Firefox uses on-device downloaded-on-demand ML models for privacy-preserving translation.
-
@scribe I'm not sure cookies are a great source of inspiration when it comes to privacy
@firefoxwebdevs In the context of granular control they're quite good though? ie I can accept/delete them per domain as I like. I voted for the middle option as the only granular option, but granularity can be more fine-grained than that, is what I mean. And privacy is all about control over the granularity. Time-limited access tokens with very specific permissions are maybe a better analogy.
-
@davidgerard @mdavis @firefoxwebdevs I did not say I was personally uncomfortable with the term, because I am not personally uncomfortable with the term.
Please do not let your imagination run wild with this.
@jaffathecake @davidgerard @mdavis@mastodon.social @firefoxwebdevs this is a real weird hill for you to die on
if you’re representing your employer and they’re uncomfortable with the kill switch naming, to the point where you keep encasing the term in scare quotes every time it’s used, then we can’t tell and frankly don’t care if you personally love the term. nobody’s here for Jake. do you understand that? we’re here because we’re dedicated Firefox users angry at the direction your employer has taken.
-
@jaffathecake @davidgerard @mdavis@mastodon.social @firefoxwebdevs this is a real weird hill for you to die on
if you’re representing your employer and they’re uncomfortable with the kill switch naming, to the point where you keep encasing the term in scare quotes every time it’s used, then we can’t tell and frankly don’t care if you personally love the term. nobody’s here for Jake. do you understand that? we’re here because we’re dedicated Firefox users angry at the direction your employer has taken.
@zzt @jaffathecake @firefoxwebdevs this account will be shut down by the incoming AI CMO anyway as unauthorised marketing
-
@jaffathecake @davidgerard @mdavis@mastodon.social @firefoxwebdevs this is a real weird hill for you to die on
if you’re representing your employer and they’re uncomfortable with the kill switch naming, to the point where you keep encasing the term in scare quotes every time it’s used, then we can’t tell and frankly don’t care if you personally love the term. nobody’s here for Jake. do you understand that? we’re here because we’re dedicated Firefox users angry at the direction your employer has taken.
@zzt @davidgerard @firefoxwebdevs "note that Jake, in presenting the kill switch and calling it a kill switch and getting it into all the papers as a kill switch, says he's uncomfortable with the name" - I was called out by name directly and deliberately.
-
@zzt @davidgerard @firefoxwebdevs "note that Jake, in presenting the kill switch and calling it a kill switch and getting it into all the papers as a kill switch, says he's uncomfortable with the name" - I was called out by name directly and deliberately.
@jaffathecake @zzt @firefoxwebdevs i'm sure you'll reveal the culprit who hacked the account and posted it forthwith
-
@zzt @davidgerard @firefoxwebdevs "note that Jake, in presenting the kill switch and calling it a kill switch and getting it into all the papers as a kill switch, says he's uncomfortable with the name" - I was called out by name directly and deliberately.
@jaffathecake @davidgerard @firefoxwebdevs yes Jake, because you’re professionally representing your employer when writing under a supposedly official account.
-
@jaffathecake @zzt @firefoxwebdevs i'm sure you'll reveal the culprit who hacked the account and posted it forthwith
@davidgerard @zzt @firefoxwebdevs It's telling that you can't admit that you (deliberately?) misrepresented me to stir outrage.
-
@jaffathecake @davidgerard @firefoxwebdevs yes Jake, because you’re professionally representing your employer when writing under a supposedly official account.
@zzt @davidgerard @firefoxwebdevs and I didn't say I'm uncomfortable with the name, which is the claim that was put directly to me. I think it's reasonable to push back against that false claim.
-
@davidgerard @zzt @firefoxwebdevs It's telling that you can't admit that you (deliberately?) misrepresented me to stir outrage.
@jaffathecake @davidgerard @firefoxwebdevs it’s telling that you can’t admit that you deliberately misrepresented community consensus to push horseshit into the browser I use
-
@davidgerard @zzt @firefoxwebdevs It's telling that you can't admit that you (deliberately?) misrepresented me to stir outrage.
@jaffathecake @zzt @firefoxwebdevs your outrage is entirely performative and I don't believe you
-
Firefox uses on-device downloaded-on-demand ML models for privacy-preserving translation.
They're not LLMs. They're trained on open data.
Should translation be disabled if the AI 'kill switch' is active?
@firefoxwebdevs How about "don't put pointless AI bullshit into your browser in the first place so you don't have to ask asinine loaded questions like this to try to con people into not turning all that shit off.
-
@zzt @jaffathecake @firefoxwebdevs this account will be shut down by the incoming AI CMO anyway as unauthorised marketing
@davidgerard @zzt @jaffathecake @firefoxwebdevs He sounds like a politician talking to the press. “I never said that.” “Yes you did.” “Well what I meant to say was…” “It was implied.” “Its the official position of the government….”
