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

Mozilla's opposition to Chrome's Prompt API

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 248 posts

Re: Mozilla's opposition to Chrome's Prompt API

#151

Post by ilaksh »

jaffathecake wrote: post #136
ilaksh wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Archibald is anti-AI. 70+% of his public statements have demonstrated that. He is more or less aligned with the current most common sentiment in the west which is largely publicly against AI. But realistically it's just slow adaptation, network effects, etc. To give an example, before the MLB rolled out the Automated Ball Strike system this year, last year maybe 65+% of the sentiment in discussions about it was negat…

It's fun that I get to be called both "anti-AI" and an "AI shill" by people on the internet depending on the day of the week.

You're a politician. The sentiment leans anti in this cultural context at this time and so do your statements overall, such as if we look at this one and the rest and tally each one as positive or negative. Underlying you are more anti-AI than neutral. So your reply may have been technically true but it was deliberately misleading.

But you haven't really made a technical argument because your objection is not really technical. It's a type of politics.

It's obviously extremely extremely useful to have a simple API for accessing an LLM. It needs permissions like most things and the ability to limit download sizes/specific or maybe block use of external services if desired.

But anyway people will just fall back to a slightly worse alternative like a wrapper around WebLLM (that wraps WebGPU).

It's probably not politically feasible for you to take a different stance anyway.

Re: Mozilla's opposition to Chrome's Prompt API

#152

Post by MisterTea »

codedokode wrote: post #134

I am against this. 1) This will be a new source of fingerprinting information and this is difficult to fake to fool fingerprinting scripts, so it can be abused for "device verification". There should be no ability to "verify" a browser, and anyone should be able to emulate any browser. This is the most important point, I thought Google people are smart enough to see it. 2) LLMs use lot of memory and CPU time, for man…

> This is the most important point, I thought Google people are smart enough to see it.

Google just points towards the money like other bacterium and beats its flagella until it gets there. I don't know why or how anyone would EVER think Google is going to do something good for the web or humanity.

Re: Mozilla's opposition to Chrome's Prompt API

#153

Post by a1o »

thrance wrote: post #13
shevy-java wrote: post #2

> This will result in Mozilla and Apple having to licence Google's model, or ship a model that's quirks-compatible with the Google model in order to be interoperable. It may also become difficult for Chrome to update its own model for the same reasons. Google is again doing Evil. I am very annoyed that Google kind of de-facto controls the www (through chrome, let's be honest here). We really need to change this. I do…

Lina Khan's FTC sought to break Google into multiple companies, leaving Chrome alone. Alas, Google escaped unscathed.

I am curious if such thing happened, how would Chrome sustain itself as a company. I imagine Google would pay a hefty contract to it and keep their control, or some other actor would do and change the actors in the problem, but keeping it.

Re: Mozilla's opposition to Chrome's Prompt API

#154

Post by john_strinlai »

MisterTea wrote: post #152
codedokode wrote: post #134

I am against this. 1) This will be a new source of fingerprinting information and this is difficult to fake to fool fingerprinting scripts, so it can be abused for "device verification". There should be no ability to "verify" a browser, and anyone should be able to emulate any browser. This is the most important point, I thought Google people are smart enough to see it. 2) LLMs use lot of memory and CPU time, for man…

> This is the most important point, I thought Google people are smart enough to see it. Google just points towards the money like other bacterium and beats its flagella until it gets there. I don't know why or how anyone would EVER think Google is going to do something good for the web or humanity.

>I don't know why or how anyone would EVER think Google is going to do something good for the web or humanity.

i dislike google as much as the next guy, but sometimes it can be good to remember that actual humans work at google. some of them want to improve things for people. some of them even have a conscience.

one immediate "good" that comes to mind, from google, is the project zero team.

Re: Mozilla's opposition to Chrome's Prompt API

#155

Post by kevinwang »

john_strinlai wrote: post #154
MisterTea wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is the most important point, I thought Google people are smart enough to see it. Google just points towards the money like other bacterium and beats its flagella until it gets there. I don't know why or how anyone would EVER think Google is going to do something good for the web or humanity.

