Ex-Siri head reportedly wanted Apple to choose Google's Gemini over ChatGPT
In Brief
Former Siri head John Giannandrea pushed Apple to choose Google's Gemini chatbot over ChatGPT for the first chatbot integration with Siri last year, according to a Bloomberg report looking at Apple's uneven AI efforts.
Giannandrea, an ex-Google executive who was demoted in a leadership reshuffle in March, thought that OpenAI's bot wouldn't have staying power and wasn't protective of sensitive personal data. Despite these concerns, Apple announced ChatGPT's integration at WWDC in 2025 and made the feature available to users in December.
Apple's integration lets users tap ChatGPT in instances where Siri isn't able to answer a question. Last year, Apple announced that it would connect additional chatbots, including Google's Gemini, to Siri.
Apple is also in preliminary talks with AI-powered search engine Perplexity to offer Perplexity as a ChatGPT alternative in Siri and a search provider in the company's Safari browser, according to Bloomberg.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
28 minutes ago
- CBS News
Supreme Court halts lower court orders requiring DOGE to hand over information about work and personnel
Elon Musk on DOGE and his work in and out of government Elon Musk on DOGE and his work in and out of government Elon Musk on DOGE and his work in and out of government Washington — The Supreme Court on Friday halted lower court orders that required the White House's Department of Government Efficiency to turn over information to a government watchdog group as part of a lawsuit that tests whether President Trump's cost-cutting task force has to comply with federal public records law. The order from the high court clears DOGE for now from having to turn over records related to its work and personnel, and keeps Amy Gleason, identified as its acting administrator, from having to answer questions at a deposition. Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented. "The portions of the district court's April 15 discovery order that require the government to disclose the content of intra–executive branch USDS recommendations and whether those recommendations were followed are not appropriately tailored," the court said in its order. "Any inquiry into whether an entity is an agency for the purposes of the Freedom of Information Act cannot turn on the entity's ability to persuade. Furthermore, separation of powers concerns counsel judicial deference and restraint in the context of discovery regarding internal executive branch communications." The Supreme Court sent the case back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit for more proceedings. Chief Justice John Roberts temporarily paused the district court's order last month, which allowed the Supreme Court more time to consider the Trump administration's bid for emergency relief. A district judge had ordered DOGE to turn over documents to the group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, by June 3, and for Gleason's deposition to be completed by June 13. The underlying issue in the case involves whether DOGE is subject to the Freedom of Information Act. CREW argues that the cost-cutting task force wields "substantial independent authority," which makes it a de facto agency that must comply with federal public records law. The Justice Department, however, disagrees and instead claims that DOGE is a presidential advisory body housed within the Executive Office of the President that makes recommendations to the president and federal agencies on matters that are important to Mr. Trump's second-term agenda. DOGE's agency status was not before the Supreme Court, though the high court may be asked to settle that matter in the future. Instead, the Trump administration had asked the justices to temporarily halt a district court's order that allowed CREW to gather certain information from DOGE as part of its effort to determine whether the task force is an advisory panel that is outside FOIA's scope or is an agency that is subject to the records law. The judge overseeing the dispute, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper, had ordered DOGE to turn over certain documents to the watchdog group by June 3 and to complete all depositions, including of Gleason, by June 13. Mr. Trump ordered the creation of DOGE on his first day back in the White House as part of his initiative to slash the size of the federal government. Since then, DOGE team members have fanned out to agencies across the executive branch and have been part of efforts to shrink the federal workforce and shutter entities like the U.S. Agency for International Development and the U.S. Institute of Peace. DOGE has also attempted to gain access to sensitive databases kept by the Internal Revenue Service, Social Security Administration and Office of Personnel Management, prompting legal battles. In an effort to learn more about DOGE's structure and operations, CREW submitted an expedited FOIA request to the task force. After it did not respond in a timely manner, CREW filed a lawsuit and sought a preliminary injunction to expedite processing of its records request. The organization argued that DOGE was exercising significant independent authority, which made it an agency subject to FOIA. Cooper granted CREW's request for a preliminary injunction in March and agreed that FOIA likely applies to DOGE because it is "likely exercising substantial independent authority much greater than other [Executive Office of the President] components held to be covered by FOIA." He then allowed CREW to conduct limited information-gathering, which the watchdog group said aimed to determine whether DOGE is exercising substantial authority that would bring it within FOIA's reach. A federal appeals court ultimately declined to pause that order, requiring DOGE to turn over the documents sought by CREW. In seeking the Supreme Court's intervention, Solicitor General D. John Sauer said CREW is conducting a "fishing expedition" into DOGE's activities. He warned that if Cooper's order remains in place, several components of the White House, such as the offices of the chief of staff and national security adviser, would be subject to FOIA. "That untenable result would compromise the provision of candid, confidential advice to the president and disrupt the inner workings of the Executive Branch," Sauer wrote. "Yet, in the decisions below, the court of appeals and district court treated a presidential advisory body as a potential 'agency' based on the persuasive force of its recommendations — threatening opening season for FOIA requests on the president's advisors." But lawyers for CREW told the Supreme Court in a filing that the Justice Department's position "would require courts to blindly yield to the Executive's characterization" of the authority and operations of a component of the Executive Office of the President. They said adopting the Trump administration's approach to DOGE would give the president "free reign" to create new entities within the Executive Office of the President that exercise substantial independent authority but are shielded from transparency laws. "Courts would be forced to blindly accept the government's representations about an EOP unit's realworld operations, unable to test those representations through even limited discovery," CREW's lawyers wrote. "It is that extreme position, not the discovery order, that would 'turn[] FOIA on its head.'"
