I honestly don't know how people can be so judgmental about a technology. AI is just a tool that can be sometimes be very helpful if you trust the users' critical thinking skills and the ability to smell bullshit. Most of the problems associated with AI are just a consequence of shitty business models and a mediocre mode of production (Capitalism) "Judging by what I see in the comments on the posts about Firefox’s potential AI feature integrations, the apparent path that critics are recommending as an alternative browser is “I’ll yell at you until you stop using ChatGPT”. Consider this post my official notice: that strategy hasn’t worked. And it is not going to work. The only thing that will work is to offer a better alternative to these users. That will involve defining what an acceptably “good” alternative AI looks like, and then building and shipping it to these users, and convincing them to use it. I’m hoping such an effort succeeds. But I can guarantee that scolding people and trying to convince them that they’re not finding utility in the current platforms, or trying to make them feel guilty about the fact that they are finding utility in the current platforms, will not work.And none of this is exculpatory for my friends at Mozilla. As I’ve said to the good people there, and will share again here, I don’t think the framing of the way this feature has been presented has done either the Firefox team or the community any favors. These big, emotional blow-ups are demoralizing, and take away time and energy and attention that could be better spent getting people excited and motivated to grow for the future."anildash.com/2025/11/14/wantin#AI #GenerativeAI #Mozilla #Firefox #AIBrowser #OpenAI #ChatGPT

all 26 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [S] 1 point 11 months ago (20 children)

My personal wishlist would be pretty simple:- Just give people the “shut off all AI features” button. It’s a tiny percentage of people who want it, but they’re never going to shut up about it, and they’re convinced they’re the whole world and they can’t distinguish between being mad at big companies and being mad at a technology so give them a toggle switch and write up a blog post explaining how extraordinarily expensive it is to maintain a configuration option over the lifespan of a global product.- Market Firefox as “The best AI browser for people who hate Big AI”. Regular users have no idea how creepy the Big AI companies are — they’ve just heard their local news talk about how AI is the inevitable future. If Mozilla can warn me how to protect my privacy from ChatGPT, then it can also mention that ChatGPT tells children how to self-harm, and should be aggressive in engaging with the community on how to build tools that help mitigate those kinds of harms — how do we catalyze that innovation?"

  • source
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (5 children)

    @remixtures This is insufficient. You need to actively remove all the AI code or it'll just sit there in the background sucking down everything you do, every image you post, all of it, to feed its host. You need an AI free version of any software.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 11 months ago (4 children)

    @golgaloth And while we're at it, why not disable browsers' ability to process JavaScript code? That kind of paranoia is completely insane to me. Today's users have certain expectations and requirements. A product that doesn't meet their needs is a fail.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (1 child)

    @remixtures @golgaloth "why not disable browsers' ability to process JavaScript code? " - some people do exactly that in order to stop ads appearing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (2 children)

    @remixtures I was ready to go off on another rant about how the foundation is genAI is based on the unprecedented theft of every bit of publicly available human sourced art, every blog, every video, every image, every code repository, every song. All stolen without permission, attribution, or compensation; also stolen without any consequences by companies run by billionaires. Or maybe I was going to talk about how they use obscene amounts of dirty energy and are pushing us further into a human-caused climate apocalypse, how these massive data centers are literally taking clean drinking water away from people who need it. I might mention how the tools are being used to replace human creativity with good enough slop in order to drive down wages and push people into labor positions as opposed to those which require thinking, how they want us to lose the ability to think critically at all so we can be more easily manipulated. I might mention how the same billionaires that stole everything we've ever done and churned it through a compost heap to represent it to us as something new are shoving it in our faces at every opportunity and treating it like it's the most benign and beneficial technology ever while downplaying that its nature means it cannot be accurate. It will always hallucinate and confabulate. That's how it works. Finally, I might suggest that we're watching the last gasps of a massive bubble that is about to burst and send the entire world into a recession, maybe a depression.But I guess I won't because "the people" want it and therefore we must give it to them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 11 months ago (1 child)

    @jrdepriest Yes, people want AI. And also people want to have the right to remix works of art that have been produced several decades ago but most often aren't allowed to do it because they have to pay feudal rents to copyright holders who are just interested in extracting eternal rents from the public.Also, do have a look at the local LLMs based on open-weights and sometimes open source code that Chinese companies have been releasing. These models are way, way more efficient than the models released by OpenAI, Google or Anthropic. reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (9 children)

    @remixtures "Just give people the “shut off all AI features” button. It’s a tiny percentage of people who want it" - no it isn't, hence the plethora of articles about "How to turn of AI in (tool)". Just this morning there was one in my feed about how to turn it off in gmail (the articles are needed because the option - when the option exists at all - is hidden away so as not to be easily findable).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 11 months ago (8 children)

    @SmartmanApps explodingtopics.com/blog/chatg

    None

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (7 children)

    @remixtures And where's the number of visitors to the NoChatGPT website to compare that number to? Oh yeah, there isn't one, thus you can't claim it's a "tiny percentage" without numbers to calculate the percentage (which there aren't).What we CAN compare that number to, say the 700,000,000 weekly active users, is the world population of more than 10 times that number, so in a given week, less than 1 in 10 people use ChatGPT, at all. If you want to talk tiny percentage...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 11 months ago (6 children)

