Apple:

Audio Intelligence is a brand-new class of Apple Intelligence features that use the microphones of Apple Watch, the power of Apple silicon, and on-device and cloud-based AI models to help you detect sounds, identify music, and stay present and engaged — all while protecting your privacy at every step.

Hartley Charlton:

• Siri Recap: Uses ambient listening to generate high-level notes from conversations, such as takeaways from a team meeting or a parent-teacher conference, producing an Apple Intelligence-generated title, summary, and key points reviewable in the Siri app.
• Live Rewind: Lets users “go back in time for 15 seconds,” transcribing and displaying what was just said in a conversation with a double press of the Digital Crown.
• Shazam: Automatically identifies music playing nearby and surfaces the song title and artist on the Music Recognition widget in the Smart Stack.
• Sound Recognition: Brings sound alerts to Apple Watch for users who are deaf or hard of hearing, listening for sirens, alarms, doorbells, a baby crying, and more, even when their iPhone isn’t nearby.

Lily Hay Newman:

Apple is emphasizing that all of them are built to prioritize privacy and security using the extensive infrastructure the company has developed to protect its other Apple Intelligence and Siri services. As more and more of these types of features debut, though, the audio intelligence announcements are a reminder that AI-powered tools are becoming increasingly universal in all areas of computing and life.

“These features do not create or store audio recordings, and raw audio used for processing is completely inaccessible to the operating systems, apps, the user, or Apple,” the company wrote in a report shared with WIRED.

[…]

Apple emphasizes that its on-device capabilities for Apple watches have expanded thanks to the company’s new S11 chips. The chips include a special memory-protected space that Apple calls the Secure Exclave. Designed specifically for sensor data, the exclave is an isolated buffer that is inaccessible to the rest of the operating system where Apple Watch can hold and process audio data in a protected space.

[…]

To try to mitigate blatant privacy violations, Apple says that the watch produces an audible chime when a watch owner initiates a Live Rewind transcript to alert other people in the area—even if it is on silent mode or paired with headphones. And the features are built to omit or filter out potentially identifying information about speakers. But the sheer scope and breadth of the tools is extremely noteworthy.

Zac Hall:

If you want to really take a deep dive on privacy and the new features, Apple has published an 11-page privacy paper that goes even further.

Previously:

• Apple Watch Ultra 4
• Apple Watch Series 12
• Pebble Index

Update (2026-09-11): Dr. Drang:

Ron Huang introduced a couple of features of the Series 12 and Ultra 4 that struck me as both disturbing and possibly illegal. They certainly seem at odds with Apple’s commitment to privacy.

[…]

I’m sure Apple will argue that there’s no privacy issue because the recordings aren’t being saved. But if there’s a transcription, isn’t that a type of saving?

And then there’s the question of legality. A great variety of law, both in the United States and across the world, concerns the recording of electronic and in-person conversations. I’m sure Apple has considered this, but I have to think some jurisdictions will frown on Live Rewind. If Apple has to defend it, that’s fine. What’s one more squadron of lawyers to Apple? But if an Apple Watch owner has to defend a transcription made innocently—made with Apple’s encouragement, in fact—that seems like an unfair burden. Maybe Apple should indemnify all future Watch buyers from privacy-related legal action.

[…]

The hoops Apple jumped through to avoid certain words is pretty funny. […] You think your watch records the audio around you? No no no. The audio flows into the Secure Enclave, and flowing is definitely not recording because it’s a different word.

Juli Clover:

Live Rewind and other Audio Intelligence features do not generate audio recordings. Audio flows into the Secure Exclave, is processed, and then deleted.

According to Apple, Live Rewind text snippets “disappear permanently” from the Apple Watch approximately 30 seconds after the Apple Watch display dims, unless the info is saved to the Siri app.

Nick Heer:

But good luck explaining that to anyone around you after you read back an exact transcript of what they just said. Apple says they should be sufficiently notified Live Rewind is active because “an audible chime plays from the speaker on your Apple Watch, even if your Apple Watch is on silent or you have headphones connected”, plus the watch plays an animation, but it is not clear to me when this happens. It is not shown in Apple’s video. The impression I get is that Live Rewind is always running in the background and these notifications are only played after you double-click the Digital Crown to look at the text.

This feels like a glimpse of how Apple will market its inevitable wear-anywhere glasses product. I do not think it does enough to assuage privacy concerns. I think normal people will continue to react negatively when you tell them you have been passively recording them because, outside Silicon Valley, that is considered gross and invasive.

Saagar Jha:

I have to admit that the Siri Recap stuff all being “documented” using AI slop is really giving me confidence in the level of care that went into designing this feature

Matt Evans (Hacker News):

I’m frankly surprised Apple even went through with this feature at this time, considering the bans and backlash other AI-powered surveillance wearables are getting.

