Live data from Hacker News

Firefox will have an option to disable all AI features

mastodon.social

401–410 of 554 posts

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

#401

I think people screaming "but AI is the future" doesn't recognize what the problem is. The problem is not AI. The problem is that Mozilla keeps jumping on fads instead of focusing on their browser core. There are a tons of "we bundled all the latest crap" Chrome forks out there. Nobody needs more those. Stop pushing bells and whistles. Give us more extensibility instead. Keep supporting v2 manifest and add more. Ther…

> The problem is that Mozilla keeps jumping on fads instead of focusing on their browser core. They always did, everyone does. This is not really new, and not really that harmful in itself. The deeper problem is that you need developers who are also understanding what they are doing, what people want and need, developers who are nerdy about some topic and very deep into their understanding of it. But Mozilla seems to…

> and not really that harmful in itself

Unless you can't afford the split focus. If Mozilla can do 1 thing right or 2 things half-assed, and it looks like this is the case, they should stop and focus on strengthening the core before hanging more stuff around it.

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

#402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So instead of being flexible enough to adapt to new requirements as users demand them, they are blindly implementing things before they are requested just in case?

Last I checked Firefox was sitting at 4% browser market share. If you include Brave you just get to 5%[0]. So truth is that privacy isn't enough to get people to switch. 5% share isn't enough to stay alive and protect privacy. > they are blindly implementing things before they are requested This is the job of every engineer. Your job is to understand the product and where it advances and where it can help the users.…

>This is the job of every engineer.

No its not. Engineering is about right sizing the product. This is not that. Theres no user story, theres no pressing demand. Every CTO in the world might be racing to force AI into their products regardless of utility but there's no reason to pretend this is being done for good engineering reasons.

>Work with customers and you'll experience this first hand.

Theres no customer benefit to shoving AI in every application at every layer. This is not about the customer. This is about a race to cram the feature in every conceivable space and see where it sticks. This is corporate and has no sense of good engineering. They also don't want it. What a combo. No utility and no demand. If anything its a bit like the story of fish fingers, where the pressing need, was the big warehouse full of unwanted fish bits that they wanted to move, and the innovation was productising it in such a way that people would actually purchase and consume it. In this case we have DC's full of AI cards that desperately want a market. It might be uncharitable, but I do wonder if the Mozilla Foundation has been promised some financial reward if they solve this issue.

There has not been any demonstrable requirements gathering for this change. An executive directed this, and to pretend otherwise is insane.

>Speaking about reading between the lines, the privacy community is not very good at advocating for privacy.

No they aren't very good at it at all, but that's a massive non sequitur.

>So stop with this bullshit, you're shooting yourself in the foot.

No, defending Firefox from valid criticism is the self inflicted injury.

>I use Arch but that doesn't mean I'm going to piss on Ubuntu every chance I get.

Ok, but I would think it fair and reasonable to criticise Ubuntu if they decided to randomly cram an opt out LLM into the distro, and I think your criticism of them also deserves to be heard. You dont need to be the Ubuntu or Firefox internet defense force.

>So why get angry because someone is making a step in the right direction?

I haven't been angry at a single firefox user here, I would ask you to stop making things up just to be angry about. There's not an ounce of "Boycott" or anything in my posts. I am writing this from firefox. I am permitted, to be critical of the browser I am using.

>I'm mad at you because you're attacking our literal last line of defense for a secure and private internet.

"Attacking". Its clearly necessary criticism. The devaluing of the product is coming from inside the house. Their chief rival is, critically, releasing a separate browser to test their AI features in. For Chrome itself Gemini is in the extension store. It is OPT IN, not OPT OUT. https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/gemini-for-chrome/a... Their chief rival is respecting end user consent better. If you want them to be a more popular browser, why don't you hold them to a better standard than Chrome, instead of policing the critics?

(Also boo for making me open chrome to check)

>Stop with this "no true Scotsman" bullshit.

I literally cannot identify a no true scotsman argument in my comments. Theres a difference between saying "No TRUE web browser would" and pointing out validly that there's no interest or demand in the feature being rolled out. If anything, the closest thing in this thread to a no true scotsman, while still failing it technically, is the idea that you cant be a true supporter of privacy while being critical of Mozilla.

>We can have those arguments at a later date when Firefox isn't on its last leg and/or when we have a diverse choice in browsers.

No now is a great time.

>But at this point all you are doing is advocating for Chrome.

No I am asking them to be competitive with chrome, and treat users that well or better.

>But it didn't work, so we need to try something else.

Enshittification isnt a plan.

