if kagi can make a search engine that charges users, why dont we have a 1$/month open source browser whose code can be verified but people pay to use monthly?
No AI* Here – A Response to Mozilla's Next Chapter
141–150 of 344 posts
Re: No AI* Here – A Response to Mozilla's Next Chapter
#142...and keep your hand up if you've ever donated to Firefox
Why don't you go ahead and share the "donate to Firefox" page?
Last I knew, it doesn't exist. You can donate to Mozilla Corporation, the group that has been agitating it's own users and donors for years now.
People who want to support the Firefox team/product and have them focus on improving things like the development tools (or whatever else) literally cannot. Mozilla doesn't make that an option.
Re: No AI* Here – A Response to Mozilla's Next Chapter
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's an interesting example to use. I only use turn signals when there are other cars around that would need the indication. I don't view a turn signal as politeness, its a safety tool to let others know what I'm about to. I do also find that only using a turn signal when others are around is a good reinforcement to always be aware of my surroundings. I feel like a jerk when I don't use one and realize there was so…
> when there are other cars around that would need the indication This has a failure state of "when there's a nearby car [or, more realistically, cyclist / pedestrian] of which I am not aware". Knowing myself to be fallible, I always use my turn signals. I do take your point about turn signals being a reminder to be aware. That's good, but could also work while, you know, still using them, just in case.
[deleted]
Re: No AI* Here – A Response to Mozilla's Next Chapter
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's levels of this, though, more than two: local, open model local, proprietary model remote, open model (are there these?) remote, proprietary model There is almost no harm in a local, open model. Conversely, a remote, proprietary model should always require opting in with clear disclaimers. It needs to be proportional.
What do you mean by "open"? Open weights, or open training data? These are very different things.
That is a good point, and I think the takeaway is that there are lots of degrees of freedom here. Open training data would be better, of course, but open weights is still better than completely hidden.
Re: No AI* Here – A Response to Mozilla's Next Chapter
#145> Large language models are something else entirely*. They are black boxes. You cannot audit them. You cannot truly understand what they do with your data. You cannot verify their behaviour. And Mozilla wants to put them at the heart of the browser and that doesn't sit well. Am I being overly critical here or is this kind of a silly position to have right after talking about how neural machine translation is okay? Ma…
The thing about translation, even a human translator will sometimes make silly mistakes unless they know the domain really well. So LLM are not any worse. Translation is a problem with no deterministic solution (rule-based translation had always been a bad joke). Properly implemented deterministic search/information retrieval, on the other hand, works extremely well. So well it doesn't really need any replacement - except when you also have some extra dynamics on top like "filtering SEO slop" - and that's not something LLMs can improve at all.
Re: No AI* Here – A Response to Mozilla's Next Chapter
#146> Machine learning technologies like the Bergamot translation project offer real, tangible utility. Bergamot is transparent in what it does (translate text locally, period), auditable (you can inspect the model and its behavior), and has clear, limited scope, even if the internal neural network logic isn’t strictly deterministic. This really weakens the point of the post. It strikes me as a: we just don't like those…
Your tone is kind of ridiculous. It’s insane this has to be pointed out to you but here we go. Hammers are the best, they can drive nails, break down walls and serve as a weapon. From now on the military will, plumber to paratrooper, use nothing but hammers because their combined experience of using hammers will enable us to make better hammers for them to do their tasks with.
No, a tank is obviously better at all those things. They should clearly be used by everyone, including the paratrooper. Never mind the extra fuel costs or weight, all that matters is that it gets the job done best.
Re: No AI* Here – A Response to Mozilla's Next Chapter
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't really dig into a model you don't control. At least by running locally, you could in theory if it is exposed enough. The focused purpose, I think, gives it more of a "purpose built tool" feel over "a chatbot that might be better at some tasks than others" generic entity. There's no fake persona to interact with, just an algorithm with data in and out. The latter portion is less a technical and more an emoti…
Yes I agree with this, but the blog post makes a much more aggressive claim. > Large language models are something else entirely. They are black boxes. You cannot audit them. You cannot truly understand what they do with your data. You cannot verify their behaviour. And Mozilla wants to put them at the heart of the browser and that doesn’t sit well. Like I said, I'm all for local models for the exact reasons you ment…
Exactly this. The black box in this case is a problem because it's not in my computer. It transfers the users data to an external entity that can use this data to train it's model or sell it.
Not everyone uses their browser just to surf social media, some people use it for creating things, log in to walled gardens to work creatively. They do not want to send this data to an AI company to train on, to make themselves redundant.
Discussing the inner workings of an AI isn't helping, this is not what most people really worry about. Most people don't know how any of it works but they do notice that people get fired because the AI can do their job.
Re: No AI* Here – A Response to Mozilla's Next Chapter
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
Translation AI though has provable behavior cases though: round tripping. An ideal translation is one which round-trips to the same content, which at least implies a consistency of representation. No such example or even test as far as I know exists for any of the summary or search AIs since they expressly lose data in processing (I suppose you could construct multiple texts with the same meanings and see if they sum…
That is not an ideal translation as it prioritizes round tripability over natural word choice or ordering.
Getting byte exact text isn't the point though: even if it's different, I as the original writer can still look at roundtripped text and evaluate that it has the same meaning.
It's not a lossy process, and N round-trips should not lose any net meaning either.
This isn't a possible test with many other applications.
Re: No AI* Here – A Response to Mozilla's Next Chapter
#149Re: No AI* Here – A Response to Mozilla's Next Chapter
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not yet, but we’ll hopefully get there within at most a few years.
Get there by what mechanism? In the near term a good model pretty much requires a GPU, and it needs a lot of VRAM on that GPU. And the current state of the art of quantization has already gotten us most of the RAM-savings it possibly could. And it doesn't look like the average computer with steam installed is going to get above 8GB VRAM for a long time, let alone the average computer in general. Even focusing on new…
By M series and amd strix halo. You don't actually need a gpu, if the manufacturer knows that the use case will be running transformer models a more specialized NPU coupled with higher memory bandwidth of on the package RAM.
This will not result in locally running SOTA sized models, but it could result in a percentage of people running 100B - 200B models, which are large enough to do some useful things.