[…]

Apple is keen to evidence its trustworthiness, with on-device AI and Private Cloud Compute and an insistence that it doesn’t record or log audio and transcripts. However, if people think they’re being discreetly recorded without their permission, it’s possible Apple Watch wearers could experience their own slice of the abuse hurled at Meta Glasses wearers.

Dan Sugalski:

I… y’know, Betteridge’s law does, as always, apply.

Glenn Fleishman:

Given that Apple has to warn of this, it’s the surest sign the features shouldn’t be released in this form. Apple repeats the form of the warning I see regularly at my gym… but apparently it isn’t heeding it.

Jack Brewster:

Just called my HSA provider and upfront they say that calls may be recorded and transcribed by AI and then provide no means of opting out. So of course the person who finally answered says I have to give my social to verify my identity.

Update (2026-09-14): See also: Core Intuition and Steven Aquino.

Hoje, com a revelação dos Apple Watches Series 12 e Ultra 4, a Maçã também anunciou um novo conjunto de recursos chamado Inteligência de Áudio (Audio Intelligence), composto pelas funções Reconhecimento de Som (Sound Recognition), Reconhecimento de Música (Music Recognition), Live Rewind e Siri Recap.

Parte da Apple Intelligence e exclusivas desses novos relógios, essas ferramentas analisam o som ambiente — que, em alguns casos, é captado constantemente — para alertar o usuário sobre sons importantes, ajudá-lo a descobrir o título de músicas, recobrar algo que foi falado nos últimos instantes e revisar anotações sobre as suas principais conversas ao longo do dia, respectivamente.

Por mais bem intencionados que esses recursos possam ser, no entanto, é natural que alguns usuários torçam o nariz para eles — afinal, a ideia de ter um dispositivo monitorando tudo o que você fala (e que falam para você) sem interrupções pode ser um tanto… preocupante, principalmente do ponto de vista da privacidade — um assunto tão abordado pela Apple.

E foi muito provavelmente pensando nessas pessoas que a Apple colocou no ar uma extensa página de suporte que detalha o funcionamento dessas ferramentas, além de explicar quais medidas de segurança foram tomadas para proteger usuários que decidirem ativar essas ferramentas. A empresa também publicou um documento [PDF] que mergulha ainda mais nas minúcias dessas novidades, as quais dependem não só do poder de fogo do novo SiP ¹System in a package, ou sistema em um pacote. S11, como também dos seus recursos de segurança embutidos.

Para início de conversa, a Apple deixa claro que todos esses recursos são completamente opcionais; o Reconhecimento de Som, por exemplo, precisa ser configurado nos Ajustes (Settings) do iPhone, de modo que ele só vem ativado por padrão no Apple Watch caso o recurso equivalente do iOS já tenha sido ativado anteriormente pelo usuário no iPhone. Outras ferramentas, como o Reconhecimento de Música, podem ser ativadas diretamente nos Ajustes do Apple Watch (caso já não tenham sido ativadas anteriormente).

O Live Rewind, por sua vez, entra em cena apenas quando o usuário dá um clique duplo na Digital Crown, mostrando em seguida uma transcrição dos últimos 15 segundos de conversa. Ainda segundo a Apple, o relógio para de gerar essa transcrição assim que o último trecho de conversa é exibido, além de não salvar qualquer texto — a menos que o usuário faça uma pergunta sobre o seu conteúdo para a Siri ou escolha salvá-lo no app da assistente, que é onde estão os ajustes dessa ferramenta.

Disponível na Central de Controle, o Siri Recap pode ser ativado e desativado manualmente a qualquer momento, mas também permite que o usuário defina uma programação com base na hora e/ou localização. A Siri também pode ser barrada de realizar qualquer registro em momentos/lugares específicos.

Trechos de texto do Live Rewind e anotações do Siri Recap podem ser visualizados, editados e apagados a qualquer momento no app da Siri, bem como exportados para apps como o Notas (Notes) e o Diário (Journal). Além disso, apagá-los faz com que eles sumam de todos os seus dispositivos sincronizados — lembrando que a Apple os protege com criptografia de ponta a ponta antes de enviá-los ao iCloud.

Proteções adicionais

Segundo a Apple, em todos esses casos, nenhuma gravação de áudio é gerada ou armazenada no Apple Watch. Em vez disso, o áudio captado pelos microfones passa pelo Secure Exclave do SiP S11 — compartimento isolado por hardware que processa dados de maneira separada do resto do sistema, impedindo que aplicativos, o watchOS, a Apple ou até mesmo o próprio usuário possam acessá-lo.

