I mean, let's be real, what major function has Mozilla implemented into Firefox that hasn't been opt-out? And no, UI doesn't count, I'm talking features.
The problem isn't the existence of AI. The problem is the inescapably of it and how, under Microsoft or Google, it will harvest your data whether you like it or not. When you tell them "fuck off, leave me alone, and keep my words out of your AI's mouth", they're not going to listen. Profit motive requires them to invade.
Mozilla is a non-profit, and they've long been very good about letting you opt out things, and listening. I'm not worried about them putting AI into Firefox, because I can be reasonably sure it will be optional, in a way I know the others won't.
I'd rather they didn't go chasing this car at all, to be honest, because they're not likely to catch it, but whatever. They're renewing focus on the browser and I'm taking that as a win.
I can't contest the first point cause I'm not a firefox junkie, so I won't.
What I will contest is that the existence of AI, or, deep learning, or LLMs, or neural networks, or matrix multiplication, or whatever type of shit they come up with next, I'll contest that it isn't problematic. I kind of think it is, inherently, I think it's existence is not great. Mostly because it obfuscates, even internally, the processing of data, it obfuscates the inputs from the outputs, the works from the results. You can do that with regular programming just fine, just as you can do most of the shit that AI does with normal programming, like that guy who made a program that calculates the prices for japanese baked goods and also recognizes cancer, right. But I think AI is a step further than that, it obfuscates it more. I kind of am skeptical of it's broad implementation.
For trivial use cases, it's kind of fine, but I think maybe use cases we might consider trivial, otherwise are kind of fucked, maybe. AI summary of an article? I dunno if that's good. We might think, oh, this is kind of trivial because the user should just not really trust what the AI says, but, as with all technology, what if the user is an idiot and a moron? They might just use it to read the article for them, and then spout off whatever talking points and headlines it gives them. I can't really think of a scenario where that's actually a good thing, and it's highly possible. It might make it easier to parse an article, like that, but I don't think that's actually a good or useful tool, it's just presented a kind of illusion of utility, most especially because it was redundant (we could just write a summary and have it at the top of the article, like every article on the face of the earth), and it was totally beyond our control, at least, in most circumstances.
Also, the Mozilla Foundation is nonprofit, but the Mozilla Corporation is not. The Foundation manages the Corp, which manages Firefox development. So depending on which one you're referring to, it might be a non-profit, or it might not be. In any case, the nonprofit is a step removed from Firefox development, which I think is an important side-note, even if it's not actually that relevant to whatever conversations about AI there might be.
Perhaps, comically, it is the perfect representation of the world as it is now: “knowledge” in people’s brains is created by consuming whatever source aligns with the beliefs that they think are theirs. No source or facts are required. Only the interpretation matters.
We already have AI in Firefox. And not gonna lie, offline (I.e. absolutely private) translations for webpages is pretty neat.
It’s really good but I do wish it supported more languages like Russian or Japanese. So far most of the times I have had to translate a page, Firefox didn’t support the language.
This. It has held back adoption for me. I want translations in my language of choice and it’s simply not one of the very few options of languages available. AI could help with this.
It’s really good but I do wish it supported more languages like Russian
It's never too late to learn the language of enemy!
Да
Let me share some fun Mozilla facts about their previous CEO who has now stepped down to “executive chairwoman” last week.
She received 6.9 million dollars in 2022 and 5 million in 2021, 3 million in 2020.
Her replacement is an executive from AirBnB and eBay. We will find out how much both of these are earning in 2025 when they release their financial statements.
They fired 60 staff and are adding AI to their flagship program to earn more money.
Tell me this is a good thing.
Tell me this is a good thing.
Mozilla has long been the most ethical player in this space (while still producing SOTA ML). All of their datasets/models are open source and usually crowdsourced. Not to mention, their existing work is primarily in improving accessibility.
ALSO, the other half of this story is that Firefox is becoming the primary focus again. Everybody's freaking out about the AI stuff but that's because they're only reading the headlines. The programs they've shut down are things like Hubs (Mozilla's metaverse platform), the VPN, and the sensitive data scrubber (which was using a third party service anyway).
As a software developer I am huge supporter of Mozilla's developer initiatives from Manifest V2 implementation to MDN. But it's also important to be realistic Mozilla has long had major money problems, and not the kind that giving them more would fix.
The Lunduke shit again? The one that takes offense to money being donated to support "politics" i.e abortion rights?
Take a look at the other trash he posts on his reddit profile. That blog is not a trustworthy source, by any stretch, and it's sweetly ignoring that he's not looking at Mozilla's spending alone, but of 3 separate entities that exist under the umbrella of the Mozilla Foundation.
I don't think this is a money making move. The previous CEO was absolutely overly focused on monetization and this move is a step away from that. I should've addressed this more explicitly in the above comment but even for the players who actively monetize, AI is a money incinerator.
Cloud AI is, but for local AI, they only need to incinerate enough money to train it. That's none if they just end up using mixtral or something
I agree it's probably not for money making, that's my point, its instead that their management doesn't know how to spend money.
Ok. Mozilla was spreading itself too thin, spending resources trying to compete with multiple products against established brands that were already way ahead of them. They needed to focus down onto their core product rather than frivolously cast about.
And AI is the technology of the future, despite all the whinging and griping by commenters on the subject. It's being incorporated into the other major browsers, it's a must-have if Firefox is to remain relevant. I'm sure you'll be able to turn it off in the settings if you don't want it and if you're really concerned about getting AI cooties there'll be niche forks that are compiled without it.
And the ever increasing CEO wages and hiring of AirBnB/eBay executive as CEO? Their previous CEOs salary alone could've covered everyone of those employees fired.
That part's not good. I was addressing the "They fired 60 staff and are adding AI to their flagship program to earn more money." Part.
I know, I was more looking at the bigger picture.
Adding AI could be fine, but with the direction the leadership is going I can’t see it as good in this case.
They didn't hire the AirBnB/eBay executive to be CEO, they've been there for a while.
Also, you understand that people can work for companies without supporting their agendas, right?
I agree with you that Mozilla is spreading itself too thin. And don't get me wrong, I love Firefox and am a long time user. But they do need to understand their user base better.
They aren't going to become a sustainable business by copying more popular browsers. It's their differences from the mainstream that make them appealing as an alternative in the first place. I already don't like them foisting Pocket on me, which 100% should have remained an extension. I don't like the fact that Google is their default search engine, which goes against all their privacy messaging. I understand the reason is money, but that's kind of the definition of being a sellout isn't it? Their core values should always come first.
Fact is, those employees weren't fired for any good reason other than to hop on the latest tech trend. It's this sort of corporate "profit before people" bullshit that will erode any goodwill that people still have towards Mozilla. I couldn't give a fuck about adding a stupid AI driven chatbot to Mozilla, and neither, I imagine, do many of their current users. Honestly, I think "AI" has ruined the internet in a lot of ways already. It's already had a massive negative impact on the quality of search results, across all major search engines, because of all the low quality llm content that has been produced already, and it's only going to get worse. And you can't trust a single thing that comes out of those models, so what is even the point of them?
Sorry in advance for the old man rant lol.
As fair as I am aware, Mozilla so far is only thinking about integrating AI in relatively smart ways that leverage their limited resources well. (There were some rumours a while back about using ai locally to search your history and tabs, as well as (arguable if this counts as AI, but branding is everything) on device translation)
Then Mozilla, please, emphasize the results instead of saying "We're adding AI!"
They had 400m in cash in 2022, they don't have any sustainability issues.
I think the obvious worry being alluded to is the reason they had 400m in cash due to their arrangement with Google. Their primary sustenance comes from an entity actively seeking their destruction.
And AI is the technology of the future, despite all the whinging and griping by commenters on the subject.
Yeah because we've never seen tech fads before heralded as the next big thing. If I could roll my eyes any harder we could harness that for power generation.
The tools I want to see integrated into Firefox already exist. I've used them. It's just a matter of putting them together with it.
And AI is the technology of the future, despite all the whinging and griping by commenters on the subject.
You have no idea, any more than the rest of us. Like, please tell me you understand "____ is the technology of the future" has been said more times than it's ever been true.
The idea of AI is a technology of the future, but what we have growing now is not AI, not really, and this iteration can be just as big a flop as any other technology of the moment.
LLMs are what everyone dunks on, and “image generators are coming for our jobs! Think of artists! It’s not real art if a cheating machine does it!” is also a common cry.
But do any of those people even know about the new class of antibiotics a neural network trained to find patterns in protein folding discovered? Do any of them know about the accuracy of diagnosis that IBM Watson was able to make in cases of rare cancers, even when doctors didn’t see it? What about changes in weather prediction accuracy? Novel suggestions in materials science?
We are mimicking neural patterns, similar to the way our own minds work, to achieve pattern recognition and even extrapolate from them. And yeah, right now we’re brute forcing it, and we’re not even entirely sure how these relationships develop. It’s in its infancy, and growing fast.
This is technology considered the holy grail of computing. We have been chasing this concept since the 1940s. There are a million sci-fi stories about it and there are a million more attempts to make it work before one really stuck.
And now we’re at the beginning of it being practical and you think we’re just gonna go “eh it’s a wet fart like the Virtual Boy. Oh well, let’s make some new phones or something”?
No. This is literally the technology of the future. Within your lifetime (assuming you live a reasonable while longer) there will come a point when you won’t be able to buy a CPU without some type of neural engine in it.
And yes, people will (and already are) do horrific shit with it. It will fuck over a large portion of the white collar economy; a portion of which were told to go into the careers they did because they’d be safe from automation. “Get a degree and you’ll be safe!” they told us! Now they tell us “you better work at two different targets to make that payment, should have studied a trade!”
So the reason for skepticism and animosity is almost certainly the fear of being replaced; but look at how far these AI models have come in the last month alone. We’re already in “this is changing the future” territory and those things are just getting started.
Here's one of the big issues: Basically all of the AI is not even happening on your CPU, it's happening on the cloud.
And that wouldn't be in issue if companies stopped shoving "AI" into everything not originally built for AI.
And even that wouldn't be as big of an issue if the companies talked about the benefits of the new tech instead of just going "AI!!!!1!!! drops mic"
This is technology considered the holy grail of computing.
This shit is just analog computing though, right? Like at it's base, we're just reproducing analog computation in a digital environment and then we're framing that in a million different ways, like we've been doing since the seventies. We've actually had this shit since the first computers, which were analog. The whole reason we moved to digital, though, is because the results were easier to break down, parse, and we had control over every step of the process to confirm it was correct, and it was going to be correct every time. A clearer sense of limitations and constraints, basically.
Now I'm not entirely against analog computing as a matter of fact, right, in fact I think it can be pretty cool if we recognize it for what it is, but at the same time I can't help but think that the level of hype around it is fucking insane. Primarily because it's not easily controllable or reproducible. Not in the sense that we're gonna somehow invent a rogue AI that will kill us all, or whatever garbage, but in the sense that, while you can get easily reproducible results (such is the nature of computation), it is very hard to control what the output is of a given neural network. You can process loads of information extremely quickly, but, like, what use is that if I don't know whether or not the solution is correct, or if it's just a kind of ballpark figure? That's the main issue.
Again, fine if we recognize it, but I don't think we're really close at all to just like, randomly inventing a rogue consciousness. We're not anywhere close to that, from what I've seen. We're still barely good at image recognition and generation in an actually complicated environment, and even then it's still pretty hard to get what it is that you specifically want, partially because the hype is driving so much development at this point, and the implementation is bunk and, again, kind of uncontrollable. Venture capital jumping down this thing's throat has partially blocked it's airway, as I see it. Still a useful technology, potentially, but a million stupid tech demos and image generators for nonsensical memes that we can flood everyone with is the dumbest shit imaginable, and even dumber than that is the level of venture capitalists I see that want to somehow monetize that.
And so I have to ask, right, if I want a robot to sort through the different colors of little plastic beads, right, do I get a large language model on that, or do I just run a pretty basic and more efficient algorithm that just narrows the parameter of beads to a certain color, as recorded by the camera, and then that's it? Do I want to translate a sentence with AI, or do I want to just manually run a straight word to word conversion that maybe changes based on a couple passes I'm gonna run at it to check whether or not it contextually makes sense with something like a markov chain? Trick question, they are both the same approach, AI has just done it in a way where I could apply a kind of broader paintbrush to the thing and get my results a little faster and with a little less thought even if I have less control over it.
Dude. Take a chill in the bathtub and touch grass. AI is never taking my job, since it's physical labor since I removed myself from the computer industry 15 years ago. But as someone who studied AI and LISP (which was mired in the previous AI craze), it's not actually wrong to have animosity and be skeptical about the current AI. we're literally using the same techniques than we did 30 years ago. We've invented nothing new since the last AI fad. What is driving this craze is the brute force approach of massive parallel processing, not actual innovation.
There's been some minor refinement, so it's not exactly identical, but to use a metaphor... We've using more Lego bricks and different colours now to build our castles, but they're all still lego bricks. Nothing has fundamentally changed.
... and you should know by now that tech industry is funded by hype machine, so temper your expectations. Current machine learning techniques are limited and inefficient, it's not actually really a solvable problem with the current approach.
