at various universities, including Stanford. Its goal was developing “data management technologies to manage several terabytes to petabytes of data,” including for “query processing, transaction management, metadata management, storage management, and data integration.”Thuraisingham goes on in her article to reiterate that this joint CIA-NSA program partly funded Sergey Brin to develop the core of Google, through a grant to Stanford managed by Brin’s supervisor Prof. Jeffrey D. Ullman: “In fact, the Google founder Mr. Sergey Brin was partly funded by this program while he was a PhD student at Stanford. He together with his advisor Prof. Jeffrey Ullman and my colleague at MITRE, Dr. Chris Clifton [Mitre’s chief scientist in IT], developed the Query Flocks System which produced solutions for mining large amounts of data stored in databases. I remember visiting Stanford with Dr. Rick Steinheiser from the Intelligence Community and Mr. Brin would rush in on roller blades, give his presentation and rush out. In fact the last time we met in September 1998, Mr. Brin demonstrated to us his search engine which became Google soon after.”
Brin and Page officially incorporated Google as a company in September 1998, the very month they last reported to Thuraisingham and Steinheiser. ‘Query Flocks’ was also part of Google’s patented ‘PageRank’ search system, which Brin developed at Stanford under the CIA-NSA-MDDS programme, as well as with funding from the NSF, IBM and Hitachi. That year, MITRE’s Dr. Chris Clifton, who worked under Thuraisingham to develop the ‘Query Flocks’ system, co-authored a paper with Brin’s superviser, Prof. Ullman, and the CIA’s Rick Steinheiser. Titled ‘Knowledge Discovery in Text,’ the paper was presented at an academic conference.
“The MDDS funding that supported Brin was significant as far as seed-funding goes, but it was probably outweighed by the other funding streams,” said Thuraisingham. “The duration of Brin’s funding was around two years or so. In that period, I and my colleagues from the MDDS would visit Stanford to see Brin and monitor his progress every three months or so. We didn’t supervise exactly, but we did want to check progress, point out potential problems and suggest ideas. In those briefings, Brin did present to us on the query flocks research, and also demonstrated to us versions of the Google search engine.”
Brin thus reported to Thuraisingham and Steinheiser regularly about his work developing Google.
(continues) https://medium.com/insurge-int... [medium.com]
Is it true or wild conspiracy theory?
Hard to find supporting evidence (Google search was less than helpful), but there does seem to be at least one part that is backed up from another source https://web.archive.org/web/20... [archive.org]
Re:Meta as a Pariah? (Score:4, Interesting)
My university was part of the digital library initiative. Basically it was a grant from the government (as described in parent's quote) to quickly search through gigabytes (!!) of data with accuracy. The name of the game was relevance and Brin and Page's algorithm was pretty good, however it was only good for structured documents (if you ever went to page 100 of google searches back in the day you know what I mean). Our school, instead, was focusing on academic papers and as such PDF, TeX, PS and other document formats. In those areas we were highly successful and that brought in grants from the US Military and their contractors (like Lockheed and Raytheon). I have fond memories of taking a summer "internship" and working with those same contractors to implement some of the same technology we built in our research labs, but under a TS/SCI clearance.
So conspiracy theory? Yes because you are still searching for the evidence. Is there truth in this conspiracy theory? Yes because you can simply look to other DL initiatives to see the connection back to the USG. How far that rabbit hole goes is an exercise to the reader. I would urge that you stop where the supported evidence ends and avoid conjecture. Yes we know what the CIA and NSA does, but we have no idea how they (if they) used any data from Google. And so much time has passed, even if you get a job at Google you will never find those archived communications.
Re: (Score:2)
What's to say they were ever benevolent?
I don't know if they were ever "benevolent" (they were always a for-profit corporation) but they certainly weren't actively evil. Since the Founders left and put the MBA asshats in charge they are actively evil. They laid off thousands of people despite being profitable simply because they saw their competitors do it and get rewarded by Wall Street. Nearly all pro-employee perks have been eliminated. Those perks weren't just about the employees, they were a differentiator that helped with recruitment, a
So basically (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not Meta? But Open AI? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)