Recall the dogs out
Wednesday, June 5, 2024
Comments: 39 (latest 2 days later)
Tagged: recall, microsoft, windows, ai, llms, copilot, stross
You can't sneeze right now without blowing over a "Microsoft's Recall is terrible" headline. The most positive take I've seen is "you might find this useful, but there are privacy concerns". The median take is less than positive. For details, check Kevin Beaumont's post which is the substantive analysis behind the current shouting.
I was struck, though, by Charlie Stross's post this morning, titled "Is Microsoft trying to commit suicide?"
Stross is a sharp writer and a sharp tech observer, and I entirely agree with the body of his missive: that Recall is terrible for many reasons. (Although he misstates that the feature is "impossible to disable". As commenters note, Recall installs default-enabled, but you can disable it in settings.)
But as a thesis statement, I am really not on board. Because the obvious answer is "No." Microsoft is not trying to commit suicide. Microsoft is trying to survive. And it's worth considering what this calamitous self-own tells us about Microsoft's mindset.
Microsoft's dedication to AI-as-a-feature began with the original Github Copilot, announced in 2021. I think it was the first big Github move after Microsoft acquired it. That is, Copilot was a clear signal of Microsoft's priorities as OpenAI's investor and Github's owner.
Since then we've gotten a thundering cascade of "you have to use AI" announcements, either from Microsoft or from the bubble-wave of startups committed to using OpenAI compute time. The rest of the equiv-tech stratum are cranking away on their own AI roadmaps, but they aren't really driving the hype. Apple wants to improve Siri. Google wants to improve Google search (and they're not fixated on AI as the only answer). Facebook has no actual ideas so why not open-source. None of them really seems interested in beating Microsoft to any particular punch.
But Microsoft is behaving like they are. MS acts like they have to be first to market, whatever market it is that Recall serves, and GoogAppleFace are hot on their heels.
Why? Spoiler: I don't know. I don't sneak into Microsoft's board meetings.
Stross suggests "to sell Windows on ARM", but I don't like that answer. ARM-based laptops sell themselves: vastly improved performance, vastly improved battery life, or any tradeoff you like between the two. Apple has been smirking about it since 2020 and Microsoft just needed to catch up, which they now have.
But the point is, it doesn't matter what catastrophe Microsoft sees in the future where they come in second. They think they're doomed without AI. Conventional wisdom is "Azure is doing fine", but maybe that's not true. Maybe it's only true if you factor in sky-high demand for AI compute. Maybe Satya Nadella sits on a Silicon Throne that stabs him in the butt every day that Microsoft isn't a market leader in something. (Windows no longer counts -- OSes are loss leaders now.)
"They think they're doomed" explains a lot about this whole situation. Notably, nobody at Microsoft is allowed to think about the downsides. AI is a bet they cannot hedge. Feature not ready for prime time? We're not delaying it, because this plan cannot fail. AI spews lies and hallucinations? Customers will love it anyway, because this feature cannot fail. Market not materializing? Shut up, yes it will.
Anybody who says otherwise gets ignored or steamrolled. La la la, "...when his salary depends on his not understanding it."
This is not to say that they cannot course-correct. Microsoft wants this stuff to succeed, not to destroy them. I suspect they will improve the security story around Recall. Maybe not by June 18th (the ship date of "Copilot+ PCs"), but over the course of this year.
Will they improve it enough? I have no idea. They have lots of smart engineers. Maybe they'll flex enough to consider a disable-at-install-time option. I don't know how it will shake out.
I expect a lot of corporate policies saying "turn that crap off on your work machine." I certainly will on my Windows box (which runs nothing but Steam anyhow). That's not really the question. The question is what security exploits arise to target the average user -- the one who never changes the defaults and clicks any "Install" button that pops up.
The longer-term question is, what happens if the AI bubble really does sputter out and MS leadership stops believing it will save them?
I don't mean "when AI goes away". I think we're past the point where it will go away. I mean the likely outcome: people stop shouting "AI will solve all human problems!" and start treating it like, I don't know, copy-and-paste. A neat trick which is ubiquitous and makes some things easier, but nobody thinks about it much.
