Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Firefox will have an option to disable all AI features

mastodon.social

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 554 posts

Re: Firefox will have an option to disable all AI features

#261

Post by tjpnz »

brooke2k wrote: post #182
sigmar wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Yes. Firefox and Chrome already offer this. yes, both use machine learning methods to translate pages. You're already using AI and don't realize it.

"AI" as it's used nowadays is unfortunately usually a shorthand for LLM. When firefox talks about "AI features", I think most people interpret that as "LLM integration", not the page-translation feature that's been around for ages.

I think it's simpler than that. AI is fast becoming synonymous with something being force fed and generally unwanted.

Re: Firefox will have an option to disable all AI features

#263

Post by evil-olive »

tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #90
gigel82 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd love to live in your world for a bit... I can't imagine any future where having AI in your browser is a net positive for any user. It sounds like an absolute dystopian privacy and security nightmare.

Why? Imagine you have an AI button. When you click it, the locally running LLM gets a copy of the web site in the context window, and you get to ask it a prompt, e.g. "summarize this". Imagine the browser asks you at some point, whether you want to hear about new features. The buttons offered to you are "FUCK OFF AND NEVER, EVER BOTHER ME AGAIN", "Please show me a summary once a month", "Show timely, non-modal notifi…

> Imagine you have an AI button. When you click it, the locally running LLM

sure, you can imagine Firefox integrating a locally-running LLM if you want.

but meanwhile, in the real world [0]:

> In the next three years, that means investing in AI that reflects the Mozilla Manifesto. It means diversifying revenue beyond search.

if they were going to implement your imagination of a local LLM, there's no reason they'd be talking about "revenue" from LLMs.

but with ChatGPT integrating ads, they absolutely can get revenue by directing users there, in the same way they get money for Google for putting Google's ads into Firefox users' eyeballs.

that's ultimately all this is. they're adding more ads to Firefox.

0: https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/leadership/mozillas-next...

Re: Firefox will have an option to disable all AI features

#264

Post by wkat4242 »

glenstein wrote: post #103
ahartmetz wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a difference between "FYI, we're rejecting a ton of money for us, that's how serious we are about not selling out" and "We ran the numbers, and on balance, taking these 30% more money doesn't seem like the right thing to do because it would be against our stated mission statement". The second one doesn't sound like real conviction.

Thank you for directly addressing my point! I disagree but I respect your prioritization of of substance. I agree that notionally there's a difference but (1) they never said they "ran the numbers", (2) there are other good reasons for having access to that data that don't involve selling out, and (3) this all hinges on squinting and interpreting and projecting, and splitting the difference on linguistic interpretati…

> At best it's like 0.001% circumstantial evidence that has to be reconciled with their history of opposing the Manifest changes. If reading tea leaves matters so much, then certainly their more explicit statements need to matter too.

Their history is less relevant now because it's a fresh CEO that came up with this statement on his first day. New leaders often means a change in direction and this is a worrying sign. Also the number he quoted is far too explicit. Doing something like that would instantly move Firefox to be the absolute worst browser possible considering even advertising- and tracking-loaded crap like Chrome and Edge don't go that far.

Clearly they have been running the numbers and clearly he feels fine talking about it which is a pretty strong departure of previous values.

Of course I'd not continue using Firefox in this case, and I'm sure it would get widely forked. I found it pretty shocking.

The other examples don't reassure me one bit because they're not the same teams and in many cases they were simply external pushes like offers that were rejected. Here it's a different team that already has been changing direction for the worse recently (e.g. PPA, purchasing Anonym), and came up with this without external pressure. There's also plenty of situations where FOSS projects did go full evil.

Anyway I don't really have any better options than firefox and I'm sure that it would get heavily forked if they started siding with the advertisers, but it is worrying to me especially coming from a new leader on his very first day. Not only because it's about ads. Just because it removes user freedom of choice completely if they were to enforce this.

Re: Firefox will have an option to disable all AI features

#265

Post by dspillett »

LexiMax wrote: post #247
1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is well-known as a result of the expert reports in US v Google that generally software users do not change defaults Whereas providing an option or a setting that the user must locate and change doesn't really mean much. Few users will ever see it let alone decide to change it For example, why pay 22 billion to be "the default" if users can just change the default setting

Mozilla is certainly paddling upstream. Of all of the AI-integrated apps and sites that I'm subjected to, I can think of exactly two where it wasn't obnoxious and a pain in the neck to disable. Kagi. Zed. That's it, that's the list.