TLDR; LLMs are a super far cry from actually being "intelligent" and calling it AI is the equivalent of calling a wheeled electric self balance board a "Hoverboard".
And AI is the technology of the future, despite all the whinging and griping by commenters on the subject.
The entire discussion is to distract ourselves from the raw truth:
Fax machines are the technology of the future.
Fax machines will outlive us all. AI and VR will reach their heyday, then wane with years and be replaced. But whatever replaces them will sit quietly in the shadow of the everlasting Fax machine.
Don't forget that Mozilla even had a Metaverse instance, chasing the VR fad, only to turn around and chase the latest trendy subject.
$6.9 million dollars?
Nice.
Ni.ce
The answers to both of those things depends very heavily on the details. I think focusing on their main products is a good thing, but adding AI sounds like one of those likely terrible decisions. We definitely need privacy friendly & open source based AI though, in all areas, so I hope this is Mozilla pushing for something sensible here.
How about, and run with me on this, Mozilla stops trying to be Microsoft and Google and instead just provides the cleanest, most barebones-yet-privacy-oriented browser? Will they ever have market dominance? No, and they never will even with AI tools. Fuck AI and what it's doing to the planet and fuck all of the capitalists enshittifying The Last Browser.
We need a new Foundation willing to develop a fork.
A browser could be top dog if it was just less shitty than the others, like the Brother printers, that print without bloatware and mob tactics of HP.
We want a browser that just browses.
But what about AI ?
It has to be everywhere!
Somebody please think about adding AI to Firefox!
I need it to do ????????????
/s
At this point the only thing that could save Firefox is a rewrite
In Rust, right?
RIGHT?!?
No! Not again!
uggggggggggh. I'm using Firefox because chrome is really going too far with it's manifest v3 garbage killing decent adblockere and Firefox is basically the only non chromium based option. Please for the love of everything that is holy. Just. Make. Your. Browser. Better. Don't need ai gimmicks. Definitely don't need to lay people off. You need to get back on track. Holy heck. This is the worst.
AI will be great for translation of webpages locally instead of sending content over the wire
I can get behind this if everything is processed locally. Let my computer do the computing and stop harvesting my data, internet
Firefox already has that as a built-in feature on desktop version.
If the only use case is translation, that's probably not a good business case.
That's not the only use case. It could read a 400 page pdf locally and summarize it for you, answer questions and find which slide the data you want is on.
The use cases are only limited by how powerful the AI is
My brother, I weep with you and agree with angrily gritted teeth at all your words.
its* manifest v3 garbage.
Gonna have to pass on that one good buddy. Don't shit up Firefox.
why the fuck would I need an AI in a browser? 0 fucks given for this "feature". firefox is devolving into an edge.
Nowadays we are supposed to need AI everywhere. I'm waiting for my AI bidet so that I can chat with it when I do my business.
"What is my purpose?"
"You wash my asshole when I poop"
"Oh my god"
Edge? Think Clippy.
"It looks like you are browsing porn. Can I help?"
That could be useful... Find more X person/stuff....
I think an AI that finds porn across the entire web that meets specific search criteria or is like an example would be a hit.
You already have AI in Firefox - local translations for example. Developing local AI aligns perfectly well with Mozilla's goals, but it seems people panic as soon as they see the two letters together.
Theoretically I can imagine AI in the browser to be awesome to combat AI on the web. Let the AI wars begin!
Things to add to your product when you want to look hip and trendy, but dont have any real ideas how to make your product better:
1990s: visitor counter
1995: Popups
2000s: flash intros
2005: stock photography
2010: local weather widget
2015: share to social media widgets
2020: fullsize 4k background stock videos
2024: AI assistant
1995: animated gifs, , guest books, site rings!
"Under Construction" GIF
I'm not sure if you remember, but site rings were what you used instead of Google. They were useful.
And I've seen some guest books with lots of people at some point in my childhood, but about half a year after that everybody firmly chose in favor of hierarchical boards.
And I don't share that hate for , it served the purpose of showing you a long line in a small space, implicitly saying that it's secondary temporary information, a bit like on TV.
And what's wrong with animated GIFs, animation is nice.
visitor counter
I actually liked those.
flash intros
These could be used to create right atmosphere.
local weather widget
Back then I hated those, but maybe showing local weather on desktop is not such a bad thing.
share to social media widgets
Hate. Hate. Hate.
I miss guest books tbh
They would be abused by spam bots in an instant, even before you could write your own "welcome to my guestbook" post.
So you've never had one of those bot blocking capcha things?
You forgot about blockchain and NFTs.
Remember all those IE toolbars?
I got enough installed once to fill the whole screen.
Ugh...please don't remind me.
It really grinds my gears. Why does my bank insist on installing an app to approve transactions, and why does that app have a huge background video playing every time i open it? It really should consist of an MFA code generator.
And yet Microsoft added a weather (and bullshit) widget to windows in like 2020
I suppose many people were already using a third-party Aero widget for weather forecast since Windows 7.
I know I did.
2015: share to social media widgets on porn sites
You were the Chosen One! It was said that you would destroy the Sith, not join them! Bring balance to the browsers, not leave it in darkness!
Fuck sake. Sick of ai being added into everything. Please dont ruin firefox
From what I understand, they're divesting resources that aren't in Firefox or at least involved in a trustworthy/open source AI project.
I see a lot of people in this theead are upset at this, but I'm tentatively excited. If they can pull off a good AI engine, especially built into the browser, that would be nice. If it had offline capabilities, that would be amazing.
Even if they can pull off a good AI solution that's not built into Firefox but it's offline, I'd be really excited. I'm not crazy about having especially detailed and intimate information being thrown to some vendor out there, not knowing where it's going. Modern AI can do some amazing things, but a lot of them reserve the right to have a human read whatever you put in them and warn you about that. This is too limiting to me for my preferred use-cases.
Once concern I have is that Firefox and its engine are one of the last non-chromium browser platforms that have a household name and are FOSS. So to me, that has to be the first goal to keep healthy. Maybe the AI thing will help in this respect
People read the headline and get angry, then want to tell everyone how angry they are
Reading into their AI plans - it's to be run completely locally using only the data you want to give it, and it doesn't send info back to Mozilla.
Now, personally, my biggest issues with AI is data collection and where the training data comes from. It seems for FF, neither of these will be problematic, so I don't see the issue.
Training data could still be an issue, but if anyone is going to do it right it’s Mozilla.
Though, it's tough to pull from the headline/discussion this pivot is explicitly meant to refocus on the browser.
As far as the AI stuff goes, Mozilla has long been the most ethical player in this space. All of their datasets/models are open source and usually crowdsourced. Not to mention, their existing work is primarily in improving accessibility. It's really hard to see how this is a bad thing.
If they just built a browser and started acting like a foundation, I’d support them in a heart beat. As it happens today, I feel like I’m pouring money into a set of holes that neither I, nor seemingly the whole world, has much interest in.
One of 70 flavors of Chromium including the "privacy centric" Opera who run Chinese loan shark gangs for some reason, Edge which is Microsoft Chromium and aside from hardware acceleration capabilities is pretty meh, and Brave which despite operating their own separate search engine index are one of the most likely to sell your data and/or kidneys
Rapidly Enshitifying Firefox
Safari - no comment
Whatever the fuck Gecko is...
Tor Browser (for people with infinite time to wait for pages to load, or maybe just drug dealers)
RE: point 1, I'm a fan of Vivaldi, a privacy-focused highly modified chromium build developed by former Opera developers who were disillusioned by the direction that company went in.
The chromium part is still problematic. I'll stick with the only other option until they shit the bed completely :(
That sounds nice, I'll check it out.
librewolf? mullvad browser? Tor browser?
Librewolf is built on Gecko, people often accredit it as a "firefox fork".
Tor Browser seems cool, it's what I use on my phone whenever I have spare time to let it load before searching things which don't require a lot of bandwidth. I'll edit the above list.
Mullvad? Is that some kind of slur? I've never heard of that but searches say it's a VPN client. ¯\(ツ)/¯
mullvad browser, made in collaboration with the tor project and mullvad VPN. Requires mullvad VPN to use.
This is a pretty effective ad for LibreWolf
Gonna check it out. Is it foss? Didn't find it on fdroid
Ahh, not available for android
Yeah desktop only, as it stands today. As a person that only uses my phone to tide me over between PCs, I didn't really think of mobile.
The paradox of tech right now "we are going to build the most complex technology known to man into our product in the next 12 months. Are we hiring record numbers of people to get it done? No. We fired a bunch of people and everyone else will just have to be extremely hardcore."
They're refocusing on Firefox and continuing the ai stuff they were already doing. They fireded people who were working on fediverse and metaverse platforms. Did you even read the article?
I'm starting to think FF is being deliberately run into the ground by the higher ups. It would be good to hear from some of the devs about their thoughts on all this.
That's a very good way of me leaving Firefox behind...
To go where, though? Lynx? Everything else is Chromium and that's not much better.
Librewolf. If all else fails I'll pop my old Emacs config and browse whichever websites I can there
To a Gemini reader. Kristall is nice. Lagrange is ... interesting.
If the past is any indication, it'll either be off by default or you can turn it off. So maybe it isnt' all the drama that people make it sound like.
But it's a hellishly expensive thing that seems to not attract enjoyment from current Firefox users, and seems unlikely to bring new users, and (again) seems to be prioritised over other things that could better use the money, like developers, so...
as Firefox is the only browser that can't trace its lineage back to Apple and WebKit
What a slap on Konqueror's face.
And text only browsers too.
I don't really see it this way it's just marketing. Saying "all other browsers descend from big bad corporate Apple" is scary, saying "all other browsers descend from another open source project" is meh.
"It's all KHTML", I heard.
You have a point. But still, they could have added an "ackshually" footnote or something.
Unfortunately, KHTML was discontinued in 2023 (according to Wikipedia)
I mean yes no kinda Konqueror simply accepted a bunch of downstream patches, including a name change.
...more or less. It could for a long time use all three of KHTML, WebKit (fork of KHTML) and QtWebEngine (Blink wrapped for Qt, that is, a fork of WebKit), they recently removed KHTML support because noone was updating it and it hadn't been the default for ages.
If they hadn't implemented multi-engine support in the past they probably would've switched over to "whatever Qt provides" right-out, it's KDE after all. Ultimately they're providing a desktop, not a web browser. Back in the days they did decide to roll their own instead of going with Firefox but it was never a "throw project resources at it" kind of situation, there were simply KDE people who felt like working on it. Web standards were a lot less involved back around the turn of the millennium, and also new and shiny. Back in the days people thought that HTML 4.01 Strict and XHMTL would be a thing that servers actually would start to output instead of the usual tagsoup.
If you're that kind of person right now I'll point you in the direction of Servo. No, Firefox doesn't use it and it's not a Mozilla project any more, Firefox only included (AFAIK) parallel CSS handling, the rest is still old Gecko.
That's quite the bummer. But still. Saying that almost all browsers can trace their lineage to Apple and Webkit is technically correct, but it's just a half-truth. As Apple and Webkit were once based on KHTML.
This surprises people? Mozilla has always been Mozilla's biggest enemy.
Been saying the writing is on the wall for their enshittification for months. On lemmy. Every time I end up with 20+ downvotes.
Eat me. Here it comes.
Still using Firefox until it officially sucks, but if you haven't seen it coming you've been willfully ignorant.
I expect a Ubuntu fork packaged with Firefox a la windows 98/IE as a paid OS in the next 5 years to try to undercut Microsoft. Or something. Idk the future.
oh hey it's you! I actually thought about your comments as soon as I saw this headline. I switched from Firefox to brave a few years ago, then recently switched to waterfox as they are again independent of system1 like before. the browser itself removes a lot of unnecessary Mozilla integrations and also reverts the proton UI. maybe forks like this or Librewolf are the future for this browser?
Ah, the chromium approach.*
:D
No, I think you're right. (I think people will strip down Firefox and those strip down versions will probably persist to be the ideal browser for years to come)
*I am aware that there is a difference here
That's not the chromium approach. That's the Phoenix (a fork of Netscape Navigator) approach.
Of course, Phoenix ended up becoming Firefox.
If you don't mind me asking
What is the difference?
Willfully ignorant until the end. single browser for everything will be worse for sure
Whyyyy Mozilla? I want to love you, rally, but you wont let me.
You may be in an abusive relationship with your browser. 💔
What a sad day to be alive. I want to believe nothing bad will happen but this is scary
but its open source so someone can just fork it
Okay, well I'm ready to write a angry email now who's with me? Anybody know the best address?
they have a mastodon instance, and many official accounts with job titles.
It’s remarkable really. They are competing against another browser which users have to actively go out and find, then install.
Some people are used to how chrome looks and that’s powerful glue, of course, but very few normal users (ie almost none of us in here on Lemmy) needs things beyond what both Firefox and Chrome does equally well.
The simple difference in adoption rate is this: Google pushing Chrome through people’s use of Google. Diminish the need for Google, diminish people’s discovery of Chrome.
Also, I cannot understand why they need this many people. If 5% of their workforce is 60 people, they have 1200 people employed. I can almost guarantee that Google’s Chrome team isn’t 1200 people strong.