(I remember the first article I read about copy-and-paste, back when it was a Xerox PARC tech demo. This Alan Kay article in 1979? Mm, not sure. Anyway, I didn't get it. "How does that help?" Hard to see until it's available everywhere, but I sure copied and pasted a lot in writing this post.)
Anyway, neat tricks are commodity, not differentiator. If it's ubiquitous, it'll be on Windows and Mac and anything Google-connected. Where will Microsoft be then? Doomed? Or just another tech company with some revenue streams?
I know that seems like a fate worse than death in today's venture-unicorn market, but somebody's gotta do it.
Comments from Andrew Plotkin
Comments from Mastodon
@zarfeblong Reading that post gave me serious "Google doing G+" vibes, though I suspect it won't end nearly as well.
@zarfeblong I think it's possible that AI really will sputter out—at least as a consumer product—in part because it's so expensive. Like: expensive enough that the state of Georgia just brought two new nuclear silos online and is already looking to expand fossil fuel plants because data centers need more energy to keep up with AI processing demands. And if AI really does become ubiquitous in consumer applications, that demand is going to increase more quickly than improvements in efficiency.
@lrhodes Yeah, I don’t know what my hypothetical future(s) mean in terms of energy usage. If AI is a commodity OS feature, it may well be running locally and then MS/Apple will be keen to keep the battery usage under control. If it’s a commodity Google feature... harder to say.
@zarfeblong I agree; Microsoft are being driven by what they see as rational, and aren’t allowed to think about downsides. But I’m not sure whether course correction (on Recall specifically, not “AI” generally) is possible for them. I mean, https://rem.ing exists and got no backlash. Mostly cos it wasn’t the main character, but... people don’t trust MS with this _because they’re MS_. Everyone thinks this at least a bit. Fixing that is the work of a generation I think
@sil This rem.ing tool (which I never heard of) got no backlash because only people who have heard about it will install it. It’ll never be a target.
Microsoft changes the world security attack landscape every time they change a default. Has nothing to do with their past reputation. They are perfectly aware of their stakes as platform owners, and usually act responsibly. The current situation really does indicate that they’re out on some kind of limb.
@zarfeblong My current employer is in an interesting rock and hard place between “shareholders and C-Suite say we must AI all the things” and “legal and compliance are concerned about anything that smells of AI”. I have a great sympathy for Microsoft here for what seems to be the exact same high stakes game. AI ALL THE THINGS PLZKTHNXBYE but also NO NOT THAT WAY, BAD Microsoft.
@zarfeblong There’s no winning here, just lots of losing and hoping short term shareholder glee prevents long term shareholder panic. I’ve got half a gut instinct that the current mini-recession/inflation period has put the US’ worst shareholders “in charge” and we’re seeing the consequences in real time.
@zarfeblong Reading that post gave me serious "Google doing G+" vibes, though I suspect it won't end nearly as well.
@zarfeblong I think it's possible that AI really will sputter out—at least as a consumer product—in part because it's so expensive. Like: expensive enough that the state of Georgia just brought two new nuclear silos online and is already looking to expand fossil fuel plants because data centers need more energy to keep up with AI processing demands. And if AI really does become ubiquitous in consumer applications, that demand is going to increase more quickly than improvements in efficiency.
@lrhodes Yeah, I don’t know what my hypothetical future(s) mean in terms of energy usage. If AI is a commodity OS feature, it may well be running locally and then MS/Apple will be keen to keep the battery usage under control. If it’s a commodity Google feature... harder to say.
@zarfeblong I agree; Microsoft are being driven by what they see as rational, and aren’t allowed to think about downsides. But I’m not sure whether course correction (on Recall specifically, not “AI” generally) is possible for them. I mean, https://rem.ing exists and got no backlash. Mostly cos it wasn’t the main character, but... people don’t trust MS with this _because they’re MS_. Everyone thinks this at least a bit. Fixing that is the work of a generation I think
@sil This rem.ing tool (which I never heard of) got no backlash because only people who have heard about it will install it. It’ll never be a target.
