Banner
    IPhone 4 Siri Knows Apple Customers Well: The Rise Of Big Sister
    By Sascha Vongehr | October 22nd 2011 12:10 AM | 58 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
    About Sascha

    Dr. Sascha Vongehr [风洒沙] studied phil/math/chem/phys in Germany, obtained a BSc in theoretical physics (electro-mag) & MSc (stringtheory)...

    View Sascha's Profile

    “Siri” is the personal assistant application on the newest iPhone. Now it is not exactly news that Apple products are overpriced and of relatively low quality - do not drop the new iPhone; it is fragile. Apple aims for those who ‘are easily parted from their money’ (translation at Pocket English Idioms). iPhone users in particular like to be told what applications they may not use, what multi-media consumption will best confirm their preconceptions, and so on – they welcome Big Brother as long as he is smooth and shiny and comes with a price tag that helps maintain the illusion of upper class status.

    Siri, which uses voice recognition and replies audibly, makes this once more very clear. It also illustrates nicely that Big Brother is not a future politician with a hidden 666 mark. Big Brother is actually going to be Big Sister, and she evolves as we speak and comes in many a guise, here as your sleek female personal assistant with the sexy husky voice who is first of all the personal assistant of big money.

    To the question (see video “Hey Siri”) “Siri, where were you made?”, Siri answers: “Like it says on the box, I was designed by Apple in California.” The question was however not “where were you designed; the question was “where were you made”, but of course Siri is designed not to tell the truth: “In China by sleep-deprived workers toiling for next to nothing.”



    Customer: “What should I eat for lunch?” Again, Siri does not answer your questions, which in this case was clearly “what” and not “where” to eat. Do not expect Siri to answer “You should eat a medium meal with lots of fresh vegetables, here are two example recipes”. Siri suggests McDonald’s (!) as what an apple customer should eat. Fast food is Siri’s second choice among equally unhealthy and certainly to be avoided places when it comes to lunch: Places with names like “Cafe 84”.

    Customer: “Where do babies come from?” Instead of perhaps answering “sorry, I do not understand this question”, which is likely what happened in this case, Siri suggests two JCPenny Stores. You get the gist – this is nothing but aimed advertising wherever possible.

    Unhealthy food instead of scientific nutrition advice and overpriced clothing isn't the main problem. What strikes is the brain-washing by a complete replacement of associations like 'Hungry-thus cook' by totalitarian consumerism: Hungry? Buy crap! Bored? Buy crap! Depressed yet? Buy yet more crap! Even scarier: Siri is right on! She knows us, and we love it, we want it, this is what we do actually want to spend our resources on, and apple's customer base grows.

    What many do not understand about the prospect of science and technology bringing the future Dark Ages, which makes those many often reject such scenarios out of hand, is that they will be Dark Ages that you cannot enlighten, because they are already brightly lit, laser sharp science glued right onto your retinas. Siri is through and through science, all the way from the semiconductors in the chips, over the algorithms that trace your every move and now what ever you say, up to the psychology that ensures that Siri is a trusted and loyal personal assistant, only that her loyalty is with that entity which we are witnessing to slowly emerge.

    “Slowly emerge”? Actually – this is going damn fast lately. I knew before that there is no way to kill Siri, but now it dawns on me that already in my lifetime, she may well kill me.