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Apple Watch 圈圈真的準？美國有研究指 Apple Watch 部份運動數據追蹤表現準度不足
Yahoo購物節，6月2至13日正式舉行！集合全球精選著數的網上大型購物節：波鞋低至36折、手袋低至4折、自助餐半價、旅遊產品買一送一等，更有獨家優惠為您而設，把握限時兩星期優惠，1Click買盡全世界！ 早前消委會就發表智能手錶評測報告，強調智能手錶、手環的運動數據都是估算，只適宜作參考之用。其實智能手錶在追蹤不同數據時準度的確存在著誤差。最近美國就有研究指 Apple Watch 於運動時記錄燃燒了多少卡路里的數據，準度並不是想像中的高。 美國密西西比大學的研究人員做了一個關於 Apple Watch 的研究，分析了 56 數據得出一個整合分析，並以 Apple Watch 每一項的表現都與標準的醫療級工具進行了比較。結果顯示 Apple Watch 於測量心率及步數方面極大部份情況下是準確的。研究人員指，測心率與步數的平均絕對百分比誤差（即衡量準確度的標準指標）分別為 4.43% 與 8.17%，然而估算燃燒了卡路里數據表現就達 27.96%。對於一般大眾買到的穿戴式裝置而言，低於 10% 的誤差值表現已被視為「十分優秀」，但研究團隊測試 Apple Watch 在走路、跑步、混合強度訓練和踩單車等多種活動中計算用戶燃燒了多少卡路里的數據時，卻發現其估算值大幅超出可接受範圍。 不過研究人員同時指出，這個數據本身就相當難以估算，因為涉及許多變數如體重及運動方式等等。因此，不要把每個數字都當作 100% 準確，而是可當成其中一種鼓勵的工具，達至恆常運動、保持追蹤習慣並維持動力。團隊還指出，目前 Apple Watch 的準確度已提高了不少，顯示蘋果在硬體及演算法方面都在逐步改進，而指出弱點可幫助開發者獲得更真實的回應建議，協助他們進一步研究，以製出更好的感應器或演算法，提升智能手錶追蹤健康數據的表現。 更多內容： 9to5mac 消委會試智能手錶運動偵測，Garmin 最貴最高分，一款千元級高評分！Apple、Samsung、華為各有高低 智能手錶推薦 2025 | Apple、三星、Garmin 如何選？三鐵、跑山、單車各有不同，睇清楚點揀！ 緊貼最新科技資訊、網購優惠，追隨 Yahoo Tech 各大社交平台！ 🎉📱 Tech Facebook： 🎉📱 Tech Instagram： 🎉📱 Tech WhatsApp 社群： 🎉📱 Tech WhatsApp 頻道： 🎉📱 Tech Telegram 頻道：
Yahoo
39 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Apple reportedly ditching its OS naming system for something more... confusing?
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. Quick Summary Apple is set to rip up the copybook when it comes to the names of its new OS updates. Industry sources claim the next iOS will be called iOS 26. Apple's other operating systems will follow suit, it is said. If you own an Apple device you'll likely be au fait with the company's OS naming system. We're currently on variants of iOS 18, iPadOS 18, tvOS 18, etc, and iOS 19 and we're fully expecting iOS 19 and its equivalents to be announced during WWDC in a couple of weeks. However, it turns out we could be very wrong. It is claimed that Apple is set to shake-up the naming convention for the software coming to its best iPhones and other devices. And rather than simplify things, it could be more baffling than ever. Bloomberg's resident Apple expert, Mark Gurman, has reported that Apple will switch to yearly identifiers from this year's OS updates. However, much like EA does with its annual EA Sports games, it'll opt for the forthcoming year, not the current one. According to "people with knowledge of the matter", that means we'll get iOS 26, iPadOS 26, macOS 26, watchOS 26, tvOS 26 and visionOS 26 this year, while next year will see iOS 27 release, and so on. The software will be the same as the rumoured iOS 19, etc, but the name will be different. Of course, once we get into the swing of it, it'll make sense. And we get why Apple would want to use the proceeding year rather than current one, considering each OS is likely to release towards the end of 2025 (in September). However, it could make it particularly confusing when scanning through app compatibility, for example. The jump from 19 to 26 leaves quite a gap for the uninitiated. It's also been pointed out just how Samsung this all seems. Samsung has, since 2020, named its flagship Android phones after years – although as they launch in February or March, they use the current date. The Samsung Galaxy S25 family is the latest, therefore. It doesn't do so with its software though, with One UI 8 (based on Android 16) set to be its next big phone OS release. We'll find out more about the new naming structure on 9 June during during Apple's WWDC 25 opening keynote (or should that be 26?).