Os resumos da Siri Recap são gerados pelos chamados Apple Foundation Models no Private Cloud Compute, que não salva nenhuma das informações. As anotações também são apagadas automaticamente pelo app da Siri depois de sete dias, caso o usuário escolha não salvá-las ou exportá-las.

A Apple também garante que esses recursos não identificam ou atribuem locutores nos áudios captados — protegendo, assim, a identidade de pessoas no entorno do usuário. A única particularidade aqui é a Siri Recap, que pode registrar nomes citados no conteúdo da conversa, mesmo sem identificar quem é o locutor ou interlocutor; ele também reconhece e censura “conteúdo potencialmente prejudicial, como linguagem que promove automutilação ou discurso de ódio, e informações confidenciais, como dados financeiros, identificadores governamentais, dados de autenticação e certos identificadores pessoais”.

No caso do Live Rewind, um alerta sonoro é reproduzido sempre que o usuário ativa o recurso, não importa se o Apple Watch está com o modo silencioso ligado ou não. Uma animação em tela cheia também é exibida junto com um indicador de uso do microfone; “Isso serve para alertar as pessoas próximas de que o recurso foi ativado”, explica a empresa.

Dependente do Shazam, o Reconhecimento de Música compartilha apenas uma assinatura acústica, e não o áudio bruto, na hora de processar o áudio captado — algo que acontece nos servidores do serviço. A assinatura acústica, ainda segundo a Apple, é gerada em um buffer seguro no Secure Exclave.

Disponibilidade

Todos esses recursos, como dito, requerem um Apple Watch Series 12 ou um Apple Watch Ultra 4 para funcionar.

Indisponíveis para usuários menores de 13 anos, o Live Rewind e a Siri Recap serão liberados como recursos beta ainda neste ano (inicialmente apenas em inglês). O Reconhecimento de Som e o Reconhecimento de Música serão liberados junto com os novos smartwatches.

Notas de rodapé

• 1
  System in a package, ou sistema em um pacote.

Elephants struggled when scientists changed the rules but then adapted surprisingly fast.

💾

💾

Cognition's valuation multiple is higher than Cursor's was before selling to SpaceX.

From fireflies to mammals, evolution may have tuned communication to the rhythm of neurons.

Psychedelic drugs are often described as throwing the brain into a state where the usual rules begin to break down. Under psilocybin, neural networks that normally organize perception, thought, and our sense of self loosen, blurring the boundaries between the mind and what we perceive as reality.

Close your eyes, and colors and shapes may appear from nowhere. Music can feel almost physical. Even the familiar boundary between where the self ends and the rest of the world seemingly begins to melt away.

From the outside, this altered state can look a lot like a neurological disorder—a brain becoming less synchronized, less structured, and increasingly chaotic.

But a major new brain-imaging study suggests an unexpected order may be hidden within that apparent chaos. Rather than simply scrambling the brain, psilocybin appears to reorganize its activity, making it unusually sensitive to what a person is experiencing in the moment.

Published in Nature, the study used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), electroencephalography (EEG), and machine learning to examine 62 adults before and after receiving psilocybin.

Researchers say their results uncover a previously hidden form of organization within the psychedelic brain that helps explain why setting and subjective experience can have such a powerful influence on the psychological effects of psychedelics.

“Under psilocybin, brain networks that help us process our inner world and the world around us became less distinct, but reorganized into patterns that reflected what people were experiencing,” lead author and Research Fellow at the Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health in the Monash School of Psychological Sciences, Dr Devon Stoliker, said in a statement. “We uncovered hidden order within that disruption.”

Past studies have shown that psychedelics disrupt the brain’s usual organization. Psilocybin acts primarily on serotonin 5-HT2A receptors, reshaping communication between sensory regions and higher-level networks involved in cognition, perception, and our sense of self. Researchers have frequently characterized the resulting brain state as more entropic, desynchronized, and disordered.

The new study does not necessarily contradict those findings. Instead, it suggests conventional measurements may have been missing another layer of organization unfolding over time.

Participants, none of whom had previously used psychedelics, underwent both fMRI and EEG while experiencing four different conditions: resting with their eyes closed, guided meditation, listening to music, and watching a silent movie of moving clouds. Researchers recorded their brain activity during a baseline session and again after participants received a 19-milligram dose of psilocybin.

Standard brain-imaging measurements initially produced results consistent with previous psychedelic research. Psilocybin reduced the degree to which the brain remained divided into distinct functional networks. During eyes-closed conditions, connectivity between sensory areas and the wider brain decreased while integration involving associative regions increased.

One especially intriguing change involved the difference between eyes open and eyes closed. Normally, those states produce clearly distinguishable patterns of brain connectivity.

Under psilocybin, however, that distinction narrowed dramatically. In the visual network, the gap in global functional connectivity between eyes-open and eyes-closed conditions fell by 85 percent.

