- cross-posted to:
- firefox@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- firefox@lemmy.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
The new CEO of Mozilla, Laura Chambers, has a background working at all sorts of evil companies like AirBnB and PayPal. Its absolutely no surprise that the company immediately dropped plans to diversify in ethical, unique and privacy friendly ways as soon as she joined.
CEOs getting paid primarily in stock means grifters like this will drop their USP for whatever trend makes the line go up, if it is crypto, NFTs, or AI.
Shes not the new ceo, shes a temporary interim ceo while they find someone better
Our initial offering will include ChatGPT, Google Gemini, HuggingChat, and Le Chat Mistral, but we will continue adding AI services that meet our standards for quality and user experience.
Is that the same Mozilla that started the Joint Statement on AI Safety and Openness?
What in living hell do proprietary and predatory AI services even doing here?
Mozilla just offered users to feed into the very abomination they claim to fight.
Also, for all things “AI”, local is the only way to go if you ever want to have a chance at privacy.
“Our initial offering”
They said in the article theyll also offer the use of self-hosted models later
They didn’t mention it anywhere
Whether it’s a local or a cloud-based model, if you want to use AI, we think you should have the freedom to use (or not use) the tools that best suit your needs.
Ok it doesnt say it directly but you can see where i got it from
As long as I can disable it, sure. Knock yourself out.
people please actually read the article not the headline; this is literally about accessibility improvements for blind and visually impaired people for generating alt text inside of documents and pdfs.
access their preferred AI service from the Firefox sidebar to summarize information, simplify language, or test their knowledge, all without leaving their current web page.
Our initial offering will include ChatGPT, Google Gemini, HuggingChat, and Le Chat Mistral
That’s one of the things, but it’s also adding a dedicated sidebar for AI. That’s the sort of thing that should just be an extension, there’s absolutely no reason at all why that needs to be something built into the browser.
Developers should be providing alt text themselves, but in cases where they aren’t having a local image recognition model running to provide a description isn’t terrible as long as it’s either 100% local or completely opt-in.
The dedicated sidebar on the other hand feels very much like a cheap attempt to cash in on the AI fad.
That’s the sort of thing that should just be an extension
It most likely is on the technical level, just shipped by default and integrated into standard settings instead of the add-on ones. And it’s going to be opt-in, so you won’t have to go into
about:configto disable it. Speaking of: You’re looking forextensions.pocket.enabled, it should befalse. And before you say “muh diskspace” it’s probably like 5k of js and css or such.
I don’t care. I don’t want AI in my browser.
Nice for you, fuck blind people.
Blind people shouldn’t need to give up their privacy to Microsoft and Google to have a web page read to them.
Let me just quote the top of this thread.
people please actually read the article not the headline; this is literally about accessibility improvements for blind and visually impaired people for generating alt text inside of documents and pdfs.
It doesn’t just read the page to them, which is a solved problem, it generates descriptions when they’re missing, making the web more accessible.
Ai ScArY!¡! And you haven’t ever used google translate?
no. why the hell would I use google spyware crap?
Just curious, how do you translate things? I know Mozilla recently did some local translation stuff in-browser, but what about before? Is there a good competitor to Google Translate?
yeah but AI bad no matter if it would be actually useful for once
Not going to lie, AI can be a very powerfull tool but the “we want your browsing experience to be divine, but don’t worry we have your back” scares me shitless. Firefox has always had our backs, why do they feel the need to mention it now? Maybe I’m being paranoid but I feel like a browser shoulf just be a browser.
Firefox has always had our backs
It’s been going in a less friendly direction for a while. Embedding of mandatory useless extensions, aggressive advertising, deals to display more and more content to more users, disregard for user settings on multiple updates, opt-out telemetry, and now telling you that you’re using it wrong.
Sure, you can navigate through various settings to disable most of these, and check back on updates for settings that toggles back, or are simply renamed and mysteriously got back to their default, intrusive value. But we should not have to do that.
And that’s not even touching the issue with the Mozilla Corporation itself.
Firefox is the alternative browser, but it certainly isn’t there to “have your back”.
trustworthy AI
Our initial offering will include ChatGPT, Google Gemini, HuggingChat, and Le Chat Mistral
What
I would relatively ok with an implementation of Le Chat Mistral
Defund Mozilla lmao. Absolute shipwreck of a company at this point.