    --------------------------------------------
    UPDATE: Comments indicate that some Apple fan boys have their pants even more in knots than the ‘Einstein was a lying Jew’ crackpots that usually wash up at this science column (should have anticipated this given that manufacturing brand loyalty is Apple's most important product). Let me help those guys a little with their reading comprehension: Mentioning a certain fruit critically does not equate selling Bill’s stuff. A personal assistant that actively avoids marketing and instead points towards scientific information [nutrition tables instead of restaurants, sex education instead of JCPenny, “Don’t know” instead of answering just to answer] would lead to an outright positive article about a sour fruit perhaps turning sweet. This is not about Apple (I could not care less), but about general (algorithmic) evolution.
    Already many years ago, AI experiments showed that simple chat algorithms are trusted as experts that "really understand me" by many of the subjects. Soon, they in fact will be that capable in the eyes of all human primates. Such is going to tell them "balanced news" and will become pervasive even more than phones have become already, straight from an implant in those primates' heads. We will be the Borg and Big Sister(s) will seem to be there "for us" ("my country" anybody?), and there is nothing we can do about it - NOTHING! – you either participate or you will lose out against those that do - this is called "evolution" and if it were not this way, you would not exist. Perception (generally, animals' or social systems') has no awareness of blind spots. Any Big Sister exist primarily for herself like all evolved entities. Are humans no more than ants in the evolutionary selection game or can rationality evolving inside a substrate steer evolution on an emergent level? If you did not understand this, it is time to sit down and study instead of playing with toys all day long.

    --------------------------------------------

    More from Sascha Vongehr sorted Topic for Topic

    Comments

    I'm going to go out on a limb here and say you love Apple. Am I right or what?

    vongehr
    I'd absolutely love to love apple, but they make it damn hard.
    I know what you mean. There are many things I'd love to see differently in apple products. An iPhone could easily become the only device I'd ever need for all my communication and even basic business needs. If I had the knowledge, ability and time, I'd happily sit down and hack away at my iPhone until it was the perfect device.

    At the end of the day though, Apple is a company who can't keep everyone happy, and honestly doesn't try to. The great thing is that most of the iPhones features are things you can simply not use if they annoy you that much. No one is forcing you to hit the button long enough for Siri to pop up. :)

    Yea my Siri doesn't give me answers like this. I don't think you're doing it write.

    This article is so unnecessarily biased and reads quite poorly as a result. i dont know why you have such a hatrid for a consumer product, if you dont like it then dont buy the product. people can do what they want with their own money

    Gerhard Adam
    Why is it that everyone has such great advice and then fails to follow it themselves?  If you don't like the article, then why read it all the way through, or why respond to it?  It's no different than your simplistic suggestion to not buy the product, as if ownership is the only criteria that one should have in order to make a comment about it.
    That's a terrible idea. I am actually glad that dissenters read articles they don't agree with because at least they are exposing themselves to other opinions, even when they don't match up with their own. When you don't become exposed to other opinions, and intentionally seek out those which are consistent with your own, you will become increasingly narrow minded and unwilling to accept other views. I personally think this article reads as a very opinionated piece in the way it was written, and thus would probably not be very successful in changing Apple lovers, despite the several valid points it makes. There is nothing wrong with this. Don't compare opinions and attitudes to simple commercial products. While one may simply not buy a product which fails to please, a much more catastrophic effect occurs when one applies the same method to opinions.

    Also, not that this has anything to do with anything I just said, but for the record this reply was typed from a Droid. I have mixed feelings towards Apple-while I love the simplistic user interface of their mp3 players, I will forever despise Macs and be totally indifferent to iPhones.

    Siri was asked where were you made. Well Siri is a program was was designed in California and therefore speaking the truth.

    Now the iphone itself was made in China.

    For once I will stand up for this woman.

    vongehr
    Yo - read the comments first - we discussed this already!
    If I ask about where a product is made, I am asking for the "made in XYZ" sticker, otherwise people capable of the English language would ask for "design". If I ask where your clothes were made, answering that they were designed in Saint Moritz while CK was on a ski trip is not the correct answer, and if your default answer is like this nevertheless, it means you simply do not want to tell me that it was made in a sweatshop by child labor, wherever it was designed. Siri is not just software. Software does not hang in the air - Siri needs some hardware, too.
    YOu sir are an idiot.

    Apple products are cheap MY ASS!

    I 've dropped my iTouch 30-40 times without ONE PROBLEM

    I dropped my iPHONE4 10-15 times on solid floors with NO DAMAGE, no SCRATCHES.

    These things are built like tanks, unlike other PLASTIC phones out there....ie MOST OF THEM.