EEG measurements independently showed a similar convergence. Alpha-band activity, normally associated with suppressing visual information while the eyes are closed, decreased under psilocybin, while brain-wide signal complexity increased. Because the effect appeared using two different methods of measuring brain activity, the researchers argue that psychedelic-induced changes in blood flow cannot simply explain it.

Researchers also used machine-learning techniques to follow changes in brain activity over time. Instead of becoming increasingly random, the brain activity of participants experiencing stronger psychedelic effects formed tighter, more clearly distinguishable patterns corresponding to whether they were resting, meditating, listening to music, or watching the movie.

In other words, as the psychedelic experience intensified, researchers became better able to identify what participants were doing simply from the structure of their brain activity. That is essentially the opposite of what would be expected if psilocybin were merely introducing neural noise.

“This shows that context is not just background to the psychedelic experience,” co-author and researcher at the Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health in the Monash School of Psychological Sciences,  Dr. Adeel Razi, explained. “What a person is doing and focusing on shapes how their brain responds.”

The effect was particularly strong among people reporting positive experiences involving unity, bliss, self-dissolution, and the disappearance of boundaries between themselves and their surroundings. It was weaker for purely sensory or hallucinatory effects and largely absent for negative experiences, such as anxiety or impaired cognition.

Researchers call this phenomenon “context alignment” and describe the corresponding subjective experience as “embeddedness.”

Embeddedness differs subtly from simply feeling connected to something. The researchers use the term to describe an experience in which the distinction itself begins disappearing—a feeling that the person is continuous with, rather than separate from, the surrounding environment.

Two brain systems appeared especially important. The default mode network, heavily involved in internally directed and self-referential processing, and the visual network, representing the opposite end of a broad gradient toward externally directed sensory processing. Together, changes in these systems accounted for nearly half of the machine-learning model’s improvement in distinguishing different contexts under psilocybin.

Those findings could influence psilocybin and psychedelic-assisted therapy, where a person’s mental state and surrounding environment have long been considered important.

Half of the participants later ranked their psilocybin session among the most meaningful experiences of their lives. One month later, the group also showed improvements in measures of personal meaning, acceptance of death, and bond with nature, although there was considerable variation between individuals.

However, the findings also come with important caveats. The study involved healthy volunteers rather than patients being treated for psychiatric disorders, meaning the results do not establish whether “embeddedness” itself contributes to the therapeutic benefits reported in clinical psychedelic research. Participants also knew they were receiving psilocybin.

While the researchers identified machine-learning signatures associated with subjective experience and subsequent psychological changes, they acknowledge that additional research is needed to determine whether those patterns hold across populations.

Nevertheless, the results present a different way of thinking about what psychedelics do to the brain. Psilocybin may loosen ordinary neural boundaries without eliminating organization. Beneath what looks like disorder when averaged across time, the brain may actually be reorganizing itself around the person’s immediate experience.

“Until now, brain-imaging studies have mainly told us what happens on average across a group. Using artificial intelligence, we could measure this reorganization in each person,” Dr. Razi notes. “If translated to patients, this could eventually help clinicians understand how someone is responding and predict who is most likely to benefit.”

The recent study, “Psychedelics Align Brain Activity with Context,” appeared in the journal Nature.

Tim McMillan is a retired law enforcement executive, investigative reporter and co-founder of The Debrief. His writing typically focuses on defense, national security, the Intelligence Community and topics related to psychology. You can follow Tim on Twitter: @LtTimMcMillan.  Tim can be reached by email: tim@thedebrief.org or through encrypted email: LtTimMcMillan@protonmail.com 

The MacVoices Live! panel examines a class action lawsuit over Apple Photos facial recognition, debating whether on-device processing, user consent, and biometric privacy laws justify the legal action. The conversation moves to TV tracking alternatives after TV Time’s shutdown, then shifts to Bending Spoons’ acquisition of Airtable, exploring the company’s growing portfolio, its business strategy, and the future of database tools in an era of AI-assisted coding development.

💾

Any dog owner would tell you that their canine companions are attuned to their humans' emotional state and respond accordingly. Scientists have performed fMRI scans on dogs and identified a specific brain region that processes happy human facial expresses, like a smile, according to a new paper published in the journal iScience. They also found that dogs can tell the difference between negative facial expressions, specifically anger, sadness, and fear.

“Humans are really good at picking up small details on the face, and so are dogs,” said co-author Raúl Hernández-Pérez of the University of Vienna. “This makes dogs very interesting. By studying their brains, we can understand what adaptations have developed to support their remarkable social and emotional understanding of humans.”