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

#403

I think people screaming "but AI is the future" doesn't recognize what the problem is. The problem is not AI. The problem is that Mozilla keeps jumping on fads instead of focusing on their browser core. There are a tons of "we bundled all the latest crap" Chrome forks out there. Nobody needs more those. Stop pushing bells and whistles. Give us more extensibility instead. Keep supporting v2 manifest and add more. Ther…

  >  The problem is not AI. The problem is that Mozilla keeps jumping on fads instead of focusing on their browser core
Nah, the problem is people just want to hate on Mozilla. I mean even that Mastadon thread they bring up people hating on Mozilla for accepting crypto donations and are equating it to putting a miner in the browser. Like what a fucking joke. It's such a crazy exaggeration of what actually happened. Company just adds new way for people to give them money (which they desperately need) and then everyone gets upset.

How is this not laughable?

Now we're seeing a similar thing. Everyone is talking about fucking LLMs. What, do you think FF is going to start shipping a 100GB browser? Even Llama-8B is >15GB. That would be ridiculous!

No, what FF is doing is implementing features like Translate (an ALREADY opt-in feature[0]) and semantic search. Seriously, go to their Labs tab! They let you opt in to try a feature to semantically search your browser history. That's not an LLM, that's a vector embedding model! What are they going to do next? Semantic search of a webpage? Regex search?! Even in their announcement the other day they mention the iOS "shake to summarize" and that's not even an AI they're shipping it's just a shortcut to Apple Intelligence. The only other thing they've announced is what already exists, a shortcut to use your chatbot of choice. That's not AI in the browser it is literally a split window.

  | Mozilla is not going to train its own giant LLM anytime soon.[1]

  > having a faint through about removing adblock support
Don't be so fucking disingenuous.

They said literally the opposite[1]

  | At some point, though, Enzor-DeMeo will have to tend to Mozilla’s own business. “I do think we need revenue diversification away from Google,” he says, “but I don’t necessarily believe we need revenue diversification away from the browser.” It seems he thinks a combination of subscription revenue, advertising, and maybe a few search and AI placement deals can get that done. He’s also bullish that things like built-in VPN and a privacy service called Monitor can get more people to pay for their browser. He says he could begin to block ad blockers in Firefox and estimates that’d bring in another $150 million, but he doesn’t want to do that. It feels off-mission.
That's not even a quote from him, that's a summarization of their conversation and it literally says that removing ad blockers is against their mission.

Literally the opposite of what you're suggestion.

Sorry, people just want to hate on Firefox.

Look, if anyone wants to be a power user there's nothing Firefox is doing from stopping them from using a fork like Mullvad or Waterfox. Those are going to keep all these AI features out. So what do we privacy maximalists care? The forks give us exactly what we want.

Meanwhile we're just attacking the last line of defense against Google (Chromium) taking over the internet? How fucking stupid are we? We're eating our cake and what, complaining that the baker's hands aren't made of gold? It's just laughable at how much we love shooting ourselves in the foot here. We've been playing this same stupid fucking game for years and watching Chrome take more and more market share. Let FF be the browser for the masses and use a fucking fork if you care about true Scottsmen. It takes literally no technical skill to click download on a different webpage. Seriously, this is so fucking dumb.

I'm just going to link this from further down the main post. The two toots summarize it well[2]

[0] You literally have to download the translation models!

[1] https://www.theverge.com/tech/845216/mozilla-ceo-anthony-enz... (https://archive.is/20251217170357/https://www.theverge.com/t...)

[2] https://mastodon.social/@nical@mastodon.gamedev.place/115741...

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

#404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You see the pattern here? Yes. The pattern is that you find these features useful.

The pattern is that I seek out useful tools. I don't wait for them to be rained down and force fed to me. Just because meat is useful to me doesn't mean I want to be subscribed to a grocery store who will deliver meat every month. That's an overkill of resources for most consumers.

  > I don't wait for them to be rained down and force fed to me.
Are they?

You literally have to download the language models if you want to enable translation. That's "opt-in" not "opt-out"...

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

#406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shoving an AI agent in every website is distracting and not that useful. Shoving an AI agent in every app is distracting as well. Having one global AI agent per operating system or browser (where most of the digital life happens, in the case of desktop browsers), for the people that want to have an AI agent, it's probably going to be useful, if well implemented.

OS might make sense, but the browser level is a weird middle space for it.

I know, but at the end of the day most people nowadays do the vast majority of their job in a browser, and there is already a well defined API to manage its content. Also browsers are coming there faster and at some point it will become what people expect, rather what's most optimal.