Maybe Firefox would be better being smaller and more nimble. Maybe they should stop pretending they’re a company and start pretending they’re a foundation (which is what they are). 300 people working on a core browser seems a lot of full time people, still, and that’d be a quarter of what they are today.
Also, Mozilla’s inability to produce a simple interface for embedding Firefox is simply baffling to me. The reason so many other skin-browsers are built on chromium is that it’s a LOT easier to embed.
I speak as someone who’s run Firefox since the day it was born.
Well it was 1200 people at Mozilla, not necessarily directly working on Firefox. They have multiple products and they still need HR and lawyers and all the other support roles any other company needs.
I want a upvote for sharing, down vote the concept button. I hate it.
As much as I hate it, think it's a terrible part for a free, open, and secure web; it's probably a solid business move based on the hype.
Think of the up vote button more as a "this information is worth spreading" button than "I like or agree with this content".
Votes are meant only to increase or decrease visibility, especially on Lemmy where karma doesn't exist.
still, it'd be nice to have a "upvote, but fuck this content" button
gotta add emoji reactions on posts
The "upvote good, downvote bad" mentality needs to die. As others have said, the arrows are to promote/reduce visibility of content. Whether you agree with the content of the post should be irrelevant.
People have been saying some variant of this at least as far back as Slashdot in the late 90s. Nobody has come up with a viable way to change peoples habits.
Instead of fighting it, what can we do knowing that this is how it works?
New idea I've just come up with, we make it so, before upvoting or downvoting something, you have to press a button, and then wait at least a minute, or, better yet, solve a captcha, and then you don't even have to have accounts anymore and that takes about a minute. The only people upvoting or downvoting will be those who are really reflecting on what it is that they're doing, or the people who are really really committed and pissed off about something. I'm sure the latter won't happen like, ever.
That's precisely how it's being used now though. People don't want things they don't like to be seen, so they downvote.
I think maybe that's exactly how people are using it, it's just that most people aren't thinking "oh, well, this post made me a little mad or uncomfy, but I like the content and discussion that it's spurned, so I'll toss it an upvote". I think most people are more inclined to go "THIS POST MADE ME MAD! GRUG DOWNVOTE!". It doesn't even really not make sense, it would be kind of insane to spend like, even just a minute, thinking consciously about every single upvote or downvote you make, it would take a million years for anyone to ever upvote or downvote anything, and a lot of people would just not engage unless they were really committed, which doesn't necessarily map to their level of discernment, but might just instead map to how mad people could get over a given thing. Plenty of people could get mad enough about a thing to sit through a minute long wait period to downvote something.
Obviously. I've just got two emotions about the content I want to show.
I hate that they are laying people off. I do however want to use some machine learning powered adblock, for those harder to block ads. otherwise I don't feel like every app needs an AI assistant. It's bad for the Internet generally and for the power grid.
In theory, that sounds amazing.
In practice, it will most likely need to send the contents of your browser to some third-party server. No, thanks.
(Unless it's crowdsourced, like the first person to visit a page gets dinged, but then the next persons just downloads the set of rules instead of uploading content.)
Privacy preserving federated learning is a thing - essentially you train a local model and send the weight updates back to Google rather than the data itself....but also it's early days so who knows what vulnerabilities may exist
Oh interesting!
Why Mozilla? You had so much good faith
Because money.
A non-profit that begs for donations has become a money making machine netting their ceos over $10m in 3 years.
And they still will. I'm sure most people haven't heard of the projects they're getting rid of (that's why they're getting rid of them) and the anti-AI circlejerk is going to melt away once it rolls out and people are surprised to learn it's actually a really useful technology.
I'm happy I use Librewolf, I get the good parts without the nonsense
Long time FF user, things really aren't looking good for Mozilla as a whole.
Lol when that airbnb fuck took over I knew things were going to go south.
That was my thought too.
Looks like I'll need to switch to one of those browsers that only take and show characters I can type on a keyboard. Like F and U.
oh fuck off Mozilla....
I double that. I'll go so far as to manually remove it from my fucking OS before I install it. Seriously, major Fuck You, Mozilla.
90% of these comments didn't even read the article. Its local only, and doesn't even send data to mozilla.
Yet...
Why would Mozilla make AI so they could steal personal information when they already own the browser that gives the information to the AI
The AI is claimed to be local.. Did you know that even local AIs are able to contact the internet again? So without knowing a local LLM system might execute some HTTPS calls for you, without knowing.
Except its open source. So it would last all of 4 seconds before being called out. Those HTTPS calls are a separate service the LLM will access not a part of the LLM itself.
Cant they do the same with firefox?
Yeesh people here are salty.
Honestly, if they make it optional and/or give the option to run it locally, I could see this being a good thing.
Lord knows the competition is going full bore on AI, and if FF wants to stay relevant with the mass market they'll need to keep up.
It depends on what they mean by AI. I can think of oodles of great uses:
An AI-powered adblock that removes all trackers, cookie confirmation popups, those annoying “please subscribe” popups, etc. would be badass. It would be virtually invisible but it would make the internet usable again.
A content filter that magically extracts the recipe you’re looking for out of the stupid blog post they write for SEO
Or to expand on that, an AI that goes through the page of search engine results and removes the ones that are SEO spam instead of actually useful content
An AI that can review at a page or email and determine if it’s a scam would save a TON of people by pointing out suspicious features.
Basically anything that requires you to copy data from one context to another is a good use of AI. You could probably have a nice resume-filling feature, for example.
But yeah, Mozilla will probably just go for a “chat with your browser” feature. Total waste of space.
All of those could be terrible to be honest, because AI is a data tracking vacuum. An AI adblocker or content filter sounds cool at first, but it would mean it reads and analyzes your data, just like the shit you do with chatbots too. Reading your mails? That's basically what Google does for years with gmail, that's why they have such a good spam filter. I agree that a chatbot would be kinda useless though, even if privacy friendly, which in of itself would be great but I just don't see the use. This could simply be outsourced to a website.
The only reason this would be an issue is if it’s sending that data off to a third party. If its fully local, who cares what data it sees?
If they're local they'd be basically useless due to a lack of computing power and potential lack of indexing for a search engine chatbot, so I doubt it. It would also have to be so polished that it wouldn't require further user knowledge / input, and that's just not a thing with any local LLM I've come across. Mozilla can gladly prove me wrong though. I certainly wouldn't mind if they generally can make the whole process of local LLMs easier and more viable.
The requirements to run good local LLMs have really been shrinking this past year… I have a lot of faith that there is a generally useful yet tiny AI tool within the grasp of Mozilla.
I can understand your thinking, but it could be as simple as giving the user the option to outsource the computation to a secure something or other, if their machine can’t handle it.
And yeah, the requirements are still quite high, but they are being reduced somewhat steadily, so I wouldn’t be surprised if average hardware could manage it in the long term.
Edit: For the record, Mozilla is one of the only companies I would trust if they said “the secure something or other is actually secure.” And they’d likely show actual proof and provide and explanation as to how.
There's no way it would be running locally.
In their defense, Mozilla did create the easiest way to run and integrate an LLM locally, so if anyone could do it, I imagine it would be them.
Yes, but what would a local model do for you in this case? Chatbots in browsers are typically used as an alternative / more contextualized search engine. For that you need proper access to an index of search results. Most people will also not have enough computing power to make use of any complex chatbot / larger context sizes.
Pennomi wrote a whole list of potential ideas. And honestly, while I agree that local LLMs on typical hardware are underpowered for most tasks, it's possible they would have the option for those that can run it.
People are getting all upset over this announcement without even knowing what their plan actually is, like the word "AI" is making them foam at the mouth or something. I'm just saying we should reserve judgements for when we have an idea of what's happening.
And I replied to that comment, without any mouth foaming.
Yes, and then you asked for ideas, which were in that comment that you replied to.
I honestly have no idea what you're referring to now. I never asked for any ideas.
Tell me you don't understand your userbase without telling me you don't understand your userbase
oh good firefox. Wonder what other browser i can use, oh wait...
Can someone just make a minimalist browser that isn't chrome/firefox based?
There are plenty of browsers. Dillo, NetSurf, surf, w3m, Lynx, Links, Via, Midori, Pale Moon although it's based on a fork of Gecko, Tunnel, qutebrowser. And there are even options for a search engine, although the only one worth considering that isn't just a layer on top of other search engines is Kagi which costs $10 a month, and I wouldn't exactly call it minimalist.
The problem is that no browser can allow you to escape the horror that is web standards & practices that have been developed over decades and are almost unchangeable, without sacrificing basic web functionality and just making it a worse experience than it needs to be at least. The fact is that practically the entire web is reliant on JavaScript, on top of HTML and CSS which take a lot more resources to utilize/display than it looks, meaning 3 interpreters constantly running that must be sandboxed to each tab you have open with a lot of overhead to manage security.
In an ideal world we'd all just be using provably-safe high-performance compiled WASM-but-stronger (from functional languages or more likely Rust or something less boiler-platey but similar), without having such a complex and fucked dependency situation*, where we wouldn't need to sandbox interpreted languages and slaughter performance. Of course, in an ideal world, we also wouldn't have to be concerned about aggressive tracking, ads, clickbait, SEO abuse, scams, or even malware, so there's not much use in imagining a reality where we actually have quality web browsing.
The actual answer to using the web without the fucked-ness of browsers is to not use a web browser at all for sites you use frequently. Use stuff like this instead.
*seriously, you can write the most basic website with JavaScript and it'll probably rely on tens of thousands of expressions of code which realistically should just be expressable in like a small page or two, you do webdev and you'll probably accidentally be implicitly committing a sacrifice to some Aztec God in order to check if a number is even or odd
Also just imagine if all of web dev was just ML/Scala/Rust/Swift/Erlang without compiling to JavaScript 🤤 That is the definition of a perfect universe
The problem is that no browser can allow you to escape the horror that is web standards & practices that have been developed over decades [...] practically the entire web is reliant on JavaScript, [...]
I've been saying it for a while: continuing to play catch is a losing move for Mozilla or for any independent browser maker.
The real move, is to switch to or at least integrate an alternate internet, something that uses a protocol that is simpler and more limited by design - just get rid of Javascript (or of "remote execution", really) and you instantly get a much leaner, much securer internet design.
I've heard pretty good things about the Gemini protocol, but IMHO they went too far too extremist into the "text internet" philosophy, and as a result is a raw downgrade from Gopher. Gopher could actually be a good option.
I'll definitely have to check out a few of those browsers at some point. It's kind of insane how much tech debt we've accrued over the years.
I think honestly we just need to start waning off half the shit we support. Minimize the amount of support required, and somehow manage to provide a smaller attack window so that way we can stop writing protections for problems that honestly shouldn't even exist to begin with. Bonus points to microsoft for creating security certs that don't do their jobs because hahafunneemalware.exe is signed by fucking oracle of all people, and i guess we should just blindly execute that file because it says it's trustworthy!
Though it would be interesting to have a sort of "web browser" which is actually just an application based on plugins for different frontends, for stuff like yewtube, we do only use a handful of sites from time to time. Plus maybe a basic web fronted for stuff that isn't JS because honestly who wants it anyway.
Unfortunately none.
Developing a rendering engine that can handle css, html, javascript, while also rendering a website in the exact same way as Chrome and Firefox is a huge tasks, and not something a hobby programmer can whack out in a few weeks. Thats the reason why even Microsoft abandoned their own rendering engine, because things did always look and work different in IE.
Unfortunately none.
This is not true. Pale Moon, Ice Weasel, Librewolf....
Developing a rendering engine that can handle css, html, javascript, while also rendering a website in the exact same way as Chrome and Firefox is a huge tasks
It doesn't have to be from scratch. Not even Apple did this with Safari (they based in on KHTML, the rendering engine of KDE's Konqueror.)
librewolf is a firefox fork, anything thats a fork of firefox/chrome is automatically not counted, because it is inherently bulkier than the original (though maybe more secure)
Unless it's pissandshittium of course.
anything thats a fork of firefox/chrome is automatically not counted
Says who?
because it is inherently bulkier
How is "being bulkier" relevant at all? But let's just go down that route and say that a fork does not necessarily end up in a bulkier product. A dev team could decide to fork, then remove unwanted features from the original project; which is what's happening with Librewolf as far as I know (e.g. no Pocket bs.)
Finally, let's remember that both Safari and Chrome have their roots on Konqueror's KHTML rendering engine. By your metric, we should be saying that they don't count either; because they're "(definitely) bulkier forks" of KHTML.
Says who?
says me, the one who made the original comment.
How is “being bulkier” relevant at all? But let’s just go down that route and say that a fork does not necessarily end up in a bulkier product. A dev team could decide to fork, then remove unwanted features from the original project; which is what’s happening with Librewolf as far as I know (e.g. no Pocket bs.)
now you just have a patched together, disjointed, mess of a browser, on top of a second dev team, who now needs to unpatch it together, re patch it together, and then somehow repackage that. It's just hopeless. It's like trying to turn a full size pickup into a small lightweight town car. It's just not going to happen.
Finally, let’s remember that both Safari and Chrome have their roots on Konqueror’s KHTML rendering engine. By your metric, we should be saying that they don’t count either; because they’re “(definitely) bulkier forks” of KHTML.