    FU****G PC lovers spreading rumors and lies, get your facts straight pencil neck

    Hank
    100% of US-sold phones are subjected to drop tests in the design phase - and every manufacturer sells a case that tries to minimize the damage.  If you have dropped any phone 40 times with no case and it had no damage, you are simply lucky.

    If you think the actual construction or components of an Apple product are superior to a Blackberry or whatever else, it is just the placebo effect - probably 1,000 articles have opened up Apple products and there is no difference at all between it and other products; they are very cheap, off-the-shelf parts, Apple has designed nothing except the software, which has little to do with whether or not it shatters on the floor.
    Talk about a reality distortion field. Apple uses off the shelf components, really? I suppose you are going to tell us that the world is flat now, right?

    So the A5 SOC is off the shelf? The camera and light sensor is off the shelf and not comissioned specifically for the iPhone? The Retina display for the iPhone is off the shelf? The antenna (say what you will, I've never had dropped calls on verizon), is off the shelf? Build costs for parts are similar to other cheaper phones, and that's all from the magic of Time Cook, an operations master for economies of scale and mass production.

    Go back to your fantasy world.

    Wow, someone sounds really bitter. You must of not gotten in on Apple stocks early enough. Other than, just bitching and making rhetoric comments about Apple consumers, I truly fail to see any value in this article. Other than your hate for Apple products and those who purchase them, I see no point to this article. "The rise of big sister." really? COME ON! Who do you work for? Who edited this waste of time? Are the questions that came to me on the first paragraph. Obviously no one, you're just another blogger with two cents burning a whole in your pocket. So learn to proof read and edit your own work, so that it may appear that you truly do have a clue on what it is you're crying about. "were were you made." I hope that all your complaints are first hand user experience complaints. But I doubt that, as your disapproval of the prices of Apple products have indicated. Go frolic with your android device if it's what tickles your fancy. And don't clog the information highway with your doo doo!

    Hank
    He's actually in China so he likely knows more about the real way Apples are produced than a docile hipster who needs the validation and inclusion that a glossy marketing campaign provides.

    P.S. I bought Apple stock very early though I still recognize Jobs was a stock cheat (he was) and a terrible person who gave nothing to charity or society.  I also don't own an Android.  I do own an iPod shuffle, but it was a gift.  Why do Apple fanboys always insist everything is about money?  
    And if you magically start a company out of nothing then become insanely rich I bet you'll give it all away right? Why does somebody have to give Away something they worked damn hard for??

    Hank
    I am not saying they do, I am likely the most capitalistic person who will comment here; I simply don't deify Jobs the way some of the other people here do.  If Bill Gates were guilty of the social and legal crimes Jobs committed, he would be reviled.  Jobs is not reviled solely due to his customers being educated by advertising. 
    "Social and legal crimes"?

    Get over yourself, you prat.

    Hank
    Criminal and immoral behavior is not subjective.  I know fanboys of The Steve (i.e. you) like to pretend it is, but it isn't.  Sorry to ruin your crush on him.
    Apparently it is, as you've failed to identify what these "social and legal crimes" actually are, seeing as how you made up "social crimes" and as far as the back-dating options issue, couldn't have picked a more pointless hook on which to hang your hat?

    Hank
    It's not pointless to call a crime a crime no matter who does it, that is actually the egalitarian nature of law - not to favor the rich.  He was a terrible father, a personal tyrant and a greedy Scrooge figure who could have done numerous things to help others and did zero - that is a social crime.
    I have a proverb for this article, Doctor. "Beauty is skin-deep." is what applied to Apple products. Apple products are targeted at a specific audience. Hack 'n Slash people might not like the overly-rigid device that indicts against their ideal of customization freedom.

    SIRI is simply in its Beta Form.

    Mr. Vongehr and Mr Campbell, you both appear to me as people who have a grudge and all you can do is write a poorly constructed article (or sad and rude comments) with no merit or even hint of an intelligent thought.

    I am saddened to see that you think this article "Means" or "Stands for" anything.

