The problem is that the users seem not to ask for it. To the contrary, they seek ways to opt out.
I don't want the AI to be front and center in my browser. I do want the AI, if present, be local, and be distributed among tools: a better reading mode, fuzzy search on the page that searches by meaning, recognizing text on images (and also make it searchable and selectable), creature comforts like that.
If I need to chat with an LLM, I want it to not be bound to my browser.
And yes, I want to never need to start Chromium because a rare specific site refuses to work correctly in Firefox. If AI can help with that, splendid! But I suspect something else may be needed more.
A browser user agent is a string of text that a web browser sends to a web server to identify itself and provide information about the browser's capabilities, such as its type, version, and the operating system it runs on.
This has nothing to do with what an AI “agent” is.
Firefox should be the browser that respects you privacy (the only one...). Integrating AI undermining the efforts of making it the privacy oriented browser.
For now the AI is forced and ridiculously complicated to disable (with new options in about:config poping in each new version).
The promise to have an "disable all IA features" is still a promise.
The AI hate is unreasonably strong right now. People are acting like adding one feature they don't like or need to a browser is a borderline critical offense because it is an AI feature. I find it shocking how quickly the public in the US/EU developed this sort of hate towards one of the most interesting technology of the last decades.
In the same way that a car is literally just some wheels. It's overly-reductionist to the point of being adversarial.
> What well-funded org should be entrusted with making an open source agent for the user instead?
What does that have to do with the topic at hand? Maybe if you didn't try to strip the context (Mozilla, it's reputation, it's actions, it's incentives, and how this AI initiative conflicts with the userbase' expectations and references therein) all this would seem a lot less "crazy" even if you still disagree.
Mozilla's users aren't being unreasonable or irrational for voicing criticisms here.
Sure, there's plenty of blind-hate for AI. But even many of us that aren't don't like the way Mozilla is going about this for a number of very valid reasons/concerns well beyond "I don't like AI"
A browser is there for retrieving documents on behalf of the user, not to add its own spin to it. It's already bad with everyone and their dog wanted to abuse the user computation power with "apps" where it should be simple forms and listing.
"A web browser, often shortened to browser, is an application for accessing websites. When a user requests a web page from a particular website, the browser retrieves its files from a web server and then displays the page on the user's screen."
This is awesome but it cuts off what’s underneath.
Show the “full image” with a pond of Google and Microsoft crocodiles. Because that’s what’s really going to happen. Mozilla’s little fox is going to get eaten alive.
I actually feel like these integrations are fine, as long as they are opt-in or easily opt-outable of permanently. For now, I don't see the harm in adding another default search engine, it's much less obstrusive than the home page sponsored links. And if it gets them a little more independent from google by siphoning perplexity's seemingly infinite vc investment money, so be it.
Is it though? To me the animal on logos used by Firefox [1] always looked more similar to a red fox [2] than a red panda. Note pointy nose with the bottom colored white. Even the latest logo that shows more of the side of the face lacks the kind of patterns distinctive of the red panda. The -fire part of the name seemed to be represented by the flaming tail, not the animal itself.
Something we haven't observed yet are hyperlinks automatically created from a web of documents. This is usually a manual process: which word or words to select, and which specific URL to go to.
David Revoy is the artist who made the painting, this is his blog. The "source" link is to be understood in the sense of open source. Unlike most artists, he shares the raw editor files he worked on, not just the final image. So you can learn something about his creative process if you want to.
It's not exactly a template-meme, or whatever low-effort memes are called now (the ragefaces, the reaction gifs, the deep-fried slop).
I think something like xkcd comics or something similar has always been received well by the community. Given that it's a high-effort piece of content as a digital painting, I think it should be ok - or at least not treated like it's in the same bucket as memes.
xnx|2 months ago
A browser is literally a user agent. What well-funded org should be entrusted with making an open source agent for the user instead?
nine_k|2 months ago
I don't want the AI to be front and center in my browser. I do want the AI, if present, be local, and be distributed among tools: a better reading mode, fuzzy search on the page that searches by meaning, recognizing text on images (and also make it searchable and selectable), creature comforts like that.
If I need to chat with an LLM, I want it to not be bound to my browser.
And yes, I want to never need to start Chromium because a rare specific site refuses to work correctly in Firefox. If AI can help with that, splendid! But I suspect something else may be needed more.
throwaway613745|2 months ago
This has nothing to do with what an AI “agent” is.
_ache_|2 months ago
Firefox should be the browser that respects you privacy (the only one...). Integrating AI undermining the efforts of making it the privacy oriented browser.
For now the AI is forced and ridiculously complicated to disable (with new options in about:config poping in each new version). The promise to have an "disable all IA features" is still a promise.
matusp|2 months ago
0manrho|2 months ago
Correct.
> but it's crazy to be against them for AI.
Disagreed.
> A browser is literally a user agent.
In the same way that a car is literally just some wheels. It's overly-reductionist to the point of being adversarial.
> What well-funded org should be entrusted with making an open source agent for the user instead?
What does that have to do with the topic at hand? Maybe if you didn't try to strip the context (Mozilla, it's reputation, it's actions, it's incentives, and how this AI initiative conflicts with the userbase' expectations and references therein) all this would seem a lot less "crazy" even if you still disagree.
Mozilla's users aren't being unreasonable or irrational for voicing criticisms here.
Sure, there's plenty of blind-hate for AI. But even many of us that aren't don't like the way Mozilla is going about this for a number of very valid reasons/concerns well beyond "I don't like AI"
skydhash|2 months ago
therouwboat|2 months ago
reactordev|2 months ago
Show the “full image” with a pond of Google and Microsoft crocodiles. Because that’s what’s really going to happen. Mozilla’s little fox is going to get eaten alive.
schmorptron|2 months ago
drmajormccheese|2 months ago
firefax|2 months ago
nine_k|2 months ago
firefax|2 months ago
(For the younger hackers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mozilla_Phoenix_logo_vect...)
mdlxxv|2 months ago
nonsenseinc|2 months ago
avian|2 months ago
[1] https://logos-world.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Firefox-L...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_fox
unknown|2 months ago
[deleted]
turtleyacht|2 months ago
Something we haven't observed yet are hyperlinks automatically created from a web of documents. This is usually a manual process: which word or words to select, and which specific URL to go to.
baud147258|2 months ago
yorwba|2 months ago
irilesscent|2 months ago
vachina|2 months ago
hoppyhoppy2|2 months ago
honeycrispy|2 months ago
preommr|2 months ago
I think something like xkcd comics or something similar has always been received well by the community. Given that it's a high-effort piece of content as a digital painting, I think it should be ok - or at least not treated like it's in the same bucket as memes.