Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

Here’s how Apple plans to protect privacy and still compete on AI

The technique involves obscuring personal data but still getting the big picture.

A theory has taken hold in tech: Apple’s devotion to privacy will handicap it during the next major wave of computing, where artificial intelligence like voice interaction, personal assistants and automation take center stage.

This morning Apple gave its response: It won’t handicap us, because we can do both.

Apple’s answer? A concept called “differential privacy” — an en vogue statistical method designed to reap useful intel from big piles of data while protecting personally identifying information therein.

It’s a fitting approach. Apple has branded itself as antithetical to Google and Facebook, companies that rely on reams of data. But Apple also wants to provide the perks these companies offer — more smart, personalized services — that require reams of data. Most of the operating system updates Apple introduced on Monday at its developer conference revolve around these perks.

“All of this great work in iOS 10 would be meaningless if it came at the expense of your privacy,” Apple SVP Craig Federighi said onstage.

Apple touted an endorsement from Aaron Roth, a computer scientist who specializes in differential privacy.

But the method is untested with wide use, as it will be across all Apple devices. And some researchers are skeptical of its real world applicability. One legal paper argued that the differential privacy method “will usually produce either very wrong research results or very useless privacy protections.”

So it’s unclear if Apple would be able to deploy the method to deliver its advanced software — or, conversely, really provide the safeguards Apple promises.

Federighi went out of his way to note that Apple doesn’t assemble user profiles and it encrypts communications on iMessage and FaceTime. But its embrace of differential privacy acknowledges the value of data in delivering good software. Apple recognizes that it needs to analyze user behavior to improve the accuracy of its recommendations — the links users choose most often in response to a Spotlight search query, or the emojis that are most popular.

To obscure a person’s identity, the company said it will inject a small amount of “noise,” or randomness, to what the user does — so each little interaction, on its own, is meaningless. But over time, trends will emerge that help improve features, like the QuickType recommendations or the links Spotlight suggests.

Apple also imposes a privacy “budget” on individual users, so it doesn’t recover too much information from any user.

“It’s a powerful technology that allows us to use information from users and still maintain user privacy,” said Apple’s Sebastien Marineau-Mes in remarks during the keynote event.

Still, it’s a relatively new approach. And despite the emphasis on privacy, critics worry whether any amount of shrouding of data is enough to guard private information.

There’s a lot of interest in differential privacy at Microsoft. And Google is experimenting with this approach with its Rappor project, to help identify sites that are likely to infect its Chrome browser with malware.

Cynthia Dwork, a researcher with Microsoft, helped invent this approach and has published on the topic for years. She offered one example: Health researchers conduct a survey to see how many people carry the trait for sickle cell anemia within a particular group.

A straight-ahead data analysis would yield a precise result — say, seven people. But researchers could compromise someone’s privacy — say, the president’s — with a second question: How many people in the group, other than the president, has this inherited trait?

“If you have exact answers to both questions, then you can determine whether or not the president has the sickle cell trait,” said Dwork. “By adding independently generated noise to both answers, we protect the privacy of the president.”

This article originally appeared on Recode.net.

More in Technology

Podcasts
Are humanoid robots all hype?Are humanoid robots all hype?
Podcast
Podcasts

AI is making them better — but they’re not going to be doing your chores anytime soon.

By Avishay Artsy and Sean Rameswaram
Future Perfect
The old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemicThe old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemic
Future Perfect

Glycol vapors, explained.

By Shayna Korol
Future Perfect
Elon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wantsElon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wants
Future Perfect

It’s not about who wins. It’s about the dirty laundry you air along the way.

By Sara Herschander
Life
Why banning kids from AI isn’t the answerWhy banning kids from AI isn’t the answer
Life

What kids really need in the age of artificial intelligence.

By Anna North
Culture
Anthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque messAnthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque mess
Culture

“Your AI monster ate all our work. Now you’re trying to pay us off with this piece of garbage that doesn’t work.”

By Constance Grady
Future Perfect
Some deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapySome deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapy
Future Perfect

A medical field that almost died is quietly fixing one disease at a time.

By Bryan Walsh