The poll is over, and the result is clear:

Mina@berlin.social to Firefox@lemmy.ml – 490 points –
berlin.social

The poll is over, and the result is clear:

#FireFox users have very little interest for Chatbot integration into their browser.

I am very much aware that the people, who voted in this poll are hardly a representative sample, but more than 2.4K people is a better size than many "professional" opinion polls.

@mozilla & @firefox should take people, who actually care about their #browser choice, seriously.

I still seriously believe that #Mozilla's fate matters,

https://berlin.social/@mina/113102817500429735

1/3

94

If I want to use a chatbot, I'll access a website that provides one.
My browser is supposed to be a program that lets me access the internet, and nothing else.

Or I'll have one installed as a separate app, which will have access to data on my system.

So either it's a separate app, or it's a website. I don't see a need for my browser to be that app.

And if I really really really wanted one in my browser (which I don't but for the sake of argument) I'll look for an add-on.

Same reason I don't want my browser to filter or ban my content but I totally use unlock origin.

What Firefox provides here:

A connector to LLM providers.
Accelerators (context menu options).

From a coding perspective, this should ideally be a very lightweight functionality.

This feature is very analogous to options to add a search engine, and also to provide accelerators via context menu.

While it can be done via third-party or Official Mozilla add-ons, but (to me) it still makes sense to have it part of the product.

Eventhough I am not pro chatbot, such a poll is unfortunately completely worthless. Only random samples (or at least representative ones) allow to say something about a group.

If we go into an AI fanboy forum and ask the same question, we may find 3000 people saying the exact opposite. It just means nothing whatsoever.

100%. I feel like the broad fediverse community is not a fan of generative AI

Does that mean they are not representative of the general population...?

There's also the fact that it's a false dichotomy.

@cmeio

Yes and no.

Obviously, the people questioned here, are not representative for the entire FF user community.

However: The Fediverse at large is a community of mostly tech-savvy people, who do care about independence from major corporations.

These are, in fact, also the people who are the core users and developers of FOSS software.

Whilst the exact percentage means nothing, the tendency is so clear that it should, at least, be taken into consideration.

Did you read part 2 & 3?

https://johnmjennings.com/an-important-lesson-from-bullet-holes-in-planes/

The responses needs to be contain representation at least equally to non Firefox people who no longer care to answer a poll about a product that they don't use. Why? Only current users are going to answer the poll, not the people with the cuts and pain that forced them back to Chrome or safari. Asking survivors how to reinforce survival actually doesn't solve for why do many people off board Firefox.

Frankly you should ask people like my 60-70yo parents why chrome not Firefox. You'll learn more from that than the corrected responses of people who loudly have preferences but at the end of the day would stay either way. My parents tried Firefox, but then left it. Although they only tried from insistence from their son.

PS: I agree with the poll. I don't want a chat bot either. If I did, I'd install a plugin that integrates once of my own choosing. Given the availability, privacy, and ease of lmstudio I'd rather leave it in its own place outside the browser and network. I don't know how those like my parents feel about a bot that can probably answer their questions. I also doubt they care. Maybe it would help them ask questions they're too embarrassed to ask friends and family for. Usually how to questions they've asked dozens of times. But that's super dangerous.

We want lighter and faster browsers that load up less features, block all unnecessary data collection and spying and java scripts, consume less hardware resources, and don't choke and heat up 8-gb ram laptops just because I openned 1 tab.

I don't want Siri in my internet. I don't even like it when it automatically searches and returns suggetions for mere typing anything in address bar. If I wanted a chatbot, I know how to visit chatgpt or any site myself.

It's just an integration with LLM services and not AI baked-in the browser code. You can even self-host any such service (Ollama) and integrate Firefox with it. That will make sure your query is not leaving your network.

Just a minor nit pick but it's JavaScript, not Java Scripts (javascript and Java are massively different things).

Also blocking JavaScript on the web in 2024 is really not practical. Nothing will really work without it.

aw man i missed the poll i would have voted "fuck no" to chatbot integration

Would you rather have a AI or have your browser 2x slower?

That is the kind questions that were asked

lol. I'd take a browser that's 10x slower as long as it has no AI or crypto.

Yeah but in that situation wouldn't you just not use the AI?

I think this is more about wasting development times and what features are actually in the browser.

No that was a different poll. This one asked "do you want 'enhanced privacy' or a chatbot in the sidebar" which, of course, is a false dichotomy.

Is this the official Mozilla connect survey? I believe the question order and groupings were randomized, and that may have been a (IMO bad) control question.