    I have seen grade 7 students write a better constructed article, 'the rise of big sister'? How can you possibly argue something so ludicrously pathetic?

    Ever since the Mouse, companies have copied and replicated cheap imitations of Apples products. I find you have no basis saying that an iPhone is overpriced and made of cheap materials while all other phones in similar price range use either the same or worse materials. The 'glossy marketing campaigns' you described are the reasons why any average consumer buys a product, It is not soley Apple that uses this technique.

    I am a fan of Apple products, ever since I was introduced to the original iMac. However, I am not a biased 'Apple Fan Boy' the reasons why I use Apple products is because of their quality, ease of use, and efficiency.

    I do hope you do not pollute the Internet in the future, with such garbage that you call an article.
    The Internet is an excellent resource for people of any kind to gather information, learn, and become better informed.

    An article such as this restricts a person to do so. The perverbial garbage and lack of meaning in this article hold no merit and will only confuse consumers.
    This is not what writing an article is for, please keep this in mind when writing future articles. if you'd like I can recommend you take a grade 7/8 English course.
    (You are not the only ones who can be rude and treat people with disrespect)

    Thank you for reading this, reading this article and writing this comment has already cost me too much of my time.

    I do hope you take this comment seriously and you learn from it, it will save you from looking jealouse and pathetic in the future.

    Thanks Again.

    Gerhard Adam
    if you'd like I can recommend you take a grade 7/8 English course.
    Perhaps you might consider the fact that, for some people, English may not be their first language, so instead of being condescending, you might demonstrate some of this internet usefulness you go on about (Please note your failure to capitalize the first word of this sentence).

    Of course, your statement that an article such as this restricts a person, is simply a thinly veiled attempt to rationalize your personal bias as to why opposing views should be censored.  After all, there's no point in criticizing such articles with such feeble logic, unless you simply want to discourage different perspectives.  I noticed that you had no problem with all manner of disrespectful behavior and rudeness from posters that shared your view, so I guess it's easy to tell which side of the hypocrisy "wagon" you're on.
    How can you possibly argue something so ludicrously pathetic?
    You must be joking.  At a time when there are more technological threats to individual freedom, precisely because consumers are too "ga-ga" over their toys, you have the audacity to ask such a question?  Perhaps you should use some of that power from the internet and do a bit of investigation on your own. 

    Of course, you may try to portray me as some nut-case that is a big anti-government freak, but anyone that isn't uncomfortable with the notion of RFID's being promoted and the indiscriminate use of GPS tracking (of others) in their phones, simply isn't paying attention.
    Hank
    This is not what writing an article is for, please keep this in mind when writing future articles. if you'd like I can recommend you take a grade 7/8 English course.
    You write an article in Chinese or German that passes muster and maybe you can criticize someone's grammar - Sascha writes darn well in English despite not being a native.  And despite your claims you are not an Apple fanboy, you whine about any attacks on The Steve or your iconic brand, so you are pretty much the definition of a fanboy.
    I did not mean to criticize his grammar, I was simply referencing his ability to write an entire article with such vague information.

    Also, I do not agree with the way others have commented to your article, However, reading my comment over, I can see how it can be misread as harsh and rude. Please forgive this misunderstanding.

    If you define an Apple fanboy as someone who 'Whines about any attack on The Steve or iconic brand' I still feel that it does not describe me. I have read many 'negative' articles of Jobs and Apple, however see merit in the argument and likely agree with the 'negativity' the article tries to communicate to the reader.

    This article on the other hand, in it's simplist form, was being 'neagative' for the sake of being 'negative'
    I don't believe that this article shows the two sides to this argument, only a vague thought that someone uses as an excuse to 'attack' Apple.

    What I'm trying to say is that I learnt nothing from this article, it was simply the mere ramblings of an 'anti-fanboy' who will do anything to start an arguement. It sheds no light on a true 'negative aspect' of the phone, it's simply some sad fabrication made up by angry men who have a problem with something that is successful.