    @SmartmanApps That actually doesn't make much sense. Only a percentage of all human beings use the Internet.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (5 children)

    @remixtures "Only a percentage of all human beings use the Internet" - more than 2/3rds actually

    None

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 11 months ago (4 children)

    @SmartmanApps OK, but if the growth rate continues, ChatGPT will have more users than the population of China. Also, do be aware that we're excluding Chinese Internet users. I bet that DeepSeek and Qwen must have hundreds of millions of users only in China. restofworld.org/2025/china-emb

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (3 children)

    @remixtures "but if the growth rate continues" - I see you've already abandoned your "tiny percentage" argument then, and switched to "in the future, if these trends continue, it will be a tiny percentage, maybe"."must have hundreds of millions of users only in China" - which is STILL only 1 or 2 in 10. 🙄

    None

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 11 months ago (2 children)

    @SmartmanApps You can manipulate statistics as much as you want, but the truth is that the fact that ChatGPT has become the 5th most visited Web site in the world within a few months/years is extremely significant. in terms of user adoption, it represents stratospheric levels of diffusion. If you work in information technology, you cannot ignore LLMs. Now, these companies should be forced to open their models and respect data protection and privacy. They should also be liable for any hallucinations generated by their cloud-based models.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (1 child)

    @remixtures "the truth is that the fact that ChatGPT has become the 5th most visited Web site in the world" - which ISN'T a statistic, but a total, as I have been pointing out to you the whole time. Don't try to gaslight a statistician"is extremely significant" - no it isn't. "Significant" has a specific meaning in statistics, and ChatGPT fails miserably on that count"in terms of user adoption, it represents" - less than 1 in 10 people, as I already said

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 1 point 11 months ago

    @SmartmanApps I don't have any intention of continuing with this discussion. Internet users have adopted LLM-based chatbots in a way that can be compared to a few online services. Besides ChatGPT in 5th, there's also Gemini in 30th: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_. None of these sites appeared in the same list two years ago: en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?t.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago

    @remixtures I limit my use of AI. It's a tool. I don't want it thinking for me. But sometimes it's helpful (as long as I check the results).For example, I asked Craiyon for an image of Koala Lumpur (the prompt was "Kuala Lumpur but with koalas instead of people") and here's what it gave me:craiyon.com/en/image/Bs7Omur0RFun, silly, good for a Mastodon toot. But ¿would I invest in it? No. If I want art I want the work of artists.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

    My own question is: Why make another chatbot and summary service? There's already a plethora of them. Why not instead use those resources to make the browser better? I bet there's way more to do than the occasional shortcomings I see, maybe get on par with their competition with WebGL, WebGPU, WebRTC... Why not truly innovate and develop something new? An interface for their awesome local (AI) translation service? And the rest of the missing languages? Or something with privacy? That's their big advantage over their main competitor...Instead they don't innovate and spend their resources on yet another chatbot nobody asked for. (Though realistically, maybe there is some demand for this as well. My point is just it's not innovative, Google is better at AI either way, so they're still second to Chrome and continue to lose market share.)

    And with most people it's probably the general sentiment towards AI. Bad for the planet as we ramp up dirty fossil fuels, it's exploitative, shoehorned into everything, and Mozilla didn't re-invent any of that.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 2 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    @hendrik Implementing one thing doesn't make the other impossible. Specially if it something that could improve the popularity of Firefox as a modern web browser.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

    Sure. Doing everything is something that can be done by companies with abundant resources. My point was more how that isn't the situation for Mozilla. They have limited resources available. They already laid off developers, they don't have a lot of money these days and their market share isn't great either. I think they need to pick their fights. It's either one project or the other one. And it's been like that for some time. We already had the discussion whether it's clever to invest in side-projects. Or Pocket. Or have the same developers work on the browser itself. And then there's Thunderbird as well and I really think the UX could benefit from some modernization. Thunderbird Pro sounds nice and they could provide the server side of it to businesses, now's the time for projecs like that. It'd need money and developers, though.

    I really think chasing their competition with similar features and delivering a slightly worse alternative is going to lead to less and less market share unless Firefox becomes meaningless in the grand picture. And they need to grow to attract money and add developers. At this point I don't see how that'd work unless they deliver something better than Google. In my eyes that's something like the Plugin interface which Google messed up. That could have been a selling point for Firefox. Or privacy features. Or just a solid, fast and reliable browser which feels better to their users. Even if that's mostly marketing. And I think they regularly waste those opportunities. Sure, hypothetically they could do a lot of stuff. It's just that they rarely do.

    And then AI is a bit of a weird one in my opinion. I think Firefox has roughly 3% market share these days. That's probably the last remaining Linux nerds and privacy advocates... And they try to sell cloud services and AI to them which is kinda the opposite of privacy. So what do we expect to happen? I think they're likely going to lose their last few users with these kind of business decisions. At least it's not clear to me whether they really cater to their core user base any more. And this could be problematic for the future of Firefox, Thunderbird and their entire company. Idk. It's not my call and I have little to no idea about the business side of things, but it doesn't feel like a good fit to me.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago

    @remixtures Interesting article. One point I disagree with (not taking a position on the rest of the article) is that having a single turn-all-AI-off switch is expensive over the life of a product. Firefox has an extreme amount of customizability; just visit the about:config page and list all settings available.

  • source