Microsoft changes the world security attack landscape every time they change a default. Has nothing to do with their past reputation. They are perfectly aware of their stakes as platform owners, and usually act responsibly. The current situation really does indicate that they’re out on some kind of limb.
@zarfeblong My current employer is in an interesting rock and hard place between “shareholders and C-Suite say we must AI all the things” and “legal and compliance are concerned about anything that smells of AI”. I have a great sympathy for Microsoft here for what seems to be the exact same high stakes game. AI ALL THE THINGS PLZKTHNXBYE but also NO NOT THAT WAY, BAD Microsoft.
@zarfeblong There’s no winning here, just lots of losing and hoping short term shareholder glee prevents long term shareholder panic. I’ve got half a gut instinct that the current mini-recession/inflation period has put the US’ worst shareholders “in charge” and we’re seeing the consequences in real time.
There’s a whole side question about what Nvidia does when the AI bubble sputters out. They’re currently at some nonsensical stock value, and I’m sure they’re doing everything they can to take advantage of it... but I’d love to know what the spreadsheets look like.
Does Jensen Huang have a series of contingency plans marked “if bubble bursts in Q3”, “if bubble bursts in Q4”, “if bubble bursts in 2025 Q1”...? I hope so!
@zarfeblong They may be only riding the AI bubble because the NFT bubble sputtered out so maybe if the AI bubble sputters out they switch to hyping the PDK bubble
@juandesant @zarfeblong "Humane" is gonna pull this out at the last second when the bankruptcy proceedings start going bad and trust me, it's gonna be exhausting
@mcc @aeva @zarfeblong 💭 PDK stands for Philip Dick, K., and is so called because he wrote a short story with a long title that included a tech sorta like it.
@zarfeblong They make fantastically efficient computing devices. There will always be stuff to compute! Plus I'm impressed by their applications for improving their own processes. cuLitho for lithography, the Omniverse stuff for factory design, other robot stuff. Few companies build products that improve how they build products!
@zarfeblong I think the same thinking drives a lot of people who buy their GPUs. Even if the AI bubble ends, they will have a bunch of GPUs. That's not nothing.
It's way less risk than throwing the money at startups hoping the engineers (like me) produce something useful. Because if we don't, there's nothing to show for their money.
@darabos Sure, but Nvidia made great computing devices a year ago. The company valuation has quadrupled since then.
When your stock is up you invest for the future — we get this. But it matters exactly how. Getting stuck with a warehouse full of unprofitable product after the price has crashed is a very classic way to wreck your company.
@zarfeblong Would it wreck the company if GPUs stop flying off the shelves? I can't imagine they have a lot of debt. I don't know if the stock price affects them beyond the executives getting filthy rich.
How to invest the crazy profits is a problem. The Omniverse is at least more practical than the Metaverse. But even if it fails, does that really hurt them? I have no idea how these companies operate.
@zarfeblong This is line waiting for Google to die because of the Internet bubble bursting
Yes there is a hype bubble but also this is bigger than the Internet
(this is not financial advice, it's commentary on regulations)
As I understand it, the currently accepted thing to do is to establish a 10b5-1 plan to sell stock every month, and buy something safe (i.e. a version of the S&P500 minus all tech stocks) in exchange.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEC_Rule_10b5-1
(which also helpfully notes that you can cancel planned sales freely, because the SEC doesn't think that insider trading can happen when there is no trade executed.)
@dashdsrdash I was thinking about Huang’s plans for Nvidia, not his personal plans to liquidate stock. :)
I’m sure the latter is going to be very nice for him, but I’m speculating about whether the company could be caught on the back foot if the weather changes.
As I said, a lot of company catastrophes start by saying “Conditions have never been better -- time for growth!”
@zarfeblong Planned obsolescence requires ever increasing resource use. Recall is a great example of this.
Heh, they got the changes in before the 18th after all.
They're also adding on-disk encryption for the Recall database with fingerprint/faceprint ID. Like I said, a lot of smart engineers.
I'm sure the shouting will continue, but this sounds like a more sensible level of security.