-
@jaffathecake @zzt @firefoxwebdevs your outrage is entirely performative and I don't believe you
@davidgerard @jaffathecake @firefoxwebdevs nah just look at the outrage we’ve stirred:
- many posts constructively outlining a path for Firefox (all non-core browser features as add-ons that aren’t installed by default), more than sufficient to establish consensus in a good faith environment
- lots of passionately negative responses to the poll as presented, more than sufficient to discard the poll in a good faith environment
- plenty of emotional posts because Firefox mattershow horrid!
-
@jaffathecake @davidgerard @mdavis@mastodon.social @firefoxwebdevs this is a real weird hill for you to die on
if you’re representing your employer and they’re uncomfortable with the kill switch naming, to the point where you keep encasing the term in scare quotes every time it’s used, then we can’t tell and frankly don’t care if you personally love the term. nobody’s here for Jake. do you understand that? we’re here because we’re dedicated Firefox users angry at the direction your employer has taken.
@zzt @jaffathecake @davidgerard @firefoxwebdevs
I'm not here because I'm a dedicated Firefox user. I'm here because: -
@firefoxwebdevs The frame of this question is risible.
I am begging you to just make a web browser.
Make it the best browser for the open web. Make it a browser that empowers individuals. Make it a browser that defends users against threats.
Do not make a search engine. Do not make a translation engine. Do not make a webpage summariser. Do not make a front-end for an LLM. Do not make a client-side LLM.
Just. Make. A. Web. Browser.
Please.
-
@funkylab My point is that I'm Very. Tired. of every company trying to cram unwanted cruft into their products at the expense of core features.
Of course people should be able to translate webpages.
You may not have noticed from my tone but I was being somewhat hyperbolic for rhetorical effect.
-
Firefox uses on-device downloaded-on-demand ML models for privacy-preserving translation.
They're not LLMs. They're trained on open data.
Should translation be disabled if the AI 'kill switch' is active?
Let's ask the real question:
Firefox users,
do you want any AI directly built into Firefox, or separated out into extensions?
-
The Firefox AI "kill switch" is not "complicated" except insofar as it's incoherent. it's not "undisclosed nuance" except insofar as it's incoherent.
the "kill switch" doesn't exist.
this is important to keep in mind. once you remember that NONE OF THIS EXISTS, you will realise that every one of the dilemmas you posit is an imaginary problem that follows from incoherent postulates.
e.g. "AI kill switch purists" is not a coherent postulation because the "kill switch" does not exist.
the "kill switch" is a hypothetical proposed in this post:
https://mastodon.social/@firefoxwebdevs/115740500373677782
the "kill switch" is a proposal to satisfy the demand for an opt-in by providing an opt-out. you might think that's a failure to respect the question, and you might even begin to suspect the proposal was in bad faith.
note that Jake, in presenting the kill switch and calling it a kill switch and getting it into all the papers as a kill switch, says he's uncomfortable with the name he's publicised it as. you might think that's oddly incompetent for literally a PR (devrel) person.
the concept as presented imposes multiple false dilemmas.
the LLM stuff should *incredibly obviously* be an extension. this is the purest possible opt-in, despite jake's past attempts to muddy the meaning of "opt-in".
making it an extension is also eminently feasible. There is literally no technical reason it needs to be a browser built-in.
this suggests the reasons are not in any way technical. some person with a name, who has yet to be named, dictated that it would be a built-in. so that's what Mozilla is going with.
why Mozilla went hard AI is entirely unclear. this would have been late 2024? we have no idea who was inspired with this bad idea nor why they were so incredibly keen to force it into the browser.
nor is it clear what Mozilla will do for external LLM services when the AI bubble runs out of venture capital and pops in a year or so, most of the chatbot APIs shut down and whatever remains is 10x the cost at least. but that's a problem for 2027's bonus, not 2026's.
note how the poll provides no option for "no LLM functions built-in to Firefox", in a pathetically transparent attempt to synthesize consent. jake wants to use this poll as evidence of what the user base wants, deliberately leaving out the option he knows directly a lot of them want.
and in conclusion:
1. solve the "kill switch" naming problem by branding it the "brutal and bloody robot murder switch with an option on the executives responsible".
2. make all this shit an extension like they should have a year ago.
3. and your little translator too.by the way, here's the Twitter version of the poll, posted the same time as the masto version. the screenshot is the *entire* responses to the poll, because Twitter is a plague graveyard.
https://xcancel.com/FirefoxWebDevs/status/2008586590998983153
note also the claim about "open data", which turns out to mean "we took the data cos someone found it lying around fell off the back of a truck honest" and not "open" in any other sense.
but the weird thing is, it has one less option for no good reason (Twitter allows four options too).
-
@mdavis folks want to disable 'AI' for more reasons than privacy. Privacy is important of course, but folks are also concerned about the training data, and energy used for the training.
@firefoxwebdevs I'm nitpicking here: it's not just energy, it's greenhouse geases emissions during training, and training data but also water used for cooling and DC space and water used for making GPUs and mining and destruction of life in the process. It's a lot broader than just energy. it's all about Life Cycle Assesment (LCA) and multiple impacts: GHG, water, pollution, etc. cc @mdavis
-
@mdavis I believe it's a moral stance due to how the models were produced.