It's worth noting that when a fork is building on top of something, there is a point where the original roots are no longer present, or no longer significantly present. It's like saying that android is linux. Which doesnt stop the charts from displaying android separately to linux, or chromeos for that matter. Even if it did i don't like the browsers because they're too bulky so it's not like it influences my opinion anyway lol.
says me, the one who made the original comment.
Then it's a weak argument without real support.
now you just have a patched together, disjointed, mess of a browser, on top of a second dev team, who now needs to unpatch it together, re patch it together, and then somehow repackage that. It’s just hopeless. It’s like trying to turn a full size pickup into a small lightweight town car. It’s just not going to happen.
You are assuming way too much. As if Apple and Google did all this with KHTML. Which lead us to:
It’s worth noting that when a fork is building on top of something, there is a point where the original roots are no longer present, or no longer significantly present.
And what's your point by saying this? What does it matter if the roots "disappear," if the product is good enough for competition?
Even if it did i don’t like the browsers because they’re too bulky so it’s not like it influences my opinion anyway lol.
What bulky browsers don't you like?
Then it’s a weak argument without real support.
I mean yeah, but it's my opinion on the matter. Even then my original claim is based on the fact of something being an active fork of another browser. Which is still going to line up with my point just fine.
You are assuming way too much. As if Apple and Google did all this with KHTML. Which lead us to:
assuming too much if you think modern applications are programmed/designed well. Ultimately no matter what you do, having a product be around for a decade, let alone multiple of them, is going to incur substantial tech debt, and significant feature creep. There is nothing you can do about this. It happens in EVERY industry. In fact the only thing that helps to prevent this is an almost religious and fervent dedicated to pure minimalism when it comes to what your software is doing. Look at something like DWM for example.
And what’s your point by saying this? What does it matter if the roots “disappear,” if the product is good enough for competition?
My point is that beyond a certain point, a fork is no longer a fork, but more like a competing piece of software. You see this all the time, look at android or chromeos. Technically "based" on linux, but so far gone that almost nobody considers it linux, i only ever see it mentioned in jokes. Something like prism which is a fork of poly, which is a fork of multimc is starting to get to the point where it's more of an alternate piece of software, than a direct fork. It's twice independently maintained, it's feature set is focused differently.
If you need more examples why dont we have a look at a COW filesystem? When you make a change to a file, a fork is created, and that change is then saved on that forked path, so now you have multiple different versions, throughout the chronological history of that fork. If you have auto-deletion enabled for old forks, as you should, at some point you will have "orphaned" forks. Which no longer represent in anyway the original file, but exist as an independently separate instance of that file, in a different state. It's a similar idea, in a different scale, on a different system. There is also a point where it no longer exists as a fork, but as an implementation on top of that original piece of software. How that's defined is a little more complicated though.
It's a little bit philosophical, and semantical, but my point is simple, if your piece of software exists as a fork on top of another piece of software, you don't get to call yourself "faster" or "leaner" or "more optimized" than the original. Your base browser is still a piece of shit, you've taken a bad car, and repainted it, now it looks a little bit better. But it's still a shit car. You turn a beater into a race car by completely stripping it to bits, at a certain point, it's not really a fork anymore. In the same way that putting a body on a different frame isn't the same as the original.
What bulky browsers don’t you like?
it's not like i've literally named them or anything.
assuming too much if you think modern applications are programmed/designed well. Ultimately no matter what you do, having a product be around for a decade, let alone multiple of them, is going to incur substantial tech debt, and significant feature creep.
I still don't understand what this has anything to do with "forking makes a product bulkier," the original claim. At most, what you're saying is that the fork will have its own set of tech debt. But that doesn't make it bulkier by default. Again, a fork of Firefox without the Pocket and "experiments" crap will be lighter.
My point is that beyond a certain point, a fork is no longer a fork, but more like a competing piece of software.
Well, yeah, isn't that the point of forking? I still don't see why a forked browser being "yet another competing browser" is a bad thing. It's the opposite!
if your piece of software exists as a fork on top of another piece of software, you don’t get to call yourself “faster” or “leaner” or “more optimized” than the original.
I completely disagree with you, and I think I know why you think the way you think. It seems like you assume that all forks:
Must always follow the development of the original software. Nope. Not true. It can happen, but not with all forks.
Are inherently bulkier because devs add features on top of it. Which again, it's not true for all forks. Some forks solely exist to remove crap in the original software.
Your base browser is still a piece of shit, you’ve taken a bad car, and repainted it, now it looks a little bit better. But it’s still a shit car.
Man, have you never seen TV shows about mechanics taking shitty cars and making them awesome? Yes, they strip it to pieces, and reassemble said pieces. That's part of engineering practices. It appears that you have a narrow way of seeing how software development works. Devs don't need to take in the whole "shitty project" and be resigned to deal with it. They can take the good parts, and rewrite the bad parts. And that's just one example.
it’s not like i’ve literally named them or anything.
You haven't mentioned any browser that's a fork from Firefox and that is also bulkier than Firefox. Librewolf? Bulkier than Firefox? Really?
I still don’t understand what this has anything to do with “forking makes a product bulkier,” the original claim. At most, what you’re saying is that the fork will have its own set of tech debt. But that doesn’t make it bulkier by default. Again, a fork of Firefox without the Pocket and “experiments” crap will be lighter.
I mean yeah, removing two features removes two features, that still doesn't optimize the entirety of the browser, all of the rest of the browser will behave the exact same with no difference (unless, somehow, those features are actually so badly implemented they actively impede performance) Thats like taking a corolla and removing the entirety of the interior to strip weight, and doing literally nothing else to it. It's just marginally faster now. Handles a little better maybe. Everything else is still stock though.
Well, yeah, isn’t that the point of forking? I still don’t see why a forked browser being “yet another competing browser” is a bad thing. It’s the opposite!
I dont inherently have an issue with forks, i have an issue with stuff like thorium, you forked chrome, that's great, chrome is faster than firefox by most accounts. You made it maybe 40% faster in some instances? Cool. It's still basically chrome though. They describe it as
The fastest browser which, if that's true, that's great! It's still basically chrome though. The issue here is that the modern web, and the web browsers designed around it are just massively overbuilt and bloated. We're solving problems that shouldn't exist, and we're adding features that do almost nothing other than cause problems half the time. That's not a good starting point. Unless you completely rip everything out, and rebuild it. Which is inherently not what a fork is.
Man, have you never seen TV shows about mechanics taking shitty cars and making them awesome? Yes, they strip it to pieces, and reassemble said pieces. That’s part of engineering practices. It appears that you have a narrow way of seeing how software development works. Devs don’t need to take in the whole “shitty project” and be resigned to deal with it. They can take the good parts, and rewrite the bad parts. And that’s just one example.
Yes, you wanna know what they do most of the time? Completely strip it down, and then rebuild it. If you have done that with either chromium or firefox, you wouldn't be calling it a fork of chrome/firefox, and everybody would ALL over it. As far as im concerned, any fork of either of those browsers is just removing the most egregious garbage, which is a good thing, but it's still just a bad browser underneath the removed garbage.
Let's compare forks, firefox and librewolf, both browsers i have installed, and both browsers i use. As far as i can tell they're effectively the same thing. Librewolf probably has some cruft removed and some good defaults compared to firefox, but other than that, nothing inherently different.
Lets look at chrome and chromium why dont we, this is actually just the reverse, but wouldn't you be surprised to discover that i dislike chromium equally as much as chrome because they have equal design decisions? It's almost like 90% of the feature base is going to be identical between them or something!
Thorium? I've not used that one yet, i assume it's just chrome, equally annoying to use, but with the slight added benefit of having marginally less time to ponder my bad life choices in between bouts of loading heavily ad bloated sites, and JS infested messes of web design. Plus all the ram that it probably still consumes. Because it's a web browser, why wouldn't it.
I don't even where to start, but let's just say that I now see where you're coming from. You seem to have an issue with this Thorium browser, then project your perspective over other projects that are also forks. Just because one implementation sucks doesn't mean they all do.
And we have different ideas of software engineering. To you, features are just the things that the user can interact with. When you say things like "that's like someone stripping the interior of a Corolla and doing nothing else." Except that I was thinking, precisely, of working on the whole car, including tweaking the engine, the electrical system, the fuel pump, etc. Sounds like a lot of work? Maybe. But it's better than building a car from scratch.
Anyway. Have a nice day!
including tweaking the engine, the electrical system, the fuel pump, etc. Sounds like a lot of work? Maybe. But it’s better than building a car from scratch.
that would be more of a rebuild than a fork. If your end product is more similar to the OEM car than it is to the end product. It's more like a fork. If the car is more akin to a custom built racer, than the OEM, it's a rebuild.
i thought mozilla new CEO would be better but heck no, sounds like i'll be hoping around in webkit browsers
I get that people are upset, because this fucking buzzword is haunting us. I'm just hoping that they don't jump on that BS-bandwaggon and create something actually useful. But we'll see I guess ...
Yeah, it's a hate-train for AI, I definitely get it, but Mozilla seems to be using it for actually useful things. Offline translation and fake reviewing checking for Amazon are pretty cool, in my opinion. Don't get me wrong, I'm not brand loyal, and I'm ready to jump ship to a FLOSS alternative as soon as they do something stupid. I'll just keep using Firefox until they do.
It's only a buzzword to people who've already decided it's a buzzword and are refusing to consider its actual good uses, of which there are plenty.
Being part of angry mobs is fun.
Sure is, but doesn't mostly lead anywhere
FF no !
So frustrated to see how this conversation is playing out. This is exactly what people have been asking for but all anybody can seem to see is "AI" in the headline.
This pivot is about refocusing on:
The Browser
Privacy
Ethical AI
This seems like a much better position for Mozilla to operate from, particularly because they've excelled at producing ethical SOTA ML for YEARS before ChatGPT. In all, this seems far more forward looking than the previous strategy of "make weird little web tools to make money maybe" and it's an absolutely massive untapped niche, that they already have the talent to tap into. If we punish the players best positioned to shift the industry standard away from extreme and exploitative data collection, we will end up in exactly the Orwellian AI hellscape that we're all so afraid of.
It is a better position and FF is going to be even better because of it. We need more options than just chromium. Open web standards dont stay open when everyone congregates.
Firefox on Android doesn't support keyboard shortcuts - for the last 12 years. Sooo - let's add the bloody AI, that is going to help
They're not adding ai to Firefox, at least that's not what the memo said, the memo said they were refocusing on Firefox (firing people who worked on their metaverse thing for example), and doing so on the side.
They specifically stated that Firefox mobile is a big focus moving fowards
to be fair, most people aren't using physical keyboards with their phones, this mostly applies to tablets (which are much less popular) and android tv (where firefox isn't even officially supported anymore)
anyway, even without that issue, the android version of firefox is kinda janky and regularly gets stuck while loading websites
bt keyboards can be absolutelly critical for some users with disabilities. most of the developing world can't afford to own several devices like a computer and a phone.
Why are u using a keyboard on a smart phone? Is that a thing?
I would fucking rather pay not to have AI in my browser, FFS…
ew.
Could we just have the AI part separately? I want an AI that can help me around the house by learning all my books and documents in case someone needs a specific photo of the babies or maybe needs to know a derivation of greens theorem or a recipe for kombucha.
That’s much more than an LLM. I get where you’re going, and I legitimately want it as well, assuming it’s local of course. But we aren’t there yet.
Well it'll be fun trying to find a replacement that doesn't small use anything made by Google, like Opera does.
Librewolf, Pale Moon and Iceweasel.
Guess it's time to get off the internet.
There's always trusty Lynx!
This is the best summary I could come up with:
A TechCrunch report has a company memo that followed these layoffs, detailing one product shutdown and a "scaling back" of a few others.
reads the very top of the page; it then goes on to detail a lot of projects that aren't in line with Mozilla's core work of making a browser.
These non-browser projects could be seen as a search for a less vulnerable revenue stream, but none have put a huge dent in the bottom line.
TechCrunch managed to get an internal company memo that details a few "strategic corrections" for the myriad Mozilla products.
Mozilla seized an opportunity to bring trustworthy AI into Firefox, largely driven by the Fakespot acquisition and the product integration work that followed.
Mozilla paid an undisclosed sum in 2023 to buy a company called Fakespot, which uses AI to identify fake product reviews.
The original article contains 731 words, the summary contains 140 words. Saved 81%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
So, what is else out there? Can the guys making adblocker just make a browser or so?
Making a browser from scratch would be very difficult. SerenityOS has one, but idk how usable it is.
Besides Firefox, I guess the least evil options would be something webkit-based. There are a few of those.
Apple didn't even build a browser from scratch. They took Konqueror's KHTML engine, then built Webkit with it.
We could do the same with Firefox. As the matter of fact, there are already forks out there, like IceWeasel, Librewolf, Pale Moon, etc.
What's going to happen is that one of those will start raising to the top. That's exactly what happened with Firefox. Mozilla had the Netscape suite, open sourced it, then fucked it up. When it fucked it up, I decided to try one of the alternatives, Phoenix in this case. Then Mozilla decided to drop the Netscape Suite and adopted Phoenix, which eventually became Mozilla Firebird, and finally Firefox.
I guess the cycle shall soon repeat.