Asking mastodon users whether they'd choose AI over Privacy is like asking Elon Musk if he'd rather end poverty or buy another mega yacht.

As the "tech guy" who my family turns to for advice, I do not have a single family member other than my younger brother who has any interest in AI-assistance. My brother wants it to cheat in school.

As the tech guy

My parents really like it - they like that they can say what they want to say and get it formatted for an email

I don’t think you thought this one through!

To be the guy known for ending poverty for all time, having statues in every park on the planet? Or just another boat to park in your mega-garage of boats?

Easy choice.

Yeah, I dunno about that considering he promised to end world hunger if the UN could show him how the money was used. They did and he essentially told them to fuck off and donated it to himself instead: https://truthout.org/articles/musk-pledged-6b-to-solve-world-hunger-but-gave-it-to-his-own-foundation-instead/

We’re talking about two different things here.

Actually trying to end world hunger vs pushing a button and having it happen. The former is really hard and probably way beyond the means of any individual, no matter how wealthy. The fact that Elon promised to do it is only evidence of his extreme ego, not his ability nor his ethics (which his donation to himself calls into question).

If he could push a button and end world poverty at a nominal cost of $xxx billion, I think he would do it. But to actually put in the work over a lifelong project which has a high potential to fail? I don’t for a second believe he’s capable of that. But who is?

He did not have to provide lifelong project and work on it. He just needed to donate his money and people in UN would have worked with that money. Even if it didn't work, he'd still have done a real great job by donating that much. And maybe we could have learn money is not the solution and we need to change approach.

I think both you and I know the project wouldn’t have worked and in all likelihood it would’ve damaged his reputation. I can’t fault him for opting out of that. As for what he actually did with the money, I am not going to defend that!

A representative 300 sample would give a more accurate result than a biased 2.4k sample. Bigger number doesn't mean better results.

That said, I'm not sure how to get representation from certain subgroups of the population, like the "never engages with polls" or "lies specifically to fuck with your data" subgroups.

@Buddahriffic

Yes, It was easier to do truly representative polls, when people loved answering questions and everybody had a landline.

I remember a time when the phone or doorbell would ring and I would get excited to know who it was.

Now I seriously consider setting up a series of mirrors so that I can see who is at the door without giving up my ability to pretend like no one is home and my phone ringing causes an emotion somewhere between worry and rage.

@Buddahriffic

Same!

But isn't it a bit sad, we've all become so paranoic whilst at the same time being total oblivious to sharing lots of data, just because we want to know what the kitten did to the alligator?

I'm just tired of people trying to sell me shit. Or beg. Like I know I'm not interested 3 words in to the spiel but still feel like an asshole if I just say no and close the door or hang up the phone.

Though I did eventually tell my phone provider to put me on their no call list for their internet marketing because I got tired of them trying to get me to switch to their less good internet package.

Hoping (but not holding my breath) that we, as a society, squash the whole data broker thing sometime relatively soon, though.

I mean, I don't have anything against the chatbot feature, but this is coming before the tab group functionality...

Presumably this one's less work, so even with them being worked on at the same time, no real reason to hold back the one that's done sooner. But apparently you can try out tab groups already: https://lemmy.ml/post/20000489

I wish Mozilla would just strip all the extraneous junk from Firefox aside from what is truly necessary for web browsing. No crypto, no Pocket, no chatbot integration, nothing AI related, etc. Any and all additional features should be implemented via optional plugins. They could rename the project something like Phoenix or Firebird or something like that.

I bet they wouldn't be so dependent on that google money if they stopped trying to chase every tech trend that pops up regardless of interest or popularity.

My perception of Firefox users is that most of us use Firefox for a reason, and thats usually some variation of moving away from big tech bullshit. I COULD be wrong but I certainly dont think so lol.

Where would the money come from then? donations? Or do you mean they should shrink, fire people and downscale.

I think it's too late for them to switch direction, not without a lot of people getting laid off. Though maybe that will ultimately happen if they finally end up bankrupt.

Or do you mean they should shrink, fire people, and downscale

I reckon I do. Google is like 80% of their funding or some shit, which hinders other search products while affecting user experience in other ways as well due to their influence. If they reined in the scope of their product, they could work on a lower budget which might allow them to work towards breaking free of that oversight. As I mentioned, I don't think most Firefox users want half this crap they're working on anyway, but they're caught in the tech "infinite growth" loop where they ""have"" to crank out bs features or else be considered irrelevant.

Just make a solid browser, work in solid mod support so I can make it my own, and maintain it. I have my own tools to use instead of pocket and whatever else, I don't need Mozilla to do that.