> I don't know why or how anyone would EVER think Google is going to do something good for the web or humanity. i dislike google as much as the next guy, but sometimes it can be good to remember that actual humans work at google. some of them want to improve things for people. some of them even have a conscience. one immediate "good" that comes to mind, from google, is the project zero team.

You probably meant "conscience" instead of "conscious"

Re: Mozilla's opposition to Chrome's Prompt API

#156

Post by john_strinlai »

kevinwang wrote: post #155
john_strinlai wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't know why or how anyone would EVER think Google is going to do something good for the web or humanity. i dislike google as much as the next guy, but sometimes it can be good to remember that actual humans work at google. some of them want to improve things for people. some of them even have a conscience. one immediate "good" that comes to mind, from google, is the project zero team.

You probably meant "conscience" instead of "conscious"

i sure did. thanks.

Re: Mozilla's opposition to Chrome's Prompt API

#157

Post by xingped »

john_strinlai wrote: post #154
MisterTea wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is the most important point, I thought Google people are smart enough to see it. Google just points towards the money like other bacterium and beats its flagella until it gets there. I don't know why or how anyone would EVER think Google is going to do something good for the web or humanity.

> I don't know why or how anyone would EVER think Google is going to do something good for the web or humanity. i dislike google as much as the next guy, but sometimes it can be good to remember that actual humans work at google. some of them want to improve things for people. some of them even have a conscience. one immediate "good" that comes to mind, from google, is the project zero team.

Sure actual humans work at Google. These actual humans are actively choosing to continue doing a job that makes the web worse. I don't see how "but they're human!" means automatic forgiveness of their actions.

Re: Mozilla's opposition to Chrome's Prompt API

#158

Post by zamalek »

benterix wrote: post #7

> Browsers and operating systems are increasingly expected to gain access to language models.[0] Are they? [0] https://github.com/webmachinelearning/prompt-api/blob/main/R...

AI massively empowers people who are incapable of anything except bikeshedding. It itself is very likely to be a bikeshed (but there are legitimate uses), and it also gives them to power to drone on until they overpower any opposition to their useless ideas.

Everything is increasingly expected to gain bikesheds.

Can't wait for the CVEs.

Re: Mozilla's opposition to Chrome's Prompt API

#159

Post by john_strinlai »

xingped wrote: post #157
john_strinlai wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't know why or how anyone would EVER think Google is going to do something good for the web or humanity. i dislike google as much as the next guy, but sometimes it can be good to remember that actual humans work at google. some of them want to improve things for people. some of them even have a conscience. one immediate "good" that comes to mind, from google, is the project zero team.

Sure actual humans work at Google. These actual humans are actively choosing to continue doing a job that makes the web worse. I don't see how "but they're human!" means automatic forgiveness of their actions.

>I don't see how "but they're human!" means automatic forgiveness of their actions.

it doesnt, if the actions are bad.

but if your blind hatred makes you think that google will not "EVER" produce something of value to the web or humanity, then you are just being obtuse.

i have already provided one example of something good that is directly attributable to google. there are several more examples, i am sure.

Re: Mozilla's opposition to Chrome's Prompt API

#160

Post by eocjeockoefj »

john_strinlai wrote: post #154
MisterTea wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is the most important point, I thought Google people are smart enough to see it. Google just points towards the money like other bacterium and beats its flagella until it gets there. I don't know why or how anyone would EVER think Google is going to do something good for the web or humanity.

> I don't know why or how anyone would EVER think Google is going to do something good for the web or humanity. i dislike google as much as the next guy, but sometimes it can be good to remember that actual humans work at google. some of them want to improve things for people. some of them even have a conscience. one immediate "good" that comes to mind, from google, is the project zero team.

It doesn’t really matter what the people working there want. It matters what the higher ups say, as they control the cash flow and consequently where resources are spent.

And, surprise surprise, the higher ups are generally the ones fucking things up because they also need to see those numbers and lines go up, regardless of actual impact on people’s lives.

So yeah, there surely are good people working for Google, but Google itself is not a person nor is it a “good” company. It is evil, end of. And, unfortunately, when you work for Satan, you don’t get to go around doing charity work.

Post reply on HN