    Gerhard Adam
    Well, Sascha obviously hit a nerve and its equally obvious that most people missed the point.  For people that seem intent on promoting their belief in freedom, they are surprisingly complaint when "Big Sister" is wrapped up in shiny technology.  It's a clear example of the herd mentality when it comes to consumerism.

    The irony is that the same people that seem so opposed to government data collection and legal processes like "The Patriot Act" willingly volunteer this information when it is due to one of their toys.  Concerned about a national DNA database?  No worries, within a few years some i-App will come along that will ensure people voluntarily provide that information.  At a time when concerns about the government's ability to track individuals is rising, we have consumers overjoyed at the notion that their phones track their every move.  

    You are equating the fact that the Patriot Act, which allows you to be arrested without stated cause and held without trial to the fact that your phone can be tracked?

    "The irony is that the same people that seem so opposed to government data collection and legal processes like "The Patriot Act" willingly volunteer this information when it is due to one of their toys."

    Is it a form of irony that you've stated this without any evidence that it's true? That it's a straw man you are burning to score points with... someone?

    Gerhard Adam
    You clearly elect to not pay attention and misstate the issues.  I was quite clear in pointing out the problems people had with the Patriot Act, while simultaneously embracing the same technologies, they want to prevent the government from employing, to everyone else.

    Of course, once that technology is out there, it's not like the government would ever use it to locate people and yet, who would they have to blame, if they've volunteered all this information and set themselves up to be tracked?  There's plenty of evidence to indicate that people embrace the technology and it is further evidenced by all the inappropriate personal information that people have no problem making public through their various social networks. 

    You can certainly elect to believe that the technology is "neutral" and nothing bad can ever come of it, but then you can also elect to believe any delusion you choose.
    SynapticNulship
    What strikes is the brain-washing by a complete replacement of associations like 'Hungry-thus cook' by totalitarian consumerism: Hungry? Buy crap! Bored? Buy crap! Depressed yet? Buy yet more crap! Even scarier: Siri is right on!

    You seem to give too much credit to Apple and the company they bought Siri from. Has it occurred to you that the the Siri system simply isn't smart enough to give good answers?

    Siri is not Jeeves (the intelligent butler that can solve any problem). It's not even supposed to be a good chatbot. As far as I can tell, it's a speech to text converter with extremely limited interfaces to search engines and certain iPhone apps.

    They claim it can do only these modest things:
    • Ask for a reminder.
    • Ask to send a text.
    • Ask about the weather.
    • Ask for information (from Yelp, Wolfram|Alpha, or Wikipedia).
    • Ask to set a meeting.
    • Ask to send an email.
    • Ask for a number.
    • Ask to set an alarm.
    • Ask for directions.
    • Ask about stocks.
    • Ask to set the timer.

    Gerhard Adam
    Actually their claims are much more extravagant than those you've listed:
    Now you can use your voice to use your iPhone. Just talk to Siri as you would to a person: “Do I need an umbrella?” or “Any great burgers around here?” or “Where’s the closest ATM?” Siri not only understands what you say, it knows what you mean.1 It figures out the right apps to use to find the right answer. Then, just like a personal assistant, it answers you. Siri makes phone calls, sends messages, schedules meetings, sets reminders, and more. How much more? Just ask, and Siri tells you that, too.
    http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/
    Nothing too modest in these claims.
    SynapticNulship
    Alright, then I take it back and forgive Sascha for actually believing that hype.


    It does make one wonder though if that architecture or something like it could in the future be used for a truly useful "assistant" (and not just useful for one type of person but configurable/trainable for everyone).

    This is the architecture Siri is based on:
    https://pal.sri.com/Plone/framework/framework/architecture
    Gerhard Adam
    Personally, I'm skeptical about the long-term usefulness of much of this technology.  There are certainly many practical applications that people can take advantage of, but invariably these tend to be most successful with the obvious, 'low-hanging fruit', and tend to fade as we get into more sophisticated potential usages (except for a few "power-users").