In terms of workers being let go, if they scale back they can at least let people go in a respectful manner instead of them just showing up to a sign on the door lol.

My worry is that the other 20% might actually come from other forms of partnerships and integrations not unlike what they probably had in mind with this, and that dropping Google might actually make them more dependent on seeking this kind of initiatives, not less.

I don't know how many people you actually need to maintain a browser. But if it's actually possible to do it without any kind of money from any of those sources in a way that can be sustained, then it would make more sense to make a fork (or alternative, like Ladybird) and just use that.

Like I said, I think it's too late for Mozilla to shift course, I don't expect they'll ever do that. At least not until they are forced by a competing project if it happens to become successful (or a similar huge wake up call that leaves them no alternative).

Is there crypto stuff in Firefox? Also I like the Pocket integration...

Not the currency

There is a crypto method you can call for random number generation

computer scientists: we have invented a virtual dumbass who is constantly wrong

tech CEOs: let's add it to every product

Borrowed from here

No shit

Its shocking how out of touch they are

Almost none of the people who are excited about AI know anything about computer science. I say this someone who always encounters idiots claiming my computer science degree will soon be obsolete because of AI... lol

I get this in penetration testing too.

The AI has never successfully hacked (technically it's not hacking because it's authorized but you get my point) any system of even moderate complexity. That doesn't mean the system is secure it just means the AI isn't good at it.

The main issue is it's not good at "if X therefore Y kind of thinking", It may very well successfully identify a system as having a particular type of architecture but then it doesn't follow through with the connotations of that.

I may not have to write all my own reports anymore, but I'm still going to have to do the job.

why can't we just have a fast, reliable browser with a clean UI that is fairly customizable with really solid extension support?

Extensions/plugins were supposed to provide the framework if users wanted a bunch of bells and whistles.

and I refuse to believe that a company with the resources of Mozilla cannot do that.

Minecraft is basically that in game form. A powerful voxel engine that has a massive amount of support for mods and plugins.

Minetest is probably a better comparison

Eh, fair point. Minecraft early on was more like what I was describing. For years now the devs have added a ton of content to the base game.

Still, most people I know play with at least a few mods, even if it's just texture packs and some QoL mods for better UI/UX.

as being a prominent and established way of accessing the internet without using a product owned by one of three three tech giants.

No niche browser can play the same role.

To me, hopping onto a running train doesn't seem to be the way to go when it comes to creating and keeping trust:

People, who think that cars are a terrible way of getting people around in cities, don't want another Tesla, they want a good bike.

Here we have a problem, common to many non-profits:

2/3

@mozilla @firefox

Fake Professionalism!

I don't believe that CEOs, who demand a 7 digit salary, have the ability to understand the soul and heart of a collective of people (in the case of many #FOSS projects: some of the world's most skilled and talented programmers), who donate lots of their time and energy for a project they believe in, and hence lack the credibility and skills necessary for making them thrive in the long term.

Firefox's ever falling market share proves that.

3/3

#RFC

@mozilla @firefox

Why not just PWA to side bar extension support? If users want that side bar to a chatbot. Boom easy. If they don't or any other option its there too.

If they really want to support local ai specifically focus on the web3 API stuff for it.

Just be a web browser dammit lol

Mozilla is desperate for any cash influx, AI in a browser is a hot sounding thing, right now. Perhaps they also hope they can leverage it for extra income.

I run a Nightly on one of my machines and it was weird seeing the option and I hope it does not make it or that it gets removed.

It's just a plain integration with 3rd-party or self-hosted LLM service.

I'm not sure if Mozilla will make money from this feature in any way.

Have you read anything about it anywhere?

Maybe they can offer a LLM router and privacy proxy service like they do with VPNs?

Not who you asked speculating.

If you're using a VPN at the OS or browser level, just like any other traffic, your query to the LLM service will be routed via the VPN. That VPN could be any VPN of your choice - Firefox VPN, Mullvad, or Proton etc.

The only problem is that most LLMs require a profile/login to work with. In such cases, using a VPN will be useless, as the LLM server will know who you are.

It gets them users, which are needed for funding.

Like it or lump it, AI chat integration is a feature, and lots of users (those who aren't on a federated group discussion Firefox) will see it as an attractive feature. "It doesn't even have a chat bot" is something that will legitimately be said if its the only major browser without it.

I mean I'm desperate for them to get a cash influx too, just not really sure how this does that. Maybe set up for another preferred default deal like they have with Google? Maybe privacy focused option as SaaS offering like they do with their VPN, but you ahead of the curve instead after VPNs became so common you trip over them.

