Firefox uses on-device downloaded-on-demand ML models for privacy-preserving translation.
-
@duke_of_germany @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard @tante BOTH (2) and (3).
The Mozilla I want is one that would pre-install uBlock Origin. An effective adblocker furthers Mozilla's purported mission of "put[ting] control of the internet back in the hands of the people using it" way more than any LLM nonsense.
@tommorris @duke_of_germany @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard @tante
LibreWolf is a popular fork that pre-installs UBO
I've been using it daily for months
-
@tommorris @duke_of_germany @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard @tante
LibreWolf is a popular fork that pre-installs UBO
I've been using it daily for months
@rzeta0 @duke_of_germany @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard @tante yup, I like LibreWolf a lot, although I'm testing out Zen more at the moment.
-
@m0rpk @firefoxwebdevs you have it completely backwards, AI should be opt in not opt out
@redfernmike @m0rpk @firefoxwebdevs But that way they can't validate their CEOs ego by telling them how many people are "using" the Clanker.
-
Let's ask the real question:
Firefox users,
do you want any AI directly built into Firefox, or separated out into extensions?
@duke_of_germany @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard @tante It depends...
Stuff like the small model they have for language translations, it's ok to be built in, this is a major accessibility feature.Third party models that are subscription services, or running as self hosted services, but that require user to acquire and configure on the browser for it to work (off by default), can be integrated within the browser, as long as they are extensions to other non-ai browser features.
-
@joepie91 I think a lot of people in the replies would consider this sneaky. It's a tricky UX problem. But yes, granular control needs to be part of the solution, along with a kill switch.
-
@duke_of_germany @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard @tante It depends...
Stuff like the small model they have for language translations, it's ok to be built in, this is a major accessibility feature.Third party models that are subscription services, or running as self hosted services, but that require user to acquire and configure on the browser for it to work (off by default), can be integrated within the browser, as long as they are extensions to other non-ai browser features.
@duke_of_germany @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard @tante
Other AI features that are not extensions to non-ai features, and are not similar to the language translation feature using a local small model, should definitively be a browser extension.
-
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 Translation models are language models.
The way I see it, there are two types of AI things in the Firefox product:
• User-helping features: translation, captioning, … Those don’t even need AI in the name, it's clear what they do, and the underlying tech only sets how good they are at their job.
• Buzzword features: AI sidebar, AI window. Those don’t have a user-facing goal, and are essentially a marketing gimmick. -
@firefoxwebdevs Translation models are language models.
The way I see it, there are two types of AI things in the Firefox product:
• User-helping features: translation, captioning, … Those don’t even need AI in the name, it's clear what they do, and the underlying tech only sets how good they are at their job.
• Buzzword features: AI sidebar, AI window. Those don’t have a user-facing goal, and are essentially a marketing gimmick.@espadrine I personally agree with you, but most respondents to the poll do not. It seems like, if the AI switch did not disable translations, folks would not have trust in the setting.
-
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 "Hey, we pooped in your cake. Do you want us to add inclusive topping : yes, yes but just a bit, no no topping on my poopoo cake, emoji idunnolol"
-
@firefoxwebdevs nobody wants LLMs in our browser. do something useful instead
-
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 Just keep in mind to keep all AI features off by default no matter what.
-
@firefoxwebdevs We don't want a "kill switch" aka Opt-Out, we want a "live switch" aka Opt-In!
I think it should be very clear by now that most people don't want slop by default.
What is so complicated to understand that?Opt-Out == bad
Opt-In == okay
slop as add-on == best option@CyberPunker @firefoxwebdevs kill switch doesn't mean opt-out, it means have a single button to disable it.
The thing is that an user might have switched on a couple of AI features, and might have changed its mind, and wanted to disable it all permanently or temporarily, and having a single button to do that is very useful.
-
@firefoxwebdevs @noah We also don't trust to you keep your word.
-
@duke_of_germany @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard @tante
hoping @zenbrowser, based on FF, will stay away from this
-
@espadrine I personally agree with you, but most respondents to the poll do not. It seems like, if the AI switch did not disable translations, folks would not have trust in the setting.
@firefoxwebdevs Anecdotically, I clicked "Yes" because my first instinct was to focus on semantics, but what I really want as a user is to not crowd menus with entries which are not user-helping.
-
@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.
@digitalraven @firefoxwebdevs how come a local translation is bs?
-
Let's ask the real question:
Firefox users,
do you want any AI directly built into Firefox, or separated out into extensions?
@duke_of_germany @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard @tante
.
Forget focus. It should not contain any tiny trace of AI in any way shape or form. -
@firefoxwebdevs I would rather like for auxiliary features to be added via the extensions API.
@truh @firefoxwebdevs I generally agree, but I can see exceptions for things such as accessibility features (translation is accessibility), and other features that extend user facing non-ai features and are done with local small models, as long as they are off by default.
-
@firefoxwebdevs alternative perspective:
Remove all AI-LLM, AI-ML related functionality.
Then have target end-user (web developer) choose, informed by their values & preferences what functional components they’d like to “plug-in” to web-browser for ML content processing for web page-
- Language translation - enable on device locally download-on-demand ML or use your own
- Dictionaries
- …
Once these are real-world validated & functional, they can be shared via open source commons with others.@dahukanna @firefoxwebdevs this thread is not about an LLM, or AI-ML feature.
Translations are an accessibility feature, essential for many around the world, this should be a native feature, unless you don' t care about accessibility.
-
@firefoxwebdevs rather than mess about with kill switches for a product most people don't want, strip all that AI crap out of the browser and make extensions that integrate with various LLM models so those who do want it can add it but don't force this slop on everyone by default
I've been a FF user since the beta days and have now switched to Librewolf because of the AI and ad tech bloat in FF
It makes me sad to see FF decline in this way & become another AI bloated browser
@viralobscurity @firefoxwebdevs this feature doesn't use an LLM... and it's about accessibility, accessibility shouldn't be an optional feature.