LoL, and I had been contemplating switching to Firefox on my phone. Fucking nope! Not gonna board a ship that has decided to follow the pack into the ice...
To be fair, I'll take the ship at the back of the ice-kamakaze-pack over the one at the front. More time to jump ship when something better comes by.
I'm using chrome on phone, because it's basically part of the operating system, but I did like Fennec. It's a fork of Firefox mobile with a few more privacy features (or so they advertise)
I'm just using Brave (yes, I know but it doesn't annoy ME so I'm fine with it) which is just Chrome without the constraints.
Chromium is chrome without the constraints, Brave just has a different master holding the keys.
Not saying brave is bad btw, but chromium itself is literally the master branch for all of these different browsers
I did address that. I am fully aware of Brave's faults. But the benefits to me outweigh the negatives. Besides which, there isn't a browser in existence that doesn't collect data on you. Not unless you go ahead and compile your own. So I choose the one that is blatantly not following the rules and allows me some leeway to enjoy the web the way I like. It's also not the only browser on my phone. Chrome is obviously still here but so is Duckduckgo and I do have Firefox on here even though I never actually use it.
Chromite? Fennec? Iceraven? Lots of mobile browsers without telemetry on android.
Cromite and Fennec I've seen and don't trust their security at all. Better the devil you know and all that. But Iceraven is new to me and will have to look into that one. So thanks
So instead you're using a browser by companies already in the ice?
Jumping ship means trying to go in a different direction. I'm not gonna upheave my entire online presence just to get onboard with a company who is not only going the same way, but is woefully behind in the race to go that way.
I don't see them joining anything?
I mean, let's be real, what major function has Mozilla implemented into Firefox that hasn't been opt-out? And no, UI doesn't count, I'm talking features.
The problem isn't the existence of AI. The problem is the inescapably of it and how, under Microsoft or Google, it will harvest your data whether you like it or not. When you tell them "fuck off, leave me alone, and keep my words out of your AI's mouth", they're not going to listen. Profit motive requires them to invade.
Mozilla is a non-profit, and they've long been very good about letting you opt out things, and listening. I'm not worried about them putting AI into Firefox, because I can be reasonably sure it will be optional, in a way I know the others won't.
I'd rather they didn't go chasing this car at all, to be honest, because they're not likely to catch it, but whatever. They're renewing focus on the browser and I'm taking that as a win.
I can't contest the first point cause I'm not a firefox junkie, so I won't.
What I will contest is that the existence of AI, or, deep learning, or LLMs, or neural networks, or matrix multiplication, or whatever type of shit they come up with next, I'll contest that it isn't problematic. I kind of think it is, inherently, I think it's existence is not great. Mostly because it obfuscates, even internally, the processing of data, it obfuscates the inputs from the outputs, the works from the results. You can do that with regular programming just fine, just as you can do most of the shit that AI does with normal programming, like that guy who made a program that calculates the prices for japanese baked goods and also recognizes cancer, right. But I think AI is a step further than that, it obfuscates it more. I kind of am skeptical of it's broad implementation.
For trivial use cases, it's kind of fine, but I think maybe use cases we might consider trivial, otherwise are kind of fucked, maybe. AI summary of an article? I dunno if that's good. We might think, oh, this is kind of trivial because the user should just not really trust what the AI says, but, as with all technology, what if the user is an idiot and a moron? They might just use it to read the article for them, and then spout off whatever talking points and headlines it gives them. I can't really think of a scenario where that's actually a good thing, and it's highly possible. It might make it easier to parse an article, like that, but I don't think that's actually a good or useful tool, it's just presented a kind of illusion of utility, most especially because it was redundant (we could just write a summary and have it at the top of the article, like every article on the face of the earth), and it was totally beyond our control, at least, in most circumstances.
Also, the Mozilla Foundation is nonprofit, but the Mozilla Corporation is not. The Foundation manages the Corp, which manages Firefox development. So depending on which one you're referring to, it might be a non-profit, or it might not be. In any case, the nonprofit is a step removed from Firefox development, which I think is an important side-note, even if it's not actually that relevant to whatever conversations about AI there might be.
Perhaps, comically, it is the perfect representation of the world as it is now: “knowledge” in people’s brains is created by consuming whatever source aligns with the beliefs that they think are theirs. No source or facts are required. Only the interpretation matters.
We already have AI in Firefox. And not gonna lie, offline (I.e. absolutely private) translations for webpages is pretty neat.
It’s really good but I do wish it supported more languages like Russian or Japanese. So far most of the times I have had to translate a page, Firefox didn’t support the language.
This. It has held back adoption for me. I want translations in my language of choice and it’s simply not one of the very few options of languages available. AI could help with this.
It's never too late to learn the language of enemy!
Да
Let me share some fun Mozilla facts about their previous CEO who has now stepped down to “executive chairwoman” last week.
She received 6.9 million dollars in 2022 and 5 million in 2021, 3 million in 2020.
Her replacement is an executive from AirBnB and eBay. We will find out how much both of these are earning in 2025 when they release their financial statements.
They fired 60 staff and are adding AI to their flagship program to earn more money.
Tell me this is a good thing.
Mozilla has long been the most ethical player in this space (while still producing SOTA ML). All of their datasets/models are open source and usually crowdsourced. Not to mention, their existing work is primarily in improving accessibility.
ALSO, the other half of this story is that Firefox is becoming the primary focus again. Everybody's freaking out about the AI stuff but that's because they're only reading the headlines. The programs they've shut down are things like Hubs (Mozilla's metaverse platform), the VPN, and the sensitive data scrubber (which was using a third party service anyway).
As a software developer I am huge supporter of Mozilla's developer initiatives from Manifest V2 implementation to MDN. But it's also important to be realistic Mozilla has long had major money problems, and not the kind that giving them more would fix.
The Lunduke shit again? The one that takes offense to money being donated to support "politics" i.e abortion rights?
Take a look at the other trash he posts on his reddit profile. That blog is not a trustworthy source, by any stretch, and it's sweetly ignoring that he's not looking at Mozilla's spending alone, but of 3 separate entities that exist under the umbrella of the Mozilla Foundation.
I don't think this is a money making move. The previous CEO was absolutely overly focused on monetization and this move is a step away from that. I should've addressed this more explicitly in the above comment but even for the players who actively monetize, AI is a money incinerator.
Cloud AI is, but for local AI, they only need to incinerate enough money to train it. That's none if they just end up using mixtral or something
I agree it's probably not for money making, that's my point, its instead that their management doesn't know how to spend money.
Ok. Mozilla was spreading itself too thin, spending resources trying to compete with multiple products against established brands that were already way ahead of them. They needed to focus down onto their core product rather than frivolously cast about.
And AI is the technology of the future, despite all the whinging and griping by commenters on the subject. It's being incorporated into the other major browsers, it's a must-have if Firefox is to remain relevant. I'm sure you'll be able to turn it off in the settings if you don't want it and if you're really concerned about getting AI cooties there'll be niche forks that are compiled without it.
And the ever increasing CEO wages and hiring of AirBnB/eBay executive as CEO? Their previous CEOs salary alone could've covered everyone of those employees fired.
That part's not good. I was addressing the "They fired 60 staff and are adding AI to their flagship program to earn more money." Part.
I know, I was more looking at the bigger picture.
Adding AI could be fine, but with the direction the leadership is going I can’t see it as good in this case.
They didn't hire the AirBnB/eBay executive to be CEO, they've been there for a while.
Also, you understand that people can work for companies without supporting their agendas, right?
I agree with you that Mozilla is spreading itself too thin. And don't get me wrong, I love Firefox and am a long time user. But they do need to understand their user base better.
They aren't going to become a sustainable business by copying more popular browsers. It's their differences from the mainstream that make them appealing as an alternative in the first place. I already don't like them foisting Pocket on me, which 100% should have remained an extension. I don't like the fact that Google is their default search engine, which goes against all their privacy messaging. I understand the reason is money, but that's kind of the definition of being a sellout isn't it? Their core values should always come first.
Fact is, those employees weren't fired for any good reason other than to hop on the latest tech trend. It's this sort of corporate "profit before people" bullshit that will erode any goodwill that people still have towards Mozilla. I couldn't give a fuck about adding a stupid AI driven chatbot to Mozilla, and neither, I imagine, do many of their current users. Honestly, I think "AI" has ruined the internet in a lot of ways already. It's already had a massive negative impact on the quality of search results, across all major search engines, because of all the low quality llm content that has been produced already, and it's only going to get worse. And you can't trust a single thing that comes out of those models, so what is even the point of them?
Sorry in advance for the old man rant lol.
As fair as I am aware, Mozilla so far is only thinking about integrating AI in relatively smart ways that leverage their limited resources well. (There were some rumours a while back about using ai locally to search your history and tabs, as well as (arguable if this counts as AI, but branding is everything) on device translation)
Then Mozilla, please, emphasize the results instead of saying "We're adding AI!"
They had 400m in cash in 2022, they don't have any sustainability issues.
I think the obvious worry being alluded to is the reason they had 400m in cash due to their arrangement with Google. Their primary sustenance comes from an entity actively seeking their destruction.
Yeah because we've never seen tech fads before heralded as the next big thing. If I could roll my eyes any harder we could harness that for power generation.
The tools I want to see integrated into Firefox already exist. I've used them. It's just a matter of putting them together with it.
You have no idea, any more than the rest of us. Like, please tell me you understand "____ is the technology of the future" has been said more times than it's ever been true.
The idea of AI is a technology of the future, but what we have growing now is not AI, not really, and this iteration can be just as big a flop as any other technology of the moment.
LLMs are what everyone dunks on, and “image generators are coming for our jobs! Think of artists! It’s not real art if a cheating machine does it!” is also a common cry.
But do any of those people even know about the new class of antibiotics a neural network trained to find patterns in protein folding discovered? Do any of them know about the accuracy of diagnosis that IBM Watson was able to make in cases of rare cancers, even when doctors didn’t see it? What about changes in weather prediction accuracy? Novel suggestions in materials science?
We are mimicking neural patterns, similar to the way our own minds work, to achieve pattern recognition and even extrapolate from them. And yeah, right now we’re brute forcing it, and we’re not even entirely sure how these relationships develop. It’s in its infancy, and growing fast.
This is technology considered the holy grail of computing. We have been chasing this concept since the 1940s. There are a million sci-fi stories about it and there are a million more attempts to make it work before one really stuck.
And now we’re at the beginning of it being practical and you think we’re just gonna go “eh it’s a wet fart like the Virtual Boy. Oh well, let’s make some new phones or something”?
No. This is literally the technology of the future. Within your lifetime (assuming you live a reasonable while longer) there will come a point when you won’t be able to buy a CPU without some type of neural engine in it.
And yes, people will (and already are) do horrific shit with it. It will fuck over a large portion of the white collar economy; a portion of which were told to go into the careers they did because they’d be safe from automation. “Get a degree and you’ll be safe!” they told us! Now they tell us “you better work at two different targets to make that payment, should have studied a trade!”
So the reason for skepticism and animosity is almost certainly the fear of being replaced; but look at how far these AI models have come in the last month alone. We’re already in “this is changing the future” territory and those things are just getting started.
Here's one of the big issues: Basically all of the AI is not even happening on your CPU, it's happening on the cloud.
And that wouldn't be in issue if companies stopped shoving "AI" into everything not originally built for AI.
And even that wouldn't be as big of an issue if the companies talked about the benefits of the new tech instead of just going "AI!!!!1!!! drops mic"
This shit is just analog computing though, right? Like at it's base, we're just reproducing analog computation in a digital environment and then we're framing that in a million different ways, like we've been doing since the seventies. We've actually had this shit since the first computers, which were analog. The whole reason we moved to digital, though, is because the results were easier to break down, parse, and we had control over every step of the process to confirm it was correct, and it was going to be correct every time. A clearer sense of limitations and constraints, basically.
Now I'm not entirely against analog computing as a matter of fact, right, in fact I think it can be pretty cool if we recognize it for what it is, but at the same time I can't help but think that the level of hype around it is fucking insane. Primarily because it's not easily controllable or reproducible. Not in the sense that we're gonna somehow invent a rogue AI that will kill us all, or whatever garbage, but in the sense that, while you can get easily reproducible results (such is the nature of computation), it is very hard to control what the output is of a given neural network. You can process loads of information extremely quickly, but, like, what use is that if I don't know whether or not the solution is correct, or if it's just a kind of ballpark figure? That's the main issue.
Again, fine if we recognize it, but I don't think we're really close at all to just like, randomly inventing a rogue consciousness. We're not anywhere close to that, from what I've seen. We're still barely good at image recognition and generation in an actually complicated environment, and even then it's still pretty hard to get what it is that you specifically want, partially because the hype is driving so much development at this point, and the implementation is bunk and, again, kind of uncontrollable. Venture capital jumping down this thing's throat has partially blocked it's airway, as I see it. Still a useful technology, potentially, but a million stupid tech demos and image generators for nonsensical memes that we can flood everyone with is the dumbest shit imaginable, and even dumber than that is the level of venture capitalists I see that want to somehow monetize that.