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

#407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even when they're trying to do the right thing, they're strangely afraid to commit to doing the right thing when it comes to specifics. They won't say "never" even when it should be easy. Honestly, and it's hard for me to say this: I've come around. I still use and love Firefox, but emotionally I'm detaching from it, because fundamentally: all the other FOSS I use is an actual, factual, open source project. And Fir…

I can put up with a lot of friction and cruft as long as the foundations are solid amd I feel a product is moving in the right direction. I moved off chrome when it became crystal clear that Chrome was not even pretending to compete on User experience anymore, even in it is still the best browser in some regards. I hate that I feel to be having déjà vu here. My needs are simple and I’m surrounded by software wanting…

110% on all counts.

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

#408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fully disagree. I use zero so-called "AI" features in my day to day life. None. Not one. Why do I need them in my browser, and why does my browser need to focus on something that, several years into the hype wave, I still *do not use at all*? And it's not for a lack of trying, the results are just not what I need or want, and traditional browsing (and search engines, etc.) does do what I want. I'd be elated if Firefo…

> I use zero so-called "AI" features in my day to day life. None. Not one. I know so many people who made that same argument, if you can call it that, about smartphones. I recently listened to a podcast (probably The Verge) talking about how an author was suddenly getting more purchases from his personal website. He attributed it to AI chatbots giving his personal website as the best place to buy rather than Amazon,…

> Why search, wade through dubious results, etc when you can just instantly get the result you want in the format you want it?

For one, that way you can see that the source is dubious. Gemini gives it to you cleaned. And then you still have to dig through the sources to confirm that what it gave you is correct and not halucinated.

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

#409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want to be a power user, then be a power user. Switch to a fork like Mullvad or Waterfox. Seriously, I don't get the problem here. I don't want AI in my browser either, but it is pretty simple for us who care to switch away. It's even easy for those who aren't technically skilled! If this is what stops Firefox from drowning then I'm all for it. They are our last line of defense from a Google controlled interne…

>If this is what stops Firefox from drowning By having the most engaged users leave and splinter the community furtehr in hopes that Mozilla out competes the trillion dollar monopoly in a war of data centers? We really will do anything except message your policy makers, huh? I migrated several times before and am browsing around now. Id even be so bold to say that Mozilla dying will not kill the Quantum web engine sc…

  > By having the most engaged users leave and splinter the community furtehr
Power users going to a fork like Mullvad or Waterfox still helps Mozilla. Just in the same way that people switching to Brave helps Google.

  > We really will do anything except message your policy makers, huh?
I actually do this. And I'm actually decently satisfied with one of them. I bet you're grateful for that person too even if you don't know it.

  > I migrated several times before and am browsing around now.
Cool? Switching browsers is literally one of the easiest platform migrations you can do. All your bookmarks and everything transfers. I'd bet something like Mullvad (works with the Tor foundation and their fork of Firefox) is better your speed. Yes, you can uninstall their built-in mullvad VPN extension and it'll just go away.

  > But I don't think "no one cares about you, just leave" is the healthiest option for your stated goals.
Yet that's not what's going on

  > I don't want my tools to be bloated.
So don't install them?

Seriously, I don't get the problem. As far as I'm aware the only things that are opt-out are the smart tabs. Which is a 22.6MB and 57MB vector embedding models that can be easily removed.

So what bloat?

They said everything will be opt-in and that's cool with me. If they go back on that then yeah, grab the fucking pitchforks and I'll be right there with you because fuck those lying bastards. But so far they haven't done that so put the pitchfork down. All you're doing is being over zealous and attacking the greater enemy's (Chrome) enemy. You don't have to call Firefox your ally but it's pretty clear that Chrome is significantly more misaligned with your wants than Firefox is. So stop attacking the best thing we got right now.

  > this industry bewildered on how this apocalypse came upon them
I'm pretty confident this is happening because all the privacy maximalists are not actually privacy maximalists and would rather lick the fucking boot than take a knight who's armor isn't pure. Doesn't matter if that boot is orange and shaped like a lion, it's still the boot.

I'm sorry the choices are slim. I really do wish it was better. But we're never going to get there if we kill the last thing standing against the monopoly. So yeah, pick the right fucking battle.

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

#410
post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am fine with it being a disable-button, as long it's persistent once set. What I honestly fear is that while AI-features are disabled, popups inviting me to enable them again. That, or them auto-enabling them on every update like sometimes has happened with `browser.ml.enable` flag on `about:config`.

They don't do that for any feature, no reason they'd do it for AI.

New CEO could change that.
Post reply on HN