Prior behavioral studies have shown that dogs are sensitive to emotion in human faces. Dogs will, for example, choose a box their human has identified with a happy expression over one the human treats with fear or disgust. Past fMRI studies found that an area in the canine left temporal cortex showed a stronger response to human faces compared to dog faces, as well as a greater response in the caudate, hippocampus, and amygdala to human faces showing emotion versus neutral faces.

Read full article

Comments

© Laura V. Cuaya/CC BY-SA

Any dog owner would tell you that their canine companions are attuned to their humans' emotional state and respond accordingly. Scientists have performed fMRI scans on dogs and identified a specific brain region that processes happy human facial expresses, like a smile, according to a new paper published in the journal iScience. They also found that dogs can tell the difference between negative facial expressions, specifically anger, sadness, and fear.

“Humans are really good at picking up small details on the face, and so are dogs,” said co-author Raúl Hernández-Pérez of the University of Vienna. “This makes dogs very interesting. By studying their brains, we can understand what adaptations have developed to support their remarkable social and emotional understanding of humans.”

Prior behavioral studies have shown that dogs are sensitive to emotion in human faces. Dogs will, for example, choose a box their human has identified with a happy expression over one the human treats with fear or disgust. Past fMRI studies found that an area in the canine left temporal cortex showed a stronger response to human faces compared to dog faces, as well as a greater response in the caudate, hippocampus, and amygdala to human faces showing emotion versus neutral faces.

Read full article

Comments

© Laura V. Cuaya/CC BY-SA

A security researcher has designed an algorithm that can create computer-generated patterns capable of hiding people, faces, and vehicles from detection by surveillance cameras.

New research led by University of Lethbridge scientists offers the most detailed look yet at how the dodo (Raphus cucullatus) -- the flightless bird driven to extinction by the 1600s -- actually perceived its world, suggesting the ‘stupid bird’ had a far more complex sensory life than its reputation implies.

The post Dodo Had Surprisingly Keen Sense of Smell and Owl-Like Vision, New Study Reveals appeared first on Sci.News: Breaking Science News.

A large British study spanning more than 70 years has found that people who experience chronic money struggles over their working lives show measurable declines in memory and processing speed by their 50s, along with signs of accelerated brain shrinkage decades later.

The post Decades of Financial Hardship Linked to Faster Brain Aging appeared first on Sci.News: Breaking Science News.

CapuchinAI, a portable testing station equipped with a touch screen and facial recognition software, could help scientists study primate intelligence in the wild.

The acquisition brings Poke’s conversational style and interaction model to Cognition’s coding agent Devin, reflecting a growing belief that how AI assistants interact with users is as important as the models powering them.

Getting locked out of an account is no fun. Google has a few ways to help you regain access if you happen to forget your password or lose an authenticator, including recovery contacts and backup codes. Now, Google has a completely new option: your face. You can now give Google a video record of your face and sign into your account with a selfie, which sounds like something people are going to just love.

You will have to set this feature up ahead of time if you want the option of regaining account access with a selfie later on. To get started, verify your account type is supported. You won't be able to configure selfie sign-ins for Workspace accounts, child accounts, or any account enrolled in Google's Advanced Protection Program.

Configuring selfie sign-in requires you to record a video, which Google will store on its servers. Google's selfie sign-in landing page includes the typical disclaimers about privacy and data access, promising that the company will keep the video encrypted and won't use it for any other purposes unless you opt in.

Read full article

Comments

© Google

Getting locked out of an account is no fun. Google has a few ways to help you regain access if you happen to forget your password or lose an authenticator, including recovery contacts and backup codes. Now, Google has a completely new option: your face. You can now give Google a video record of your face and sign into your account with a selfie, which sounds like something people are going to just love.

You will have to set this feature up ahead of time if you want the option of regaining account access with a selfie later on. To get started, verify your account type is supported. You won't be able to configure selfie sign-ins for Workspace accounts, child accounts, or any account enrolled in Google's Advanced Protection Program.

Configuring selfie sign-in requires you to record a video, which Google will store on its servers. Google's selfie sign-in landing page includes the typical disclaimers about privacy and data access, promising that the company will keep the video encrypted and won't use it for any other purposes unless you opt in.

Read full article

Comments

© Google

Om Malik (2023):

One of the key advantages of MacWhisper, as it utilizes the Whisper technology, is its superior accuracy in transcriptions compared to other services I have used. I was an early adopter of Rev.com and eventually switched to Otter.ai, for which I paid approximately $100/year. However, I have since canceled my subscription.

[…]

After comparing the audio transcripts from MacWhisper and Otter, I found that while Otter’s formatting is superior, there is hardly any difference in the transcriptions. I started with the free model, which was sufficient for my needs, and eventually upgraded to the large models. Nowadays, I primarily use MacWhisper to transcribe my voice memos, which I then import into Lex.Page.