And so I have to ask, right, if I want a robot to sort through the different colors of little plastic beads, right, do I get a large language model on that, or do I just run a pretty basic and more efficient algorithm that just narrows the parameter of beads to a certain color, as recorded by the camera, and then that's it? Do I want to translate a sentence with AI, or do I want to just manually run a straight word to word conversion that maybe changes based on a couple passes I'm gonna run at it to check whether or not it contextually makes sense with something like a markov chain? Trick question, they are both the same approach, AI has just done it in a way where I could apply a kind of broader paintbrush to the thing and get my results a little faster and with a little less thought even if I have less control over it.
Dude. Take a chill in the bathtub and touch grass. AI is never taking my job, since it's physical labor since I removed myself from the computer industry 15 years ago. But as someone who studied AI and LISP (which was mired in the previous AI craze), it's not actually wrong to have animosity and be skeptical about the current AI. we're literally using the same techniques than we did 30 years ago. We've invented nothing new since the last AI fad. What is driving this craze is the brute force approach of massive parallel processing, not actual innovation.
There's been some minor refinement, so it's not exactly identical, but to use a metaphor... We've using more Lego bricks and different colours now to build our castles, but they're all still lego bricks. Nothing has fundamentally changed.
... and you should know by now that tech industry is funded by hype machine, so temper your expectations. Current machine learning techniques are limited and inefficient, it's not actually really a solvable problem with the current approach.
TLDR; LLMs are a super far cry from actually being "intelligent" and calling it AI is the equivalent of calling a wheeled electric self balance board a "Hoverboard".
The entire discussion is to distract ourselves from the raw truth:
Fax machines are the technology of the future.
Fax machines will outlive us all. AI and VR will reach their heyday, then wane with years and be replaced. But whatever replaces them will sit quietly in the shadow of the everlasting Fax machine.
Don't forget that Mozilla even had a Metaverse instance, chasing the VR fad, only to turn around and chase the latest trendy subject.
$6.9 million dollars?
Nice.
Ni.ce
The answers to both of those things depends very heavily on the details. I think focusing on their main products is a good thing, but adding AI sounds like one of those likely terrible decisions. We definitely need privacy friendly & open source based AI though, in all areas, so I hope this is Mozilla pushing for something sensible here.
How about, and run with me on this, Mozilla stops trying to be Microsoft and Google and instead just provides the cleanest, most barebones-yet-privacy-oriented browser? Will they ever have market dominance? No, and they never will even with AI tools. Fuck AI and what it's doing to the planet and fuck all of the capitalists enshittifying The Last Browser.
We need a new Foundation willing to develop a fork.
A browser could be top dog if it was just less shitty than the others, like the Brother printers, that print without bloatware and mob tactics of HP.
We want a browser that just browses.
But what about AI ? It has to be everywhere! Somebody please think about adding AI to Firefox! I need it to do ????????????
/s
At this point the only thing that could save Firefox is a rewrite
In Rust, right?
RIGHT?!?
No! Not again!
uggggggggggh. I'm using Firefox because chrome is really going too far with it's manifest v3 garbage killing decent adblockere and Firefox is basically the only non chromium based option. Please for the love of everything that is holy. Just. Make. Your. Browser. Better. Don't need ai gimmicks. Definitely don't need to lay people off. You need to get back on track. Holy heck. This is the worst.
AI will be great for translation of webpages locally instead of sending content over the wire
I can get behind this if everything is processed locally. Let my computer do the computing and stop harvesting my data, internet
Firefox already has that as a built-in feature on desktop version.
If the only use case is translation, that's probably not a good business case.
That's not the only use case. It could read a 400 page pdf locally and summarize it for you, answer questions and find which slide the data you want is on.
The use cases are only limited by how powerful the AI is
My brother, I weep with you and agree with angrily gritted teeth at all your words.
its* manifest v3 garbage.
Gonna have to pass on that one good buddy. Don't shit up Firefox.
why the fuck would I need an AI in a browser? 0 fucks given for this "feature". firefox is devolving into an edge.
Nowadays we are supposed to need AI everywhere. I'm waiting for my AI bidet so that I can chat with it when I do my business.
"What is my purpose?"
"You wash my asshole when I poop"
"Oh my god"
Edge? Think Clippy.
"It looks like you are browsing porn. Can I help?"
That could be useful... Find more X person/stuff....
I think an AI that finds porn across the entire web that meets specific search criteria or is like an example would be a hit.
You already have AI in Firefox - local translations for example. Developing local AI aligns perfectly well with Mozilla's goals, but it seems people panic as soon as they see the two letters together.
Theoretically I can imagine AI in the browser to be awesome to combat AI on the web. Let the AI wars begin!
Things to add to your product when you want to look hip and trendy, but dont have any real ideas how to make your product better:
1995: animated gifs, , guest books, site rings!
"Under Construction" GIF
I'm not sure if you remember, but site rings were what you used instead of Google. They were useful.
And I've seen some guest books with lots of people at some point in my childhood, but about half a year after that everybody firmly chose in favor of hierarchical boards.
And I don't share that hate for , it served the purpose of showing you a long line in a small space, implicitly saying that it's secondary temporary information, a bit like on TV.
And what's wrong with animated GIFs, animation is nice.
I actually liked those.
These could be used to create right atmosphere.
Back then I hated those, but maybe showing local weather on desktop is not such a bad thing.
Hate. Hate. Hate.
I miss guest books tbh
They would be abused by spam bots in an instant, even before you could write your own "welcome to my guestbook" post.
So you've never had one of those bot blocking capcha things?
You forgot about blockchain and NFTs.
Remember all those IE toolbars?
I got enough installed once to fill the whole screen.
Ugh...please don't remind me.
It really grinds my gears. Why does my bank insist on installing an app to approve transactions, and why does that app have a huge background video playing every time i open it? It really should consist of an MFA code generator.
And yet Microsoft added a weather (and bullshit) widget to windows in like 2020
I suppose many people were already using a third-party Aero widget for weather forecast since Windows 7.
I know I did.
2015: share to social media widgets on porn sites
You were the Chosen One! It was said that you would destroy the Sith, not join them! Bring balance to the browsers, not leave it in darkness!
Fuck sake. Sick of ai being added into everything. Please dont ruin firefox
From what I understand, they're divesting resources that aren't in Firefox or at least involved in a trustworthy/open source AI project.
I see a lot of people in this theead are upset at this, but I'm tentatively excited. If they can pull off a good AI engine, especially built into the browser, that would be nice. If it had offline capabilities, that would be amazing.
Even if they can pull off a good AI solution that's not built into Firefox but it's offline, I'd be really excited. I'm not crazy about having especially detailed and intimate information being thrown to some vendor out there, not knowing where it's going. Modern AI can do some amazing things, but a lot of them reserve the right to have a human read whatever you put in them and warn you about that. This is too limiting to me for my preferred use-cases.
Once concern I have is that Firefox and its engine are one of the last non-chromium browser platforms that have a household name and are FOSS. So to me, that has to be the first goal to keep healthy. Maybe the AI thing will help in this respect
People read the headline and get angry, then want to tell everyone how angry they are
Reading into their AI plans - it's to be run completely locally using only the data you want to give it, and it doesn't send info back to Mozilla.
Now, personally, my biggest issues with AI is data collection and where the training data comes from. It seems for FF, neither of these will be problematic, so I don't see the issue.
Training data could still be an issue, but if anyone is going to do it right it’s Mozilla.
Though, it's tough to pull from the headline/discussion this pivot is explicitly meant to refocus on the browser.
As far as the AI stuff goes, Mozilla has long been the most ethical player in this space. All of their datasets/models are open source and usually crowdsourced. Not to mention, their existing work is primarily in improving accessibility. It's really hard to see how this is a bad thing.
If they just built a browser and started acting like a foundation, I’d support them in a heart beat. As it happens today, I feel like I’m pouring money into a set of holes that neither I, nor seemingly the whole world, has much interest in.
So to recap, your choices are
One of 70 flavors of Chromium including the "privacy centric" Opera who run Chinese loan shark gangs for some reason, Edge which is Microsoft Chromium and aside from hardware acceleration capabilities is pretty meh, and Brave which despite operating their own separate search engine index are one of the most likely to sell your data and/or kidneys
Rapidly Enshitifying Firefox
Safari - no comment
Whatever the fuck Gecko is...
Tor Browser (for people with infinite time to wait for pages to load, or maybe just drug dealers)
RE: point 1, I'm a fan of Vivaldi, a privacy-focused highly modified chromium build developed by former Opera developers who were disillusioned by the direction that company went in.
The chromium part is still problematic. I'll stick with the only other option until they shit the bed completely :(
That sounds nice, I'll check it out.
librewolf? mullvad browser? Tor browser?
Librewolf is built on Gecko, people often accredit it as a "firefox fork".
Tor Browser seems cool, it's what I use on my phone whenever I have spare time to let it load before searching things which don't require a lot of bandwidth. I'll edit the above list.
Mullvad? Is that some kind of slur? I've never heard of that but searches say it's a VPN client. ¯\(ツ)/¯
mullvad browser, made in collaboration with the tor project and mullvad VPN. Requires mullvad VPN to use.
This is a pretty effective ad for LibreWolf
Gonna check it out. Is it foss? Didn't find it on fdroid
Ahh, not available for android
Yeah desktop only, as it stands today. As a person that only uses my phone to tide me over between PCs, I didn't really think of mobile.
Mull is a good one for Android.
Enshittification continues.
I wonder when Steam will go.
The paradox of tech right now "we are going to build the most complex technology known to man into our product in the next 12 months. Are we hiring record numbers of people to get it done? No. We fired a bunch of people and everyone else will just have to be extremely hardcore."
They're refocusing on Firefox and continuing the ai stuff they were already doing. They fireded people who were working on fediverse and metaverse platforms. Did you even read the article?
I hope the folks laid off land on their feet.
I'm starting to think FF is being deliberately run into the ground by the higher ups. It would be good to hear from some of the devs about their thoughts on all this.
That's a very good way of me leaving Firefox behind...
To go where, though? Lynx? Everything else is Chromium and that's not much better.
Librewolf. If all else fails I'll pop my old Emacs config and browse whichever websites I can there
To a Gemini reader. Kristall is nice. Lagrange is ... interesting.
Librewolf is a nice fork of Firefox
If the past is any indication, it'll either be off by default or you can turn it off. So maybe it isnt' all the drama that people make it sound like.
But it's a hellishly expensive thing that seems to not attract enjoyment from current Firefox users, and seems unlikely to bring new users, and (again) seems to be prioritised over other things that could better use the money, like developers, so...
Why.
What a slap on Konqueror's face.
And text only browsers too.
I don't really see it this way it's just marketing. Saying "all other browsers descend from big bad corporate Apple" is scary, saying "all other browsers descend from another open source project" is meh.
"It's all KHTML", I heard.
You have a point. But still, they could have added an "ackshually" footnote or something.
Unfortunately, KHTML was discontinued in 2023 (according to Wikipedia)
I mean yes no kinda Konqueror simply accepted a bunch of downstream patches, including a name change.
...more or less. It could for a long time use all three of KHTML, WebKit (fork of KHTML) and QtWebEngine (Blink wrapped for Qt, that is, a fork of WebKit), they recently removed KHTML support because noone was updating it and it hadn't been the default for ages.
If they hadn't implemented multi-engine support in the past they probably would've switched over to "whatever Qt provides" right-out, it's KDE after all. Ultimately they're providing a desktop, not a web browser. Back in the days they did decide to roll their own instead of going with Firefox but it was never a "throw project resources at it" kind of situation, there were simply KDE people who felt like working on it. Web standards were a lot less involved back around the turn of the millennium, and also new and shiny. Back in the days people thought that HTML 4.01 Strict and XHMTL would be a thing that servers actually would start to output instead of the usual tagsoup.
If you're that kind of person right now I'll point you in the direction of Servo. No, Firefox doesn't use it and it's not a Mozilla project any more, Firefox only included (AFAIK) parallel CSS handling, the rest is still old Gecko.
That's quite the bummer. But still. Saying that almost all browsers can trace their lineage to Apple and Webkit is technically correct, but it's just a half-truth. As Apple and Webkit were once based on KHTML.
This surprises people? Mozilla has always been Mozilla's biggest enemy.
Been saying the writing is on the wall for their enshittification for months. On lemmy. Every time I end up with 20+ downvotes.
Eat me. Here it comes.
Still using Firefox until it officially sucks, but if you haven't seen it coming you've been willfully ignorant.
I expect a Ubuntu fork packaged with Firefox a la windows 98/IE as a paid OS in the next 5 years to try to undercut Microsoft. Or something. Idk the future.
oh hey it's you! I actually thought about your comments as soon as I saw this headline. I switched from Firefox to brave a few years ago, then recently switched to waterfox as they are again independent of system1 like before. the browser itself removes a lot of unnecessary Mozilla integrations and also reverts the proton UI. maybe forks like this or Librewolf are the future for this browser?
Ah, the chromium approach.*
:D
No, I think you're right. (I think people will strip down Firefox and those strip down versions will probably persist to be the ideal browser for years to come)
*I am aware that there is a difference here
That's not the chromium approach. That's the Phoenix (a fork of Netscape Navigator) approach.
Of course, Phoenix ended up becoming Firefox.
If you don't mind me asking What is the difference?
