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

No AI* Here – A Response to Mozilla's Next Chapter

waterfox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 344 posts

Re: No AI* Here – A Response to Mozilla's Next Chapter

#71

Post by XorNot »

kevmo314 wrote: post #29

> 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…

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 summarize equivalently - but it's certainly far harder to prove anything).

Re: No AI* Here – A Response to Mozilla's Next Chapter

#73

Post by kbelder »

TheRealPomax wrote: post #54
nullbound wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I do sympathize with the thought behind it, general user is already equating llm chat box as 'better browsing'. In terms of simple positioning vis-a-vis non-technical audience, this is one integration that does make fiscal sense.. if mozilla was a real business. Now, personally, I would like to have sane defaults, where I can toggle stuff on and off, but we all know which way the wind blows in this case.

Firefox is not for general users, which is the problem that Mozilla's for a literal decade now. There is no way to make it better than Chrome or Safari (because it has to be better for every day users to switch, not just "as good" or even "way more configurable but slightly worse". It has to be appreciably better). So the only user base is the power user. And then yes: sane defaults, and a way to turn things on and o…

The way to make Firefox better is by not doing the things that are making the other browsers worse. Ads and privacy are an example of areas where Chrome is clearly getting worse.

LLM integration... is arguable. Maybe it'll make Chrome worse, maybe not. Clunky and obtrusive integration certainly will.

Re: No AI* Here – A Response to Mozilla's Next Chapter

#74

Post by koolala »

kbelder wrote: post #67
koolala wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm ok with Translation because it's best solved with AI. I'm not ok with it when Firefox "uses AI to read your open tabs" to do things that don't even need an AI based solution.

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.

The harm to me is the implementation is terrible - local or not (assuming no AI based telemetry). If their answer is AI then it pretty much means they won't make a non-AI solution. Today I just got my first stupid AI tab grouping in Firefox that makes zero intuitive sense. I just want grouping not from an AI reading my tabs. It should just be based on where my tabs were opened from. I also tried Waterfox today because of this post and while I'd prefer horizontal grouping atleast their implementation isn't stupid. Language translation is a opaque complex process. Tabs being grouped from other tabs is not good when opaque and unpredictable and does not need AI.

Re: No AI* Here – A Response to Mozilla's Next Chapter

#75

Post by AnonC »

aleph_minus_one wrote: post #62
fguerraz wrote: post #59

I still can’t give them money, so what’s the point? Just like with Mozilla, they rely on sponsors and you are the product.

> I still can’t give them money, so what’s the point? What do you say about the following link, then? > https://www.mozillafoundation.org/en/donate/

That link is for Mozilla Foundation, which is a non-profit and donations to it do not go to the development of Firefox. Mozilla Corporation, the for-profit entity, owns and manages Firefox. The way to support Firefox monetarily is by buying Mozilla VPN where available (this is Mullvad in the backend) and buying some Firefox merchandise (like stickers, t-shirts, etc.). I think an MDN Plus subscription also helps.

Re: No AI* Here – A Response to Mozilla's Next Chapter

#76

Post by chillfox »

nullbound wrote: post #42
TheRealPomax wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want the people who make Firefox to make decisions about Firefox based on what users have been asking for instead of based on what a CEO of a for-profit decides is still not going to make them any money, just like every other plan that got pitched in the last 10 years that failed to turn their losing streak around. It's not a knee-jerk reaction to "AI", it's a perfectly reasonable reaction to Mozilla yet again sayi…

While I do sympathize with the thought behind it, general user is already equating llm chat box as 'better browsing'. In terms of simple positioning vis-a-vis non-technical audience, this is one integration that does make fiscal sense.. if mozilla was a real business. Now, personally, I would like to have sane defaults, where I can toggle stuff on and off, but we all know which way the wind blows in this case.

I find that hard to believe, every general/average user I have spoken to does not use AI for anything in their daily lives and have either not tried it at all or only played with it a bit a few years ago when it first came out.

Re: No AI* Here – A Response to Mozilla's Next Chapter

#77

Post by _heimdall »

kbelder wrote: post #69
bee_rider wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not too worried about starting to write like a bot. But, I do notice that I’m sometimes blunt and demanding when I talk to a bot, and I’m worried that could leak through to my normal talking. I try to be polite just to not gain bad habits. But, for example, chatGPT is extremely confident, often wrong, and very weasely about it, so it can be hard to be “nice” to it (especially knowing that under the hood it has no…

It's like using your turn signal even when you know there's nobody around you. Politeness is a habit you don't want to break.

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 someone in the area, just as I feel like a jerk when I realize I didn't turn off my brights for an approaching car at night. In both cases, feeling like a jerk reminds me to pay more attention while driving.

Re: No AI* Here – A Response to Mozilla's Next Chapter

#79

Post by _heimdall »

zdragnar wrote: post #37
kevmo314 wrote: post #29

> 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…

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…

Running locally does help get less modified output, bit how does it help escape the black box problem?

A local model will have fewer filters applied to the output, but I can still only evaluate the input/output pairs.

Re: No AI* Here – A Response to Mozilla's Next Chapter

#80

Post by AnonC »

fguerraz wrote: post #59

I still can’t give them money, so what’s the point? Just like with Mozilla, they rely on sponsors and you are the product.

As I mentioned in a comment below (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46297617 ), Firefox does not rely only on sponsors. There are a few ways to pay money that goes directly towards Firefox.
Post reply on HN