Bon Adamson:

Whisper, which is made by OpenAI, has the distinct advantage of allowing you to transcribe audio in almost any language you may ever need to. For the time being, Otter can only transcribe English. The benefits of better accuracy and accurate punctuation that the service already holds over Siri hold up across other languages as well. If you’re looking to transcribe non-English audio accurately, Whisper is definitely the best option available on Mac.

Dan Moren:

By taking advantage of OpenAI’s Whisper framework, Audio Hijack can now take any audio it’s recording and generate a text transcript. While this process was possible before—see Jason’s lengthy post about his workflow—it required a lot of fiddling and several different tools to accomplish; it’s certainly a lot easier to simply drop Audio Hijack’s block into your existing session. If you record multiple sources, it can even appropriately label each one—though if you record multiple people via one input, say the other end of a Zoom call, it can’t distinguish between the various participants.

Inscribe (2026, Hacker News):

Apple’s new SpeechAnalyzer is the most accurate on-device speech engine we tested. It beat every Whisper model we ship, including Whisper Small, on both the clean and the noisy half of LibriSpeech, while running roughly three times faster than Small. And the API it replaces, SFSpeechRecognizer, came last on clean speech: behind even Whisper Tiny, a 40MB model.

[…]

The new API cuts word error rate by 3.5 to 4x on the same audio: from 9.02% to 2.12% on clean speech, and from 16.25% to 4.56% on noisy speech. There is no accuracy trade-off to weigh; the new API wins everywhere we measured, and it produces punctuated, cased text where the legacy engine’s output is rougher.

[…]

All five engines ran comfortably faster than real time: between roughly 12x and 40x on the M2 Pro, meaning an hour of audio transcribes in about 1.5 to 5 minutes on-device. SpeechAnalyzer was about 3x faster than Whisper Small per second of audio while beating it on accuracy.

Yuki:

SpeechAnalyzer’s ReportingOption.fastResults reads like a knob you’d reach for when you want to trade power for latency. That framing is what cost me the afternoon.

[…]

If a recording matters — and in a notes app, a lost meeting is the worst thing that can happen to a user — then the container you write while recording has to be PCM in CAF. Not m4a, and not AAC-in-CAF either.

[…]

AVAudioEngine’s inputNode silently ignores your device selection

[…]

I wanted summarization to run on-device. Everything else in Nib’s transcription path does, the audio never leaves the machine, and it would have been a much cleaner story to tell.

But 4,096 tokens for the Foundation Models isn’t enough.

Previously:

• Apple Foundation Models in appleOS 27
• WhisperPad Rejected From the Mac App Store
• Overcast Transcripts
• Generated Transcripts in Pocket Casts
• Apple Podcasts Transcripts
• Dictation and Predictive Text in macOS Sonoma and iOS 17
• macOS vs. Dragon Dictation

Meta executives claimed that a controversial facial recognition feature didn’t “exist.” Fast forward a few weeks later, and they’re describing the feature in public — and in detail.

In June, a Wired investigation revealed that Meta had quietly infused unreleased facial recognition tech into its “AI Glasses,” the tech giant’s chatbot and camera-equipped smart glasses. While the feature, dubbed NameTag, was inaccessible to consumers, it was designed to register faces encountered by Meta glasses wearers “into unique biometric signatures, commonly known as faceprints, and check each one against faceprints stored on the user’s phone,” according to the magazine.

It’s safe to say that Meta executives were furious after Wired published its investigation. After all, the company has a long track record of data privacy violations. The revelation that its “pervert glasses,” as some have taken to calling Meta’s controversial smart glasses, could soon be using facial recognition tech — not unlike the eyewear being used by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents — fueled an existing PR disaster.

Andy Stone, the tech giant’s spokesperson and VP of communications, declared on X that Wired’s reporting was “intellectually dishonest” and “advocacy-driven click bait.” What’s more, according to Stone, NameTag was fully nonexistent.

“Here’s a thing: Wired reports Meta didn’t answer several questions about how this will work,” Stone added in a follow-up post. “How could we? The feature doesn’t exist!”

In response to Stone, another Meta executive, chief technology officer Andrew “Boz” Bosworth, jumped in.

“Incredibly misleading from Wired,” he wrote. “Absolutely dishonest.”

Yet despite company leaders reassuring us that the feature doesn’t exist, Bosworth discussed it in detail during an interview with The Atlantic CEO and podcaster Nick Thompson. Bosworth’s comments in the interview, which was published last week, seemingly contradicted his fellow executives, revealing that the feature did indeed exist.

NameTag, Bosworth told Thompson, would be “encrypted locally to your device,” and would catalog people who smart glasses wearers “met in person, with your glasses on, who introduced themselves, or you said, ‘okay, this is David, remember this person.'”

