3 ms·

For people using NixOS, you can wrap these configs in extraPrefs in wrapFirefox firefox-unwrapped: Example: Put this expression(using lockPref to hardcode the

by bitsig 11mo ago

For people using NixOS, you can wrap these configs in extraPrefs in wrapFirefox firefox-unwrapped: Example: Put this expression(using lockPref to hardcode the config values) in environment.systemPackages(assuming "with pkgs"): (wrapFirefox firefox-unwrapped { extraPrefs = ( '' lockPref("browser.ml.enable", false); lockPref("browser.ml.chat.enabled", false); lockPref("browser.ml.chat.hideFromLabs", true); lockPref("browser.ml.chat.hideLabsShortcuts", true); lockPref("browser.ml.chat.page", false); lockPref("browser.ml.chat.page.footerBadge", false); lockPref("browser.ml.chat.page.menuBadge", false); lockPref("browser.ml.chat.menu", false); lockPref("browser.ml.linkPreview.enabled", false); lockPref("browser.ml.pageAssist.enabled", false); lockPref("browser.tabs.groups.smart.enabled", false); lockPref("browser.tabs.groups.smart.userEnable", false); lockPref("extensions.ml.enabled", false); '' ); })

ekr____ 11mo ago
I know I'm a broken record on this topic, but messing with prefs directly is not a supported way of configuring Firefox, so if you do this, you shouldn't complain that Mozilla changed the prefs and reenabled these features. It's of course totally fine to be annoyed if Firefox doesn't have a supported preference to disable them (though from the discussion below it sounds like they do) or if you set that preference and then they change it.
- themafia 11mo ago
  > is not a supported way of configuring Firefox What is the supported way? > you shouldn't complain that Mozilla changed the prefs and reenabled these features. Then they should provide a reliable way of getting what I want. This notion that software developers know better than me is poisonous.
  - ekr____ 11mo ago
    > What is the supported way? The settings UI. > > you shouldn't complain that Mozilla changed the prefs and reenabled these features. > Then they should provide a reliable way of getting what I want. As I said in the comment you are responding to, it's perfectly legitimate to complain if Mozilla didn't provide a setting to disable these features (though it seems they have done so in at least some cases). However, if they don't do so, and you decide to disable them in some unsupported way, you shouldn't be surprised that you get unexpected results. > This notion that software developers know better than me is poisonous. I don't think this is really a reasonable proposition as a general matter. A browser is a very complicated piece of software and