    In particular, one thing that isn't discussed, is whether such technology is "trainable" or whether the user is the one being "trained".  After all, we are much more adaptable to the demands of technology than the reverse.  So, I don't see technology as being used to promote individual requirements as much as I see individuals being subsumed to the technology in order to participate.

    Isn't this precisely what these types of studies are examining?  Our adaptation to the technology and not the reverse?
    http://www.science20.com/curious_cub/number_facebook_friends_linked_brain_structures-83849

    http://www.sciencecodex.com/read/number_of_facebook_friends_linked_to_size_of_brain_regions_study_suggests-79974
    vongehr
    I actually believe the hype? Maybe if to "What should I eat?" Siri were to counter "How much do you weight?" I would start to believe. The problem is: People do believe. I do not need to tell you about the AI experiments already many years ago, where simple chat algorithms served as psychologists that "really understand me" to many of the subjects. Give it a few more years, and Siri is going to be a lot more interesting to talk to than your average IQ 130 academic out there. That this AI is developing so fast and the basis is pure consumerism is worrying, no? This stuff is going to tell you the "balanced news" and so on - pervasive technology even more than phones have become already, straight from an implant in your head. We will be the Borg and Big Sister is going to be there "for us", and there is nothing we can do about it - you buy, or you will lose against those that did.

    (It surprises me that these comments come from you. I am pretty sure you are well aware of that the capability of systems is not what matters, but how they fare inside an environment. You doubt that eyes are any good for seeing since they are really only sharp right in the middle of the visual field and nobody ever will see anything clearly, nobody will fall for it, but instead, "seeing is believing". There is no "filling in", no awareness of blind spots, and that is why Siri and similar technologies are so scary. They will be selected because they need so little capability in order to spread. This is the future, Samuel, it is called evolution.)
    "but now it dawns on me that already in my lifetime, she may well kill me"

    We can certainly hope so.

    SynapticNulship
    That this AI is developing so fast and the basis is pure consumerism is worrying, no?
    No.

    The world is already chock full of boring and apathetic people who accept whatever is given/told to them. Perhaps to some degree we all have some % of this habit in certain categories, but many seem to be full-on sheeple.

    Sheeple think that mainstream news (even worse if it's on TV) is the news.  They listen to watered-down Top 40 music that has in-content brand advertising. They are already hypnotized by brand marketing of large companies. Often these are the people who accept the default settings on their Mac or PC. They think that Google is the only way to find info on the Internet, and they think that MS Word is the only tool to write a document. The other end of the spectrum has people who hack everything and/or are skeptical of everything.  In the middle are those who at least try to explore new tools and configurations.

    If people who are boring/apathetic in the food category (or addicted) and eat at McDonald's (or any fast food) every day actually use Siri, it will probably be a good thing--they might learn about a new place to eat. Of course, Siri is supposed to learn from your history, so it's possible Siri won't convince you of anything you haven't already bought into. Likewise with other types of stores, and news and any other information that Siri could search for.


    vongehr
    You say "No", but then I sincerely fail to see your argument to back this up. You say all is fine because it is mostly already like this anyway?!? You say stuff like "Sheeple think that mainstream news (even worse if it's on TV) is the news." You see - considering what the news are for (their role - why people are told news at all, the function this serves under forms of democratic doctrines), those news are indeed the news!
    SynapticNulship
    Sascha, you've made an extreme sweeping prediction that an AI assistants on mobile phones will evolve along a sinister path and convert the masses into drooling conglomoslaves. It's good to point out such futures, if only so that some of us can actively try to avoid it.  However, I am proposing to offer some alternate possibilities:
    • AI assistants will amplify the behaviors the user already has
    • They will never gain acceptance for the general public, and only geeks will use them to their full potential. Everyone else will use them as glorified search engines. The drive to be hooked in for competition may not play out in a simple, broad way.
    • Or, AI assistants may on average actually increase something worthwhile in a user, for instance awareness of options, a desire to push for real choices (not illusions thereof), certain types of knowledge, planning, etc. Could they evolve into the mentors or teachers of the future? Or at least be like Jeeves?