> Kagi

I've been toying with that for ages on and off. Finally now a paid up user due to the fact that their guesswork engine (or makey-upy machine, or your preferred name) can be easily turned off, and stays off until requested otherwise.

Re: Firefox will have an option to disable all AI features

#266

Post by nicoburns »

LexiMax wrote: post #247
1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is well-known as a result of the expert reports in US v Google that generally software users do not change defaults Whereas providing an option or a setting that the user must locate and change doesn't really mean much. Few users will ever see it let alone decide to change it For example, why pay 22 billion to be "the default" if users can just change the default setting

Mozilla is certainly paddling upstream. Of all of the AI-integrated apps and sites that I'm subjected to, I can think of exactly two where it wasn't obnoxious and a pain in the neck to disable. Kagi. Zed. That's it, that's the list.

Apple's Preview is my favourite. It uses AI to allow you to copy text from images. And that's it.

Re: Firefox will have an option to disable all AI features

#267

Post by tjpnz »

RunSet wrote: post #144
999900000999 wrote: post #114

Have it as a stand alone plugin. I should have to manually install this AI stuff.

Language models are not like the Classic Theme, which can be relegated to an extension (now defunct). Language models are like Hello, Pocket, and Sync. Core browser features one and all that must silently run by default unless explicitly disabled.

You won't find much relating to Pocket or Hello in the OSS project. I predict a lot of the new AI functionality will stay out too. So not core functionality.

Re: Firefox will have an option to disable all AI features

#268

Post by protocolture »

samschooler wrote: post #23

I'm going to chime in here, I think 1. This is great and Mozilla is listening to it's core fans and 2. I want Firefox to be a competitive browser. Without AI enabled features + agent mode being first class citizens, this will be a non-starter in 2 years. I want my non-tech family members/friends to install Firefox not because I come over at Christmas, but because they want to. Because it's a browser that "just works.…

> Because it's a browser that "just works." We can't have this if Firefox stays in the pre-ai era.

Strongly disagree.

Theres no expectation of AI as a core browsing experience. There isnt even really an expectation of AI as part of an extended browsing experience. We cant even predict reliably what AI's relationship to browsing will be if it is even to exist. Mozilla could reliably wait 24 months and follow if features are actually in demand and being used.

Firefox can absolutely maintain "It just works" by being a good platform with well tested in demand features.

What they are talking about here, are opt out only experiments intruding on the core browsing experience. Thats the opposite of "It Just Works".

>I know Mozilla doesn't have much good will right now, but hopefully with the exec shakeup, they will right the ship on making FF a great browser.

Its already a great browser. It doesnt need a built in opt out AI experience to become great.

Re: Firefox will have an option to disable all AI features

#269

Post by rjdj377dhabsn »

Saris wrote: post #41
t1234s wrote: post #34

Is there a fork of firefox where you have all the same core functionality and support for extensions but with all the mozilla services (pocket, safe browsing, forced crap on the new tab page, any AI service, etc...) removed?

Zen, Waterfox, Librewolf, Floorp.. For android there's Fennec, Iceraven. There are more, those are just the ones I can recall.

For Android, Ironfox is currently the best option IMO.

Re: Firefox will have an option to disable all AI features

#270

Post by phyzome »

BeetleB wrote: post #228
phyzome wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anything that makes it easy to accidentally send local data elsewhere is a privacy issue.

> Anything that makes it easy to accidentally send local data elsewhere is a privacy issue. How is it "easy" if nothing is sent unless you configure the AI? What I'm asking is: If I do a brand new profile, default configuration, how can any AI related feature send anything that is of privacy concern? If you don't set up an LLM provider, it has nowhere to send to. I may be wrong, which is why I'm asking in the thread.…

I have no idea whether any of the AI features require explicit setup vs. automatically use a paid-for API somewhere.

But it also doesn't matter, because that's the kind of distinction that I've seen go back and forth elsewhere.

Post reply on HN