201–210 of 248 posts
Why is it that Google is fixated on bolting on ever more junk and turning browsers into Homermobiles[0] instead of putting those vast resources towards fixing the numerous structural weaknesses in everything that browsers are already capable of? Why not focus on foundational things that will improve quality of life for everything on the web platform ranging from static blogs to e-commerce to cutting edge web apps? Re…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Double edged sword. They have & they've have not. They've fueling technology for war, yet they've enabled us to communicate further and wider than before. The "don't be evil" & "good things" end up tainted; or thrown to the graveyard. You can't apply those morals to a corporation like Google. Anything that had an positive effect to the internet ended up in the graveyard years ago. Maybe in the early years, yes they e…
>" Anything that had an positive effect to the internet ended up in the graveyard years ago. " the example in my first comment, project zero, is still active today.
Or, something like that?
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…
> There should be no ability to "verify" a browser, and anyone should be able to emulate any browser. Hard disagree. The AI industry has absolutely shredded the various anti-scraping and anti-botting social contracts that were in place prior to the covid pandemic. Like it's now common knowledge that robots.txt isn't a hard requirement and can be avoided entirely, for example. They have absolutely turned the open web…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Double edged sword. They have & they've have not. They've fueling technology for war, yet they've enabled us to communicate further and wider than before. The "don't be evil" & "good things" end up tainted; or thrown to the graveyard. You can't apply those morals to a corporation like Google. Anything that had an positive effect to the internet ended up in the graveyard years ago. Maybe in the early years, yes they e…
>" Anything that had an positive effect to the internet ended up in the graveyard years ago. " the example in my first comment, project zero, is still active today.
So? Many smaller players actually contribute more.
It's not about a single contribution but about what is better - a lot of power in the hands of a large corp which can afford to obstruct with impunity and do the opposite of "do no evil" versus several smaller players who have to actually compete and are concerned about their image.
When I posted this, I linked to the latest statement https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1213#i... , which is the content relevant to the title (the details of our opposition to the API). Unfortunately someone removed the link to the specific post.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>" Anything that had an positive effect to the internet ended up in the graveyard years ago. " the example in my first comment, project zero, is still active today.
> the example in my first comment, project zero, is still active today. So? Many smaller players actually contribute more. It's not about a single contribution but about what is better - a lot of power in the hands of a large corp which can afford to obstruct with impunity and do the opposite of "do no evil" versus several smaller players who have to actually compete and are concerned about their image.
the claim was that no one should expect google to do anything good for the web or humanity "EVER". the existence of even one good thing is to refute that point.
but your sibling comment is probably correct. people say "EVER" but dont mean it literally, or something. its very confusing to me.
Extremely glad to see Mozilla taking a stance here.
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…
MLB's ABS does not use AI for its ball tracking. And it has specific payoffs particular to its context from four years of testing and wiel defined limits on use cases that don't necessarily generalize to issues surrounding AI and it's tradeoffs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's exhausting having such reflexive thoughtless ragging anytime Chrome is mentioned. Oh no! Chrome is trying to enhance user agency again! Oh no! Chrome is trying to make the web better for end users! Mozilla's concerns aren't totally bogus, I'm not going to try to laugh them out of the room. But their pearl clutching & belly-aching about "oh no what if not all implementations of ai prompts work exactly the same" f…
> But I'd challenge the haters to at least try to connect their reflexive hate meaningfully to what the topic at hand actually is, to provide something worth considering in some way. But that I think asks too much, for what posts like this seek: merely to inflame the world. Your fixated bias shows that your not willing to shuffle. Think out of the box for once. No one is ruling out that Google is trying to enhance th…
It seems pretty basic to me that yes I should be able to have some agentic experiences working for me.
The Mozilla line here is that this is bad because different people might have different agents and that is intolerable, is a risk.
It's hiding in a cave to avoid seeing your own shadow idiotic.
Why is it that Google is fixated on bolting on ever more junk and turning browsers into Homermobiles[0] instead of putting those vast resources towards fixing the numerous structural weaknesses in everything that browsers are already capable of? Why not focus on foundational things that will improve quality of life for everything on the web platform ranging from static blogs to e-commerce to cutting edge web apps? Re…
Google has Android & ChromeOS to directly try to do that but Chrome makes it so the average user using e.g. Windows still ends up in a Google world most of the time.