At least this is opt-in, and Firefox still allows for manifest v3 extensions, and, on the whole, isn’t using a engine funded by a billion dollar company that’s doing everything in it’s power to spy on you.
Yeah i was kinda overreacting but it really isnt looking good for firefoxes future at this point imo. As long as its open source there will at least be forks like librewolf.
deleted by creator
Why Mozilla? Why? You were the chosen one… Fuck it, I’m going back to lynx! Tabs? Sure we have tabs in lynx, just run lynx in tmux
what? Its opt-in
Sorry I can’t read your reply, lynx doesn’t render it properly ;)
I wish they spent their time fixing bugs, rather than implementing this bullshit
deleted by creator
I strongly believe that generative AI is catastrophically misused in the vast majority of its applications, so in my eyes, adding gpt-based AI to the browser is largely a wasted effort
I highly doubt they have one team that switches between experiments and bug fixes, never doing two things at once. Not to mention that something ultimately being ripped out isn’t necessarily wasted effort. They could likely easily pivot virtually anything they put into this specific experiment into any number of other uses.
Why not both? A large project like this needs to fix bugs and also continue to refine its features for long term relevance.
You will never achieve long-term relevance, by chasing immediately available buzzwords
How long does AI need to be used, and how much demand needs to be sustained, for it to stop being called a “buzzword”? I’m a little dubious that NVIDIA became literally the most highly-valued company on Earth off the back of a mere “buzzword.”
It doesn’t seem like end users are the ones demanding AI.
I am an end user and I find it quite handy for a number of applications.
The reasoning “I don’t find it useful and therefore nobody finds it useful” is common in these sorts of threads.
If the sentiment is that common, maybe there’s something to it.
You made an assertion about what end users want. I’m an end user and my desires are not the same as your desires.
But if the sentiment is that common, maybe there’s something to it.
Or maybe it’s just a common fallacy. Like argumentum ad populum.
Can you reminds us what the current state of NFTs is? Or most crypto? Web3 tech? This is next.
Of course Nvidia are the highest-valued company. They capitalized on idiots misusing the technology, until it created issues in society, for personal gain.
Can you remind me how those technologies are related, other than the mere accusation of them being “buzzwords”?
Cryptocurrency is actually doing fine, BTW. Just because you don’t find it useful doesn’t mean it’s not useful to other people.
Why are you explicitly picking those examples, and not things like IoT, DevOps and Edge computing, all buzzwords, all successful and still in general existence today?
You’re cherry picking failed buzzwords and using them as proof that “AI” will fail.
To be clear, I agree that LLMs are bullshit for 95% of applications they are being put into. But at least argue in good faith.
I chose those examples, because that’s what’s been heavily marketed recently, and it all either fundamentally failed, ended up being a scam, or both.
In contrast:
- devops is software automation practices…?
- edge computing is on-call load balancing? It’s horrendously expensive though, so i’ll give them time to figure it out
- IoT, admittedly, is largely oversold, but even then, there were a ton of products on the market that absolutely outlived all 3 of the examples i’ve given, combined. HomeAssistant+Zigbee home automation is awesome. A raspberryPi is “iot”. Your smartwatch is “iot”.
There’s a difference between cherry-picking, and refusing to accept that something is a scam. Crypto ended up begging for government regulation, when the original intention was to move away from it. NFTs are a pump-and-dump ponzi scheme. web3 literally doesn’t mean anything
LLMs aren’t a scam, I don’t even understand how you could twist it into such. While something like NFTs have no real legitimate use case, LLMs excel at translation and as an advanced form of spelling and grammar checking.
Your complaint seems to boil down to “it doesn’t work in all use cases it’s being used” which is fair enough, but if I put a car on my bed and try to use it as a blanket… does that make it a scam?
AI may have its uses, but the easy counterpoint to your argument is to look at FTX at its peak and where it is now (bankrupt). The stock exchange is the exact opposite of rational, and is terrible at estimating the use one can get out of tech.
FTX was a cryptocurrency exchange, how is that remotely similar to NVIDIA?