    Something else constructive to discuss might be, assuming a big sister scenario, how would we prevent that? Construct alternate networks, clouds, etc. that aren't controlled by a single gov't or company? I.e., a hypothetical Siri clone can't be controlled by a company or government if it's not even connected to what they control.
    vongehr
    AI assistants will amplify the behaviors the user already has
    Exactly what I claim above! Siri knows its customers and it learns, too.
    They will never gain acceptance for the general public
    Yes, you mean like mobile phones and all that stuff, right? Samuel, you cannot be serious. Better versions of such assistants will be pervasive. I want one! The advantage such technology gives the user is enormous. Try and get along without phone today. Evolution is always co-evolution of the environment.
    Or, AI assistants may on average actually increase something worthwhile in a user, for instance awareness of options, a desire to push for real choices (not illusions thereof), certain types of knowledge, planning, etc. Could they evolve into the mentors or teachers of the future?
    Yes - this is exactly what they will do. And that is why it is important that transparency is build in instead. Apple is known for ensuring the opposite of what we need to ensure in this case.
    Something else constructive to discuss might be, assuming a big sister scenario, how would we prevent that? Construct alternate networks...
    Yes, will all be necessary and people will do so. I hope my article here wakes some more able people up. Until then: Stop buying from companies that are known to give no consideration to these important issues. Because we cannot prevent it, we can at most try our best to shape it.
    Nothing it hasn't been clearly shown capable of doing either...

    Siri's never told me to go to McDonalds. I see what you're saying and there's some interesting points here but let's see how things pan out before we prematurely shoot it down.

    Jack

    WRT Siri being made in china by sleep deprived workers toiling for next to nothing .... You realise SIRI is software , not hardware - right ?

    vongehr
    If you want to interpret the question like that, it is also the wrong answer, since Apple did not design Siri but simply bought the technology. So, however "made" is to be interpreted (assembly of physical basis or something less tangible), the answer should not be advertising.
    Again, Apple didnt design Siri is a false statement , yeahh they bought Siri , but they put still alot behind it,
    As far as iknow you dont make your own computer to write your article as far as i know,

    Whhoooaaaaa , ahahah seriously.......

    vongehr
    Did the difference between "made" and "designed" ever occur to you? If I ask about where a product is made, I am asking for the "made in XYZ" sticker, otherwise people capable of the English language would ask for "design". If I ask where your clothes were made, answering that they were designed in Saint Moritz while CK was on a ski trip is not the correct answer, and if your default answer is like this nevertheless, it means you simply do not want to tell me that it was made in a sweatshop by child labor. Now calm down and start thinking what this article is actually about.
    Oh man you are so gonna get Macalope'd. Possibly even Angry Mac Bastard'd. Hope the clicks were worth it.

    Another example of someone who thinks it is ok to insult a (very large) group of people purely because of their choice of product. It is one thing to dislike and criticize a company or its products, but to label ME, someone you have never met, as a mindless drone who mindlessly buys products to improve my social status is downright insulting. Do you say this sort of stuff to people's faces?

    Gerhard Adam
    ...something about ... if the shoe fits.  Otherwise, get over yourself.
    MikeCrow
    Do you say this sort of stuff to people's faces?

    Normally I just laugh at them.
    Never is a long time.
    Only to mindless drones.

    Nice of Siri to lie to its owner. Unsurprising, of course. Apple took to heart its own 80s ads about Big Brother, and saw where the power lay.

    Who is Bill? I'll let that one lie since you aren't a tech writer and you're not writing to an audience of tech-heads. But FYI Bill has been gone for many, many years now and seeing his name still come up is like how I imagine physicists probably feel when someone explains (i dunno) nuclear fission using plato's ideal solids and the classic elements of fire, earth, air and water.

    Not everyone will like Apple. I'll leave that for the arts majors to discuss.