Willfully ignorant until the end. single browser for everything will be worse for sure
Whyyyy Mozilla? I want to love you, rally, but you wont let me.
You may be in an abusive relationship with your browser. 💔
What a sad day to be alive. I want to believe nothing bad will happen but this is scary
but its open source so someone can just fork it
Okay, well I'm ready to write a angry email now who's with me? Anybody know the best address?
they have a mastodon instance, and many official accounts with job titles.
browse mastodon.social
And I’m still waiting for them to open source Pocket. Silly me.
I'm still waiting for them to make it an optional extension… oh wait.
Honestly, it sucks, but I expected hundreds in line with the other huge layoffs we’ve seen. It being 60 seems more reasonable
They've said they want to do local AIs though. If that's the case I'm all in.
This world blows
Well guys we had a good run, free and open source software is officially over
Not entirely. There is LibreWolf (Formerly IceWolf) on desktop. https://librewolf.net
Mull is apparently an Android option that's also a fork, but I'm just installing it now, and can also say its only on FDroid.
I know man it's a joke lol. There's a bajillion forks of firefox that are mostly better than vanilla firefox itself. FOSS will never die.
Librewolf will die if Firefox dies. They don't have the resources to maintain a rendering engine
Mull works well on android. Firefox login works too.
that's a bit of an overreaction
This is how you lose. I only use FF. I will switch to another browser if they enshittify with AI.
Which browser is not going to have AI?
Netscape Navigator!
Vivaldi recently posted this -vivaldi-wont-allow-a-machine-to-lie-to-you.
See also vivaldi community
Ungoogled Chromium
Why though? I’ve pointed out elsewhere, a browser is one of the few places an LLM makes sense. Especially if it’s local.
It’s remarkable really. They are competing against another browser which users have to actively go out and find, then install.
Some people are used to how chrome looks and that’s powerful glue, of course, but very few normal users (ie almost none of us in here on Lemmy) needs things beyond what both Firefox and Chrome does equally well.
The simple difference in adoption rate is this: Google pushing Chrome through people’s use of Google. Diminish the need for Google, diminish people’s discovery of Chrome.
Also, I cannot understand why they need this many people. If 5% of their workforce is 60 people, they have 1200 people employed. I can almost guarantee that Google’s Chrome team isn’t 1200 people strong.
Maybe Firefox would be better being smaller and more nimble. Maybe they should stop pretending they’re a company and start pretending they’re a foundation (which is what they are). 300 people working on a core browser seems a lot of full time people, still, and that’d be a quarter of what they are today.
Also, Mozilla’s inability to produce a simple interface for embedding Firefox is simply baffling to me. The reason so many other skin-browsers are built on chromium is that it’s a LOT easier to embed.
I speak as someone who’s run Firefox since the day it was born.
Well it was 1200 people at Mozilla, not necessarily directly working on Firefox. They have multiple products and they still need HR and lawyers and all the other support roles any other company needs.
I want a upvote for sharing, down vote the concept button. I hate it.
As much as I hate it, think it's a terrible part for a free, open, and secure web; it's probably a solid business move based on the hype.
Think of the up vote button more as a "this information is worth spreading" button than "I like or agree with this content".
Votes are meant only to increase or decrease visibility, especially on Lemmy where karma doesn't exist.
still, it'd be nice to have a "upvote, but fuck this content" button
gotta add emoji reactions on posts
The "upvote good, downvote bad" mentality needs to die. As others have said, the arrows are to promote/reduce visibility of content. Whether you agree with the content of the post should be irrelevant.
People have been saying some variant of this at least as far back as Slashdot in the late 90s. Nobody has come up with a viable way to change peoples habits.
Instead of fighting it, what can we do knowing that this is how it works?
New idea I've just come up with, we make it so, before upvoting or downvoting something, you have to press a button, and then wait at least a minute, or, better yet, solve a captcha, and then you don't even have to have accounts anymore and that takes about a minute. The only people upvoting or downvoting will be those who are really reflecting on what it is that they're doing, or the people who are really really committed and pissed off about something. I'm sure the latter won't happen like, ever.
That's precisely how it's being used now though. People don't want things they don't like to be seen, so they downvote.
I think maybe that's exactly how people are using it, it's just that most people aren't thinking "oh, well, this post made me a little mad or uncomfy, but I like the content and discussion that it's spurned, so I'll toss it an upvote". I think most people are more inclined to go "THIS POST MADE ME MAD! GRUG DOWNVOTE!". It doesn't even really not make sense, it would be kind of insane to spend like, even just a minute, thinking consciously about every single upvote or downvote you make, it would take a million years for anyone to ever upvote or downvote anything, and a lot of people would just not engage unless they were really committed, which doesn't necessarily map to their level of discernment, but might just instead map to how mad people could get over a given thing. Plenty of people could get mad enough about a thing to sit through a minute long wait period to downvote something.
Obviously. I've just got two emotions about the content I want to show.
I hate that they are laying people off. I do however want to use some machine learning powered adblock, for those harder to block ads. otherwise I don't feel like every app needs an AI assistant. It's bad for the Internet generally and for the power grid.
In theory, that sounds amazing.
In practice, it will most likely need to send the contents of your browser to some third-party server. No, thanks.
(Unless it's crowdsourced, like the first person to visit a page gets dinged, but then the next persons just downloads the set of rules instead of uploading content.)
Privacy preserving federated learning is a thing - essentially you train a local model and send the weight updates back to Google rather than the data itself....but also it's early days so who knows what vulnerabilities may exist
Oh interesting!
Why Mozilla? You had so much good faith
Because money.
A non-profit that begs for donations has become a money making machine netting their ceos over $10m in 3 years.
And they still will. I'm sure most people haven't heard of the projects they're getting rid of (that's why they're getting rid of them) and the anti-AI circlejerk is going to melt away once it rolls out and people are surprised to learn it's actually a really useful technology.
I'm happy I use Librewolf, I get the good parts without the nonsense
Long time FF user, things really aren't looking good for Mozilla as a whole.
Lol when that airbnb fuck took over I knew things were going to go south.
That was my thought too.
Looks like I'll need to switch to one of those browsers that only take and show characters I can type on a keyboard. Like F and U.
oh fuck off Mozilla....
I double that. I'll go so far as to manually remove it from my fucking OS before I install it. Seriously, major Fuck You, Mozilla.
90% of these comments didn't even read the article. Its local only, and doesn't even send data to mozilla.
Yet...
Why would Mozilla make AI so they could steal personal information when they already own the browser that gives the information to the AI
The AI is claimed to be local.. Did you know that even local AIs are able to contact the internet again? So without knowing a local LLM system might execute some HTTPS calls for you, without knowing.
Except its open source. So it would last all of 4 seconds before being called out. Those HTTPS calls are a separate service the LLM will access not a part of the LLM itself.
Cant they do the same with firefox?
Yeesh people here are salty.
Honestly, if they make it optional and/or give the option to run it locally, I could see this being a good thing.
Lord knows the competition is going full bore on AI, and if FF wants to stay relevant with the mass market they'll need to keep up.
It depends on what they mean by AI. I can think of oodles of great uses:
But yeah, Mozilla will probably just go for a “chat with your browser” feature. Total waste of space.
All of those could be terrible to be honest, because AI is a data tracking vacuum. An AI adblocker or content filter sounds cool at first, but it would mean it reads and analyzes your data, just like the shit you do with chatbots too. Reading your mails? That's basically what Google does for years with gmail, that's why they have such a good spam filter. I agree that a chatbot would be kinda useless though, even if privacy friendly, which in of itself would be great but I just don't see the use. This could simply be outsourced to a website.
The only reason this would be an issue is if it’s sending that data off to a third party. If its fully local, who cares what data it sees?
If they're local they'd be basically useless due to a lack of computing power and potential lack of indexing for a search engine chatbot, so I doubt it. It would also have to be so polished that it wouldn't require further user knowledge / input, and that's just not a thing with any local LLM I've come across. Mozilla can gladly prove me wrong though. I certainly wouldn't mind if they generally can make the whole process of local LLMs easier and more viable.
The requirements to run good local LLMs have really been shrinking this past year… I have a lot of faith that there is a generally useful yet tiny AI tool within the grasp of Mozilla.
I can understand your thinking, but it could be as simple as giving the user the option to outsource the computation to a secure something or other, if their machine can’t handle it.
And yeah, the requirements are still quite high, but they are being reduced somewhat steadily, so I wouldn’t be surprised if average hardware could manage it in the long term.
Edit: For the record, Mozilla is one of the only companies I would trust if they said “the secure something or other is actually secure.” And they’d likely show actual proof and provide and explanation as to how.
There's no way it would be running locally.
In their defense, Mozilla did create the easiest way to run and integrate an LLM locally, so if anyone could do it, I imagine it would be them.
https://github.com/Mozilla-Ocho/llamafile
Yes, but what would a local model do for you in this case? Chatbots in browsers are typically used as an alternative / more contextualized search engine. For that you need proper access to an index of search results. Most people will also not have enough computing power to make use of any complex chatbot / larger context sizes.
Pennomi wrote a whole list of potential ideas. And honestly, while I agree that local LLMs on typical hardware are underpowered for most tasks, it's possible they would have the option for those that can run it.
People are getting all upset over this announcement without even knowing what their plan actually is, like the word "AI" is making them foam at the mouth or something. I'm just saying we should reserve judgements for when we have an idea of what's happening.
And I replied to that comment, without any mouth foaming.
Yes, and then you asked for ideas, which were in that comment that you replied to.
I honestly have no idea what you're referring to now. I never asked for any ideas.
Tell me you don't understand your userbase without telling me you don't understand your userbase
oh good firefox. Wonder what other browser i can use, oh wait...
Can someone just make a minimalist browser that isn't chrome/firefox based?
There are plenty of browsers. Dillo, NetSurf, surf, w3m, Lynx, Links, Via, Midori, Pale Moon although it's based on a fork of Gecko, Tunnel, qutebrowser. And there are even options for a search engine, although the only one worth considering that isn't just a layer on top of other search engines is Kagi which costs $10 a month, and I wouldn't exactly call it minimalist.
The problem is that no browser can allow you to escape the horror that is web standards & practices that have been developed over decades and are almost unchangeable, without sacrificing basic web functionality and just making it a worse experience than it needs to be at least. The fact is that practically the entire web is reliant on JavaScript, on top of HTML and CSS which take a lot more resources to utilize/display than it looks, meaning 3 interpreters constantly running that must be sandboxed to each tab you have open with a lot of overhead to manage security.
In an ideal world we'd all just be using provably-safe high-performance compiled WASM-but-stronger (from functional languages or more likely Rust or something less boiler-platey but similar), without having such a complex and fucked dependency situation*, where we wouldn't need to sandbox interpreted languages and slaughter performance. Of course, in an ideal world, we also wouldn't have to be concerned about aggressive tracking, ads, clickbait, SEO abuse, scams, or even malware, so there's not much use in imagining a reality where we actually have quality web browsing.
The actual answer to using the web without the fucked-ness of browsers is to not use a web browser at all for sites you use frequently. Use stuff like this instead.
*seriously, you can write the most basic website with JavaScript and it'll probably rely on tens of thousands of expressions of code which realistically should just be expressable in like a small page or two, you do webdev and you'll probably accidentally be implicitly committing a sacrifice to some Aztec God in order to check if a number is even or odd
Also just imagine if all of web dev was just ML/Scala/Rust/Swift/Erlang without compiling to JavaScript 🤤 That is the definition of a perfect universe
I've been saying it for a while: continuing to play catch is a losing move for Mozilla or for any independent browser maker.
The real move, is to switch to or at least integrate an alternate internet, something that uses a protocol that is simpler and more limited by design - just get rid of Javascript (or of "remote execution", really) and you instantly get a much leaner, much securer internet design.
I've heard pretty good things about the Gemini protocol, but IMHO they went too far too extremist into the "text internet" philosophy, and as a result is a raw downgrade from Gopher. Gopher could actually be a good option.
I'll definitely have to check out a few of those browsers at some point. It's kind of insane how much tech debt we've accrued over the years.
I think honestly we just need to start waning off half the shit we support. Minimize the amount of support required, and somehow manage to provide a smaller attack window so that way we can stop writing protections for problems that honestly shouldn't even exist to begin with. Bonus points to microsoft for creating security certs that don't do their jobs because hahafunneemalware.exe is signed by fucking oracle of all people, and i guess we should just blindly execute that file because it says it's trustworthy!
Though it would be interesting to have a sort of "web browser" which is actually just an application based on plugins for different frontends, for stuff like yewtube, we do only use a handful of sites from time to time. Plus maybe a basic web fronted for stuff that isn't JS because honestly who wants it anyway.
Unfortunately none. Developing a rendering engine that can handle css, html, javascript, while also rendering a website in the exact same way as Chrome and Firefox is a huge tasks, and not something a hobby programmer can whack out in a few weeks. Thats the reason why even Microsoft abandoned their own rendering engine, because things did always look and work different in IE.
This is not true. Pale Moon, Ice Weasel, Librewolf....
It doesn't have to be from scratch. Not even Apple did this with Safari (they based in on KHTML, the rendering engine of KDE's Konqueror.)
librewolf is a firefox fork, anything thats a fork of firefox/chrome is automatically not counted, because it is inherently bulkier than the original (though maybe more secure)
Unless it's pissandshittium of course.
