Apple Intelligence: Is AI an opportunity or a curse?

Does the rise of artificial intelligence represent more of an opportunity for the world — or a curse? Because for all the clamor about boosted productivity and enhanced human potential, there’s also the rising demand for energy, processor power, memory requirements and ever more bloat on the machine.

Just look at Apple Intelligence, which now demands almost twice as much data storage on your devices than was originally advertised.

I fear that’s the thin end of this cursed wedge. And it’s not as though storage is the only demand AI makes. 

AI is a greedy beast

Apple has been forced to roll out major hardware changes to support Apple Intelligence:

Memory: Apple has increased base memory across all of its machines. Macs, iPhone, and iPads all now ship with much more memory than before, boosting manufacturing costs.

Processor: Apple has really pushed the boat out on processors in its latest hardware. The company effectively raised everyone up an extra grade during the last 18 months as it primed its ecosystem for Apple Intelligence with new, faster, more energy-efficient processors.

Energy efficiency: Not only is Apple Silicon more energy efficient, but the company wants to give its devices more energy capacity. To do so, it is expected to shift to silicon-anode cells over the next 12 months. These hold around 15% more energy, which will be useful for the energy demands of edge AI.

Server infrastructure: Reflecting its realization that not every task can be accomplished on edge devices, Apple has now re-entered the server market, introducing its own take on secure server-based cloud computing services, Private Cloud Compute.

Apple isn’t alone in any of this, but its actions highlight the extent of the hundreds of billions being spent on the sector today — costs that extend into essential infrastructure resources such as water, rare resources, and energy supply. All of this costs enterprises money, focus, and time. The rewards? Even OpenAI, arguably the doyen of AI tech, is shedding cash faster than it makes it, even on its priciest $200-per-month ChatGPT Pro plan.

What need does the greed feed?

Right now, all we really seem to be experiencing is more targeted ads placement, email and website summaries, stupid pictures in messages, deep employment insecurity, rising energy costs, and an increasingly homogenized trade in optimized job resumes, press releases, and student exam papers. Oh, and don’t forget the fake video influencers hawking their wares on heavily AI-SEO’d social media.

We’re sold on potential, but may yet wind up with little more than a smarter search engine and a deeply intrusive invasion of privacy. Fantasia or dystopia? Even Elon Musk seems unsure, warning of the perils of AI at one point, only to introduce his own AI model later on. 

The hype is unavoidable at this week’s Consumer Electronic Show (CES), where AI is going to appear in some form across all the exhibit stands. Everyone and anyone who can link their product up to some form of AI service will do so. 

As is usual, some of the claims will turn out to be vaporware, while other combinations won’t really deliver much tangible benefit. To invent an example, do we really need an AI tool to order groceries toward personalized dinner plans it builds based on what it knows about our plans that week? Or do we just need a recipe book and a takeaway menu? 

What about the consequences of this kind of data being weaponized by AI? How is the information that AI gathers stored, who else can access it, and what control over it do we have? Do we really need dodgy surveillance-as-a-service firms to be able to identify information about us that they can then use to send convincingly authentic AI-targeted and developed phishing attacks to gain access to our digital lives? How well thought through are the solutions rapidly appearing on the table, and how much consideration has gone into weighing the potential consequences?

Behind the hype

Am I being unfair? 

I’m certain there are AI proponents who think the potential of what we are investing in far outweighs the risks. But there are always people prepared to make such claims. Right now, for most of us (even with Apple Intelligence), the hype, hoop-la, and costs haven’t yet delivered on the clamor. The rest of us watching tech bros snicker and smile on their shiny AI cavalcade remain to be convinced.

With that in mind, it seems a slow and steady approach to AI deployment could end up being the King’s Gambit in the game. Rather than chasing the evangelists, the industry should focus on putting solutions together that deliver genuine benefit, rather than simply looking good in headlines, (whoever writes them). We need to see true and tangible improvements to foster trust, and if the people behind them genuinely believe AI will drive future hardware sales, they’ll make sure their AI solutions do just that.

Or fail. 

You can follow me on social media! Join me on BlueSky,  LinkedIn, Mastodon, and MeWe.