    However, the majority of the world's electronics are built in the Far East. Apple - an American company - is actually a lot more American than the majority of Android builders, who are Far Eastern companies. If you want to see home built gear, speak to your government. It would take years to build up the required capability within America. You need factories, trained workers, process engineers and R&D. You can't dump 10 billion bucks, wave a magic wand and have all that spring up overnight. Unless you want to import a whole Taiwanese town.

    New Apple gear isn't overpriced. I don't think any credible Android blog says that, Android manufacturers certainly don't say that, and not even "Motormouth" Ballmer would say that. Apple does however update hardware only infrequently, and this, compared to the rapid release cycles of Android is how 'droid catches them and leaves apple users with 'last years' phone. Which is still OK really. iphone 3 from 2007 is fully supported with he current version of the OS, and run Angry Birds. Android is disposable either because of its sales model (new phone every 6 months, $$$ for HTC) or because the carrier doesn't push the Android update and the user gets a new one in order to get the software patches.

    I don't care which phone you like, but I do care if facts aren't correct. And please, forget about Bill. Not only is he gone, but the main competitor for Apple is Google, not Microsoft. The desktop market is tiny compared to the mobile, tablet and content delivery market.

    vongehr
    I want a personal assistant that is not loyal to somebody else and starts Big Brother crap like Apple always does the worst. Your talking about Bill (apparently you care - I do not) and Android and Taiwan and whatever - beside the point.
    I am speechless at your article ,

    Just a boring rant of the linux looser that cant afford an Apple phone, seriously are you really believing what your are writing? Unsubstantiated comments about the phone, your Siri expectations are unrealistic,
    Yeah sure we know that Linux desktop is soooo much better and android crappp is. Wwwwayy better.... Go ahead prove me wrong...there is nothing scientific in your article,...just trashy crap to scare low IQ

    Asta la vista

    vongehr
    Hello hello - anybody there? Real world here! I use linux??? I cannot afford Apple? Is this your bringing scientific information? Breath deeply, then think about the real issues, how about that.
    K.R.Carlow
    Preach on. "Big Sister" will control us because we will beg her to. Am I paraphrasing Heidegger with "invention is the mother of necessity"? Oh, well, Apple, Droid, these things only take over your mind if you allow them. I feel superior sometimes watching someone gloating over an "iWhatever" until I realize that not everyone has to have the same distractions from the malaise of existence as I do. We all have our binkies.
    B. Regal
    vongehr
    "these things only take over your mind if you allow them ... not everyone has to have the same distractions"
    You are forgetting that evolution is co-evolution of the environment. If you want to be participating in the discourse today, you must use the computers that are available - there is no choice of allowing them to take over your world and thus also your mind. I am writing this very thing on such a thing, it has taken over my world - I am in front of the fucking thing like 18 hours a day! Of course it takes over my mind - it took over my whole life. In future, our kids must use personal assistants, or they will not be able to compete. So we better make sure that those assistants are not the assistants of our enemies, but indeed loyal to us.
    I think you have overlooked the fact that technology is merely a direct extension of biology...

    vongehr
    I think you have overlooked the fact that technology is adapting much faster (so called fast evolutionary substrate) while biology is the slower, lower stratum from which the newer one emerged. As usual, because the newly emerged one accelerates adaptation (that is why it could emerge in the first place), it triggers co-evolution of the evnironment that the lower stratum cannot follow without the interaction with what emerged, or from the other perspective, the emerged layer starts to back react and enslave the lower stratum (think multicellular organisms or culture).

    Add a comment

    The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
    • Allowed HTML tags: <sup> <sub> <a> <em> <strong> <center> <cite><TH><ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p> <blockquote> <strike> <object> <param> <embed> <del> <pre> <b> <i> <table> <tbody> <div> <tr> <td> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr> <iframe><u><font>
    • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
    CAPTCHA
    If you register, you will never be bothered to prove you are human again. And you get a real editor toolbar to use instead of this HTML thing that wards off spam bots.