I do not know either. But with the recent Google, Anti-Trust ruling, there is a chance the Courts could force Google to break the deal they have with Mozilla in the future. I assume Google will appeal, but if that goes, so does 80-85% of Mozilla's income. Selling Mullvad's VPN is not going to cut it, so maybe they think they can cash in with "AI" somehow. Since you are right, maybe the best VPN's aren't dirt cheap but they are certainly not expensive in most Western countries. Besides, most users do not use VPNs. As of 2023, only about 31-33% of all internet users do.

OT but: How does this Mastodon/Lemmy integration even work? OP seems to be posting on Mastodon but we are commenting on Lemmy which makes everything look confusing.

Both services use the ActivityPub protocol, so to put it very simply the data format used by both services is the same, they just render it differently on your screen. Then they are pushing/pulling the data for posts and comments from other instances as users request it, e.g. by viewing this lemmy instance through Mastodon.

please for the love of god almighty dont ad a chatbot or any other kind of gipity! even if one disregards all the concerns about privacy, software bloat and energy usage (climate change), one has to remember the purpose of firefox, or any other browser for that matter: loading websites. nothing more nothing less.

Okay someone has to say it.

The second F in Firefox is NOT capitalized.

I'm more privy to "_fireFox" when declaring my browser.

I don't want an AI chatbot in the sidebar, but if it gives Mozilla a new, substantial source of revenue outside the Google search deal--and I can disable it--then I'm all for it.

I don't want an AI chatbot in the sidebar, but if it gives Mozilla a new, substantial source of revenue outside the Google search deal--and I can disable it enable it if I want to --then I'm all for it.

Ftfy

I think it can be useful for some users but hardly the majority.

You can select text now in Firefox and ask it to make a summary or to explain it in simpler words. Then it generates a query to chatgpt in the sidebar who answers it.

So for some use cases I think it's nice. Even better if you could make it do research and save us time. Like "check the top tech sites for reviews of this phone model and give me a summary of it's major flaws".

Chat gpt can do that but it's not really integrated into the Firefox experience. If you could select a phone name and have a one click option to "give me top flaws and pros of this model according to top reviewers", that could save a lot of time.

I think it's just about packaging this functionality better. I don't think it should be in a sidebar. It should just be in a new tab with lots of options to continue the research in different ways.

That's not private in the least. If anything add optional support for ollama

They have a choice of different models in the Nightly version of Firefox. So I think we are getting there. Maybe even an option to run our own self hosted models.

Welp, Firefox was the last option. I guess I'll just stick to Librewolf

For the use cases you describe actually sound right on the mark? If you're viewing a page and you want something summarised on there, it would be nice to not have to leave that page, but to stay in its context, for example. If you're looking at the specs of a particular phone, ditto.

(I don't expect I'll use this feature myself, but if I did, it sounds like I'd use it in that way. Luckily, I can just choose not to use it without any downsides.)

Then there are the cases where you want the LLM to actually interact with the page, using the current web page state and your credentials.

For example, one might want to tell it to uncheck all the "opt in" checkboxes in the page.. And express this task in plain English language.

Many useful interactive agent tasks could be achieved with this. The chatbot would be merely the first step.

I can't wait for other browser engine to caught up with Firefox

Can this poll be considered official ? I clicked the link and it looks like a Twitter poll or something.

@jangdonggun

Of course, it's not official.

I made this poll, as just a normal Fedi user.

It got more attention than I had anticipated, though.

This post is confusing because I recently did take an official Firefox poll involving AI features (and others).

@JackbyDev

I'm sorry.

It was certainly never my intention to impose myself like an official channel or something like that.

I still welcome a debate here.

I used to always have a ChatGPT tab pinned, so I wouldn't mind. That said, the integration is just plain terrible. To be more precise, the whole experience with the sidebar is terrible. Why can I only have one and not even choose the default one? I need two clicks to get to the assistant, which is one more than just pinning a tab...

In Brave, the integration is so much better. They have a dedicated button (that you can also disable iirc), that opens a sidebar with only the chatbot. Moreover, you can choose from a bunch of models or link your own. You are not constantly at risk of accidentally sending something to it when selecting text, because neither is "AI" the top option in context menus, nor is one opening automatically. AI doesn't appear in search. And it can even do more (e.g. "summarize this entire page"), while there is also no need to log in.

In short: This seems not thought through at all. And if it was, maybe the reactions would be less negative.