Says who?
How is "being bulkier" relevant at all? But let's just go down that route and say that a fork does not necessarily end up in a bulkier product. A dev team could decide to fork, then remove unwanted features from the original project; which is what's happening with Librewolf as far as I know (e.g. no Pocket bs.)
Finally, let's remember that both Safari and Chrome have their roots on Konqueror's KHTML rendering engine. By your metric, we should be saying that they don't count either; because they're "(definitely) bulkier forks" of KHTML.
says me, the one who made the original comment.
now you just have a patched together, disjointed, mess of a browser, on top of a second dev team, who now needs to unpatch it together, re patch it together, and then somehow repackage that. It's just hopeless. It's like trying to turn a full size pickup into a small lightweight town car. It's just not going to happen.
It's worth noting that when a fork is building on top of something, there is a point where the original roots are no longer present, or no longer significantly present. It's like saying that android is linux. Which doesnt stop the charts from displaying android separately to linux, or chromeos for that matter. Even if it did i don't like the browsers because they're too bulky so it's not like it influences my opinion anyway lol.
Then it's a weak argument without real support.
You are assuming way too much. As if Apple and Google did all this with KHTML. Which lead us to:
And what's your point by saying this? What does it matter if the roots "disappear," if the product is good enough for competition?
What bulky browsers don't you like?
I mean yeah, but it's my opinion on the matter. Even then my original claim is based on the fact of something being an active fork of another browser. Which is still going to line up with my point just fine.
assuming too much if you think modern applications are programmed/designed well. Ultimately no matter what you do, having a product be around for a decade, let alone multiple of them, is going to incur substantial tech debt, and significant feature creep. There is nothing you can do about this. It happens in EVERY industry. In fact the only thing that helps to prevent this is an almost religious and fervent dedicated to pure minimalism when it comes to what your software is doing. Look at something like DWM for example.
My point is that beyond a certain point, a fork is no longer a fork, but more like a competing piece of software. You see this all the time, look at android or chromeos. Technically "based" on linux, but so far gone that almost nobody considers it linux, i only ever see it mentioned in jokes. Something like prism which is a fork of poly, which is a fork of multimc is starting to get to the point where it's more of an alternate piece of software, than a direct fork. It's twice independently maintained, it's feature set is focused differently.
If you need more examples why dont we have a look at a COW filesystem? When you make a change to a file, a fork is created, and that change is then saved on that forked path, so now you have multiple different versions, throughout the chronological history of that fork. If you have auto-deletion enabled for old forks, as you should, at some point you will have "orphaned" forks. Which no longer represent in anyway the original file, but exist as an independently separate instance of that file, in a different state. It's a similar idea, in a different scale, on a different system. There is also a point where it no longer exists as a fork, but as an implementation on top of that original piece of software. How that's defined is a little more complicated though.
It's a little bit philosophical, and semantical, but my point is simple, if your piece of software exists as a fork on top of another piece of software, you don't get to call yourself "faster" or "leaner" or "more optimized" than the original. Your base browser is still a piece of shit, you've taken a bad car, and repainted it, now it looks a little bit better. But it's still a shit car. You turn a beater into a race car by completely stripping it to bits, at a certain point, it's not really a fork anymore. In the same way that putting a body on a different frame isn't the same as the original.
it's not like i've literally named them or anything.
I still don't understand what this has anything to do with "forking makes a product bulkier," the original claim. At most, what you're saying is that the fork will have its own set of tech debt. But that doesn't make it bulkier by default. Again, a fork of Firefox without the Pocket and "experiments" crap will be lighter.
Well, yeah, isn't that the point of forking? I still don't see why a forked browser being "yet another competing browser" is a bad thing. It's the opposite!
I completely disagree with you, and I think I know why you think the way you think. It seems like you assume that all forks:
Man, have you never seen TV shows about mechanics taking shitty cars and making them awesome? Yes, they strip it to pieces, and reassemble said pieces. That's part of engineering practices. It appears that you have a narrow way of seeing how software development works. Devs don't need to take in the whole "shitty project" and be resigned to deal with it. They can take the good parts, and rewrite the bad parts. And that's just one example.
You haven't mentioned any browser that's a fork from Firefox and that is also bulkier than Firefox. Librewolf? Bulkier than Firefox? Really?
I mean yeah, removing two features removes two features, that still doesn't optimize the entirety of the browser, all of the rest of the browser will behave the exact same with no difference (unless, somehow, those features are actually so badly implemented they actively impede performance) Thats like taking a corolla and removing the entirety of the interior to strip weight, and doing literally nothing else to it. It's just marginally faster now. Handles a little better maybe. Everything else is still stock though.
I dont inherently have an issue with forks, i have an issue with stuff like thorium, you forked chrome, that's great, chrome is faster than firefox by most accounts. You made it maybe 40% faster in some instances? Cool. It's still basically chrome though. They describe it as The fastest browser which, if that's true, that's great! It's still basically chrome though. The issue here is that the modern web, and the web browsers designed around it are just massively overbuilt and bloated. We're solving problems that shouldn't exist, and we're adding features that do almost nothing other than cause problems half the time. That's not a good starting point. Unless you completely rip everything out, and rebuild it. Which is inherently not what a fork is.
Yes, you wanna know what they do most of the time? Completely strip it down, and then rebuild it. If you have done that with either chromium or firefox, you wouldn't be calling it a fork of chrome/firefox, and everybody would ALL over it. As far as im concerned, any fork of either of those browsers is just removing the most egregious garbage, which is a good thing, but it's still just a bad browser underneath the removed garbage.
Let's compare forks, firefox and librewolf, both browsers i have installed, and both browsers i use. As far as i can tell they're effectively the same thing. Librewolf probably has some cruft removed and some good defaults compared to firefox, but other than that, nothing inherently different.
Lets look at chrome and chromium why dont we, this is actually just the reverse, but wouldn't you be surprised to discover that i dislike chromium equally as much as chrome because they have equal design decisions? It's almost like 90% of the feature base is going to be identical between them or something!
Thorium? I've not used that one yet, i assume it's just chrome, equally annoying to use, but with the slight added benefit of having marginally less time to ponder my bad life choices in between bouts of loading heavily ad bloated sites, and JS infested messes of web design. Plus all the ram that it probably still consumes. Because it's a web browser, why wouldn't it.
I don't even where to start, but let's just say that I now see where you're coming from. You seem to have an issue with this Thorium browser, then project your perspective over other projects that are also forks. Just because one implementation sucks doesn't mean they all do.
And we have different ideas of software engineering. To you, features are just the things that the user can interact with. When you say things like "that's like someone stripping the interior of a Corolla and doing nothing else." Except that I was thinking, precisely, of working on the whole car, including tweaking the engine, the electrical system, the fuel pump, etc. Sounds like a lot of work? Maybe. But it's better than building a car from scratch.
Anyway. Have a nice day!
that would be more of a rebuild than a fork. If your end product is more similar to the OEM car than it is to the end product. It's more like a fork. If the car is more akin to a custom built racer, than the OEM, it's a rebuild.
Its about time i would settle for the bare minimum at first then we can built up on it as a community
honestly, yeah.
Servo in future, LibreWolf for now imo
Plz not you mozilla, you are one of the last good guys that remains from the early days
i thought mozilla new CEO would be better but heck no, sounds like i'll be hoping around in webkit browsers
I get that people are upset, because this fucking buzzword is haunting us. I'm just hoping that they don't jump on that BS-bandwaggon and create something actually useful. But we'll see I guess ...
Yeah, it's a hate-train for AI, I definitely get it, but Mozilla seems to be using it for actually useful things. Offline translation and fake reviewing checking for Amazon are pretty cool, in my opinion. Don't get me wrong, I'm not brand loyal, and I'm ready to jump ship to a FLOSS alternative as soon as they do something stupid. I'll just keep using Firefox until they do.
It's only a buzzword to people who've already decided it's a buzzword and are refusing to consider its actual good uses, of which there are plenty.
Being part of angry mobs is fun.
Sure is, but doesn't mostly lead anywhere
FF no !
So frustrated to see how this conversation is playing out. This is exactly what people have been asking for but all anybody can seem to see is "AI" in the headline.
This pivot is about refocusing on:
This seems like a much better position for Mozilla to operate from, particularly because they've excelled at producing ethical SOTA ML for YEARS before ChatGPT. In all, this seems far more forward looking than the previous strategy of "make weird little web tools to make money maybe" and it's an absolutely massive untapped niche, that they already have the talent to tap into. If we punish the players best positioned to shift the industry standard away from extreme and exploitative data collection, we will end up in exactly the Orwellian AI hellscape that we're all so afraid of.
It is a better position and FF is going to be even better because of it. We need more options than just chromium. Open web standards dont stay open when everyone congregates.
Oh god dammit
Firefox on Android doesn't support keyboard shortcuts - for the last 12 years. Sooo - let's add the bloody AI, that is going to help
to be fair, most people aren't using physical keyboards with their phones, this mostly applies to tablets (which are much less popular) and android tv (where firefox isn't even officially supported anymore)
anyway, even without that issue, the android version of firefox is kinda janky and regularly gets stuck while loading websites
bt keyboards can be absolutelly critical for some users with disabilities. most of the developing world can't afford to own several devices like a computer and a phone.
Why are u using a keyboard on a smart phone? Is that a thing?
I would fucking rather pay not to have AI in my browser, FFS…
ew.
Could we just have the AI part separately? I want an AI that can help me around the house by learning all my books and documents in case someone needs a specific photo of the babies or maybe needs to know a derivation of greens theorem or a recipe for kombucha.
That’s much more than an LLM. I get where you’re going, and I legitimately want it as well, assuming it’s local of course. But we aren’t there yet.
Well it'll be fun trying to find a replacement that doesn't small use anything made by Google, like Opera does.
Librewolf, Pale Moon and Iceweasel.
Guess it's time to get off the internet.
There's always trusty Lynx!
This is the best summary I could come up with:
A TechCrunch report has a company memo that followed these layoffs, detailing one product shutdown and a "scaling back" of a few others.
reads the very top of the page; it then goes on to detail a lot of projects that aren't in line with Mozilla's core work of making a browser.
These non-browser projects could be seen as a search for a less vulnerable revenue stream, but none have put a huge dent in the bottom line.
TechCrunch managed to get an internal company memo that details a few "strategic corrections" for the myriad Mozilla products.
Mozilla seized an opportunity to bring trustworthy AI into Firefox, largely driven by the Fakespot acquisition and the product integration work that followed.
Mozilla paid an undisclosed sum in 2023 to buy a company called Fakespot, which uses AI to identify fake product reviews.
The original article contains 731 words, the summary contains 140 words. Saved 81%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
So, what is else out there? Can the guys making adblocker just make a browser or so?
Making a browser from scratch would be very difficult. SerenityOS has one, but idk how usable it is.
Besides Firefox, I guess the least evil options would be something webkit-based. There are a few of those.
Apple didn't even build a browser from scratch. They took Konqueror's KHTML engine, then built Webkit with it.
We could do the same with Firefox. As the matter of fact, there are already forks out there, like IceWeasel, Librewolf, Pale Moon, etc.
What's going to happen is that one of those will start raising to the top. That's exactly what happened with Firefox. Mozilla had the Netscape suite, open sourced it, then fucked it up. When it fucked it up, I decided to try one of the alternatives, Phoenix in this case. Then Mozilla decided to drop the Netscape Suite and adopted Phoenix, which eventually became Mozilla Firebird, and finally Firefox.
I guess the cycle shall soon repeat.
LoL, and I had been contemplating switching to Firefox on my phone. Fucking nope! Not gonna board a ship that has decided to follow the pack into the ice...
To be fair, I'll take the ship at the back of the ice-kamakaze-pack over the one at the front. More time to jump ship when something better comes by.
I'm using chrome on phone, because it's basically part of the operating system, but I did like Fennec. It's a fork of Firefox mobile with a few more privacy features (or so they advertise)
I'm just using Brave (yes, I know but it doesn't annoy ME so I'm fine with it) which is just Chrome without the constraints.
Chromium is chrome without the constraints, Brave just has a different master holding the keys.
Not saying brave is bad btw, but chromium itself is literally the master branch for all of these different browsers
I did address that. I am fully aware of Brave's faults. But the benefits to me outweigh the negatives. Besides which, there isn't a browser in existence that doesn't collect data on you. Not unless you go ahead and compile your own. So I choose the one that is blatantly not following the rules and allows me some leeway to enjoy the web the way I like. It's also not the only browser on my phone. Chrome is obviously still here but so is Duckduckgo and I do have Firefox on here even though I never actually use it.
Chromite? Fennec? Iceraven? Lots of mobile browsers without telemetry on android.
Cromite and Fennec I've seen and don't trust their security at all. Better the devil you know and all that. But Iceraven is new to me and will have to look into that one. So thanks
Just remembered Mull. Have you heard of it?
So instead you're using a browser by companies already in the ice?
Jumping ship means trying to go in a different direction. I'm not gonna upheave my entire online presence just to get onboard with a company who is not only going the same way, but is woefully behind in the race to go that way.