This information is “only available to you, when you are wearing your glasses,” Bosworth added. He emphasized that the data captured by NameTag wouldn’t be stored in a centralized database.

“This is a person you’ve met before. Here’s their name. They’re right in front of you. That’s… what we call a NameTags feature,” said Bosworth. “I think people get confused because they hear face recognition and they think, ‘oh, there’s a central face database that everyone’s being scanned constantly into.’ It’s not that.”

In addition to supporting blind or low-vision smart glasses wearers, said Bosworth, NameTag could solve what Meta calls “the cocktail party problem,” saving wearers from any awkwardness that may arise when encountering people at parties who they’re sure they’ve met before, but can’t quite place.

“It’s a very universally human problem,” Bosworth said. “Nearly every human I talk to, no matter what their status of their vision or their memory, understands that this is a problem that would help them feel more comfortable in social situations if they had it.”

To be clear, Wired never suggested that the facial recognition feature it uncovered was being used to build a “central face database” by way of Meta’s smart glasses. Indeed, in line with what Bosworth said in the podcast appearance, Wired reported that “code discreetly added to Meta’s AI app over multiple updates this year shows that the feature, internally called ‘NameTag,’ identifies people captured by the glasses’ camera and, when activated, alerts the wearer when it recognizes someone.” The story also repeatedly noted that the feature was unreleased and inaccessible to glasses wearers.

When journalists and others called out the contradiction between Meta’s past and recent statements, Stone — the comms executive who said that Wired couldn’t answer questions about the feature because it “doesn’t exist” — jumped back in the comments section.

“We have said for months we’re exploring such features, even as nothing has shipped to consumers,” the spokesperson said in response to a post by The Intercept journalist Sam Biddle. “No secret there despite the conspiratorial thinking.”

There’s a big difference between a feature not existing and a feature that exists — if still unfinished — and has yet to be released. Meta appears to be arguing that if a feature remains inaccessible to consumers, it’s technically nonexistent, even if the company has gone as far as to issue multiple updates inserting code for the feature into products that are already in consumers’ hands. (Meta quietly deleted the NameTag code after its existence was made public.)

During the podcast interview, Bosworth took care to emphasize that Meta is considering the privacy implications of a facial recognition-powered feature like NameTag. He noted that it’s likely illegal in states like Illinois and Texas, and that it “has to be done in a way that people feel comfortable.”

Meanwhile, Meta continues to fight an ongoing consumer harm lawsuit, prompted by an investigation by a pair of Swedish newspapers. The publications found that Meta collected recordings by smart glasses wearers and passed them along to human data labelers, despite promising consumers that their recordings would be stored only on their devices.

“Designed for privacy,” reads a webpage for Meta’s smart glasses, “controlled by you.”

More on Meta’s smart glasses: Meta Furious Over Bombshell Smart Glasses Revelation

The post Top Meta Exec Describes Controversial Facial Recognition Feature in Detail After the Company Claimed It Didn’t Exist appeared first on Futurism.

Designers say that as well as offering a degree of protection from surveillance, their clothes make a powerful fashion statement about the importance of privacy

As facial recognition technology is rolled out across Britain’s public spaces, a new generation of designers say privacy could be the next big fashion trend.

Companies have started incorporating “adversarial patterns” in their garments – carefully designed arrangements of shapes, colours and repeated motifs said to exploit weaknesses in some computer vision systems.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: PR

© Photograph: PR

© Photograph: PR

In the evolving landscape of anesthetic management for elderly patients, the impact of anesthetic agents on cognitive outcomes remains a critical area of investigation. Recent research published in BMC Geriatrics in 2026 has provided new insights into the differential effects of desflurane and propofol on perioperative neurocognitive disorders (PND) in older adults undergoing major urological surgeries. This randomized, controlled trial extends our understanding of how anesthetic choices may influence postoperative cognitive trajectories, a subject of immense importance given the increasing aging population and prevalence of complex surgeries in this demographic.

Perioperative neurocognitive disorders encompass a spectrum of cognitive impairments that arise in the perioperative period, including delirium and longer-lasting cognitive decline. Older adults are particularly susceptible due to age-related neurodegenerative changes, comorbidities, and the physiological stresses induced by anesthesia and surgery. Establishing whether specific anesthetics can exacerbate or mitigate these neurocognitive phenomena has significant implications for optimizing perioperative care and improving long-term functional outcomes for elderly patients.

The study under discussion rigorously compared desflurane, a volatile inhaled anesthetic known for its rapid onset and recovery, with propofol, an intravenous sedative-hypnotic agent valued for its favorable safety profile and neuroprotective properties observed in preclinical studies. The trial enrolled a robust cohort of older individuals scheduled for extensive urological procedures, randomizing them to receive either desflurane or propofol-based anesthesia. Cognitive function was meticulously assessed preoperatively and at multiple postoperative intervals using standardized neuropsychological tests sensitive to subtle cognitive changes, allowing for detailed temporal mapping of cognitive trajectories.

Findings from this investigation demonstrated notable differences between the two anesthetic regimens regarding the incidence and severity of perioperative neurocognitive disorders. Patients anesthetized with desflurane exhibited a higher frequency of early postoperative delirium and more pronounced cognitive decline at follow-ups compared to those who received propofol. These results resonate with emerging evidence suggesting that volatile anesthetics may contribute to neuroinflammation and neuronal stress, mechanisms hypothesized to underlie PND, whereas propofol’s antioxidative and anti-inflammatory effects potentially confer neuroprotection.

Critically, the study employed strict methodological standards to minimize bias and confounding, including blinding of outcome assessors and adjustment for variables such as baseline cognitive status, comorbidity burden, and surgical complexity. This rigorous approach increases confidence that the observed differences in cognitive outcomes stem from the anesthetic agents themselves rather than extraneous factors. Furthermore, the trial’s focus on major urological surgeries — procedures that are often lengthy and physiologically demanding — adds clinical relevance, as these patients typically face heightened risks of adverse neurocognitive sequelae.

The implications of these findings extend beyond a mere comparison of anesthetic efficacy and safety. They invite a reevaluation of perioperative protocols for elderly patients, advocating for anesthetic strategies that prioritize cognitive preservation alongside hemodynamic stability and analgesia. Propofol’s apparent advantage in attenuating PND risk may encourage clinicians to tailor anesthesia plans more judiciously, potentially integrating adjunctive measures such as enhanced monitoring of cerebral oxygenation and inflammation markers.

Mechanistically, the differential impact of desflurane and propofol on cognitive outcomes may relate to their interactions with neuronal glutamate receptors, modulation of synaptic plasticity, and influence on the blood-brain barrier permeability. Desflurane, despite its rapid elimination, has been associated with increased production of reactive oxygen species and microglial activation in animal models, processes that can trigger neuroinflammation and synaptic dysfunction. In contrast, propofol’s chemical structure facilitates scavenging of free radicals and suppression of pro-inflammatory cytokines, suggesting a neuroprotective milieu during the vulnerable perioperative period.

Additionally, this study sheds light on the critical period immediately after surgery, where interventions targeting delirium prevention could be best leveraged. The higher delirium rates observed with desflurane highlight the necessity for vigilant postoperative cognitive assessments and early rehabilitative efforts in patients exposed to volatile anesthetics. Conversely, the more favorable cognitive profile seen with propofol might translate into shorter hospital stays, reduced postoperative complications, and better quality of life trajectories, outcomes that remain to be explored in subsequent longitudinal research.

Beyond the direct effects on cognition, the choice of anesthetic also influences systemic physiological responses including hemodynamic fluctuations and respiratory function, which can indirectly affect brain perfusion and oxygenation. This study’s comprehensive monitoring protocols provide a nuanced framework for balancing these considerations while still focusing on optimizing neurological outcomes in frail and complex surgical populations.

The authors acknowledge certain limitations such as the single-center design and the need for larger-scale multicenter studies to validate these results across diverse patient populations and surgical contexts. Nonetheless, this investigation constitutes a significant advancement in the personalized management of anesthesia in elderly patients, framing future research priorities that integrate neurocognitive outcomes as central endpoints in anesthesiology trials.

In conclusion, this landmark trial delineates a clear divergence in neurocognitive outcomes based on the anesthetic agent used, favoring propofol over desflurane in terms of mitigating perioperative neurocognitive disorders in older adults undergoing major urological surgery. These insights compel a paradigm shift towards individualized anesthetic regimens that prioritize cognitive health, thereby enhancing recovery trajectories and long-term well-being in the vulnerable aging population. As the global burden of neurocognitive disorders grows, such targeted perioperative strategies stand poised to transform clinical practice and elevate standards of geriatric surgical care profoundly.

---

Subject of Research: Effects of anesthetic agents on perioperative neurocognitive disorders in elderly patients undergoing major urological surgery.

Article Title: Effect of desflurane versus propofol on perioperative neurocognitive disorders in older adults undergoing major urological surgery: a randomized trial.

Article References:
Somnuke, P., Siriussawakul, A., Pongraweewan, O. et al. Effect of desflurane versus propofol on perioperative neurocognitive disorders in older adults undergoing major urological surgery: a randomized trial. BMC Geriatr (2026). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-026-07823-x

Image Credits: AI Generated