261–270 of 970 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All those things we had before AI?
Most of those things weren't very good before AI was applied. Translation specifically was pretty bad before Google applied machine learning methods to it around 2007 when it became very good almost overnight.
Where it excels is quantity. Often, niche languages are only available on Google Translate.
Does anyone else feel like the "Trust" angle is the only card they have left to play? Technically, Chrome is faster on JS benchmarks. Edge has better OS integration on Windows and comes by default. Safari wins on battery life on Mac. Firefox's only unique selling point is "We aren't a massive data vampire." If they clutter the browser with AI which inherently requires data processing, often in the cloud, they dilute…
Firefox always feels snappier to me, and I think most of that comes from less time downloading a bunch of ad shit I don't want anyway.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No doubt the browsers are constantly leapfrogging each other, so this isn't always the case. But, anecdotally: switching from Chrome to Safari actually felt like I got a new computer. The difference was that apparent.
Safari is fast and performant but once you load a heavy web app that uses a lot of memory safari will kill the tab. It’s incredibly frustrating to have a page reload with a banner simply saying the site was using too much memory and was reloaded. Especially when you’re on a maxed out MacBook with plenty of resources.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Brave is adware.
Technically, both Chrome and Firefox are adware too, since Google's main business is ads, and Firefox/Mozilla get a lot of money from Google to display Google as a search engine in Firefox (an ad :) )
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This really feels like the beginning of the end for Mozilla, sadly. The moment Mozilla failed to stop being dependent on Google's money whilst being true to their own mission in being a 'privacy first browser' it already was the end and the damage in trust was done. In 2007, the CEO at the time said they could live without Google's money - Now, their entire survival was tied to Google funding them [0] and got rewar…
> The moment Mozilla failed to stop being dependent on Google's money whilst being true to their own mission in being a 'privacy first browser' it already was the end and the damage in trust was done. I understand your position but what is the alternative funding source that could keep a company making a free browser running? Apple funds Safari's development but it's basically a side project for them, Google funds Ch…
All the "just monetize differently" comments are coming from a place of magical thinking that nobody has actually thought through. Donations are a feel good side hustle, but completely unprecedented for any but Wikipedia to raise money that's even the right order of magnitude. Any attempts at offering monetized services run into delusional and contradictory complaints from people who treat them to "focus on the browser" but also to branch out and monetize. Hank Green has used the term hedonic skepticism for the psychology of seeking to criticize for its entertainment value, which I think is a large part of what this is.
For a more serious answer on funding, I think the most interesting thing in this space is their VC fund. Mozilla has been brilliant in building up and carefully investing their nest egg from nearly two decades of search licensing, and while it's not Ycombinator, they have the beginnings of a VC fund that may be a very interesting kind of Third Way, so to speak, depending on how that goes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The wider point here is that you can only use FF as long as Mozilla can fund it and Mozilla can only fund it as long as Google funds them. At some point, it will be cheaper for Google to pay monopoly fines than funding Mozilla.
Fines aren't a way to just buy your way out of obeying the law. At some point if they persist in monopolistic activities then they will get broken up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm excited about what Kagi is doing: https://orionbrowser.com/ I have no illusions that they will turn into google the first chance they get, all companies do. But for now they seem pretty good.
Not sure why you're getting downvoted. Orion has matured as a browser and just hit 1.0. It's mac- and ios-only for now, but linux and windows ports are in the works. It has ad-blocking out of the box and has zero telemetry. I use it every day.
I get the feeling this kind of product will only appeal to unconscious iOS and macOS users. Windows and Linux users have much better (and freer) options than a WebKit wrapper.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What even is an "AI browser"? It's a browser, it's mainly supposed to render web pages / web apps. There is no obvious reason why it would need any AI features.
Translation? Image search? Live captions? Dubbing? Summary? Rewrite text better?
Image search? I have a search engine for that.
Live captions? Didn’t ask for that, wouldn’t use it.
Dubbing? Ditto.
Summary? Wouldn’t trust an AI for that, plus it’s just more tik-tokification. No fucking thanks. I don’t need to experience life as short blips of everything.
Rewrite text better? Might as well kill myself once I’m ready to let a predictive text bot write shit in my place.
So… no thanks.