I am still not quite sure how this would affect my day-to-day (private) payment experience transaction cost etc.
But is has strategic value for Europe:
> [...] European dependencies in critical technologies. A digital euro could mitigate these developments in the medium term if the infrastructure is mainly operated by European companies and if European payment service providers manage to achieve a leading position in the evolving ecosystem for digital euro services.
Well they already know me. I make about one small payment per quarter in cash, everything else via phone, card or bank transfer.
So I don’t see the day-to-day difference with digital euro, except that the backend seems to have fewer intermediaries (and maybe lower cost for the merchant?). Also it would work in more than one country which is good.
They certainly make the EU regulators sound unfriendly (and counterproductive on privacy). Can someone with DMA legal knowledge translate and separate the spin?
> Siri AI is private by design and deeply integrated across Apple’s platforms using on-device processing and Private Cloud Compute, which extends the privacy and security of iPhone into the cloud. However, under EU regulators’ extreme interpretation of the DMA, Apple would have to give any virtual assistant direct access to users’ private data — and the ability to directly control other installed applications — as soon as Siri AI is made available in the EU, without the essential protections necessary to keep users and their data safe.
> According to EU regulators, the DMA requires Apple to give any AI system nearly unlimited access to a user’s device, as well as the ability to act on that access autonomously without a user’s ongoing visibility and control. That includes the ability to read and send messages, make purchases, access files, and execute actions across any app. Security researchers have already shown that AI systems can be hijacked to steal personal data — like passwords and photos — and to permanently alter files and account settings without a user’s consent. As AI systems gain more capabilities, these risks are quickly increasing in frequency and scope.
> Can someone with DMA legal knowledge translate and separate the spin?
The EU wants third-party providers to have access to the same features and UX that Siri has. When Apple says "the DMA requires Apple to give any AI system nearly unlimited access [...] That includes the ability to read and send messages, make purchases, access files, and execute actions across any app." they conveniently leave out that Apple's own AI has those abilities, which is what the DMA regulates against.
Right, and to be specific, what they also leave out is that the DMA only mandates that third-party providers can request access, the user can be in full control without breaching the rules set by the DMA.
> Can someone with DMA legal knowledge translate and separate the spin?
Apple wants the DMA to be repealed because it endangers their App Store revenue and somehow still thinks they'll be able to co-opt their EU customers as a bargaining chip at this point in time.
It feels like the update cadence has indeed sped up. But not necessarily quality.
Looking at MS Office I notice a lot of small changes recently that are mostly annoying. Things like Word comments losing the focus after you @-tagged a colleague, needing to click the Outlook search field twice before you can enter text, Outlook mobile date picker losing its ability to show your and attendee's availability.
So it looks like lots of throughput, but unfortunately breaking features that work. Or wasting time on things that don’t matter such as the status bar of OneDrive search circling around the input field.
Also worth noting that other index providers are less principled.
> Nasdaq changed its rules recently so SpaceX can join the Nasdaq 100 Index, a cohort of the largest non-financial companies listed on its exchange, in just 15 trading days, down from a three-month minimum. FTSE Russell adopted a similar approach, shortening the waiting time to five trading days
At the target market caps people are talking about, I wouldn't blame anyone who shorts all three: even if you're optimistic about the value of the tech, monetising is hard, and competition reduces profits.
anthropic's products are much better, anthropic and google will win the AI race, we wont even be talking about OpenAI in a few years when they run out of $ or compute and get acquired. They will be remembered by their Wikipedia page(s).
More like its a competition to get the listing -- not dissimilar to Amazon shopping cities for its corporate base. Set up a competition and get the best deal would be my speculation on why it was done (as well as goose the demand).
Yes, it's the same principle that gets you financial advisors who push you into high-fee fund choices that earn them kickbacks. Completely understandable from the PoV of these parties' self-interest, yet entirely contrary to your own self-interest as a customer and investor.
You seem to be confusing "listing" - the stock exchange where a company chooses its stock to trade (i.e. NYSE, AmEx, Nasdaq) with "indexes" - a list of stocks that is often the basis for index funds.
The Nasdaq 100 is not the same as Nasdaq. A company can be in many indexes but only one listing. There may have been competition for the listing but there is not competition between indexes for inclusion.
I am still not quite sure how this would affect my day-to-day (private) payment experience transaction cost etc.
But is has strategic value for Europe:
> [...] European dependencies in critical technologies. A digital euro could mitigate these developments in the medium term if the infrastructure is mainly operated by European companies and if European payment service providers manage to achieve a leading position in the evolving ecosystem for digital euro services.
Some more: https://www.ecb.europa.eu/euro/digital_euro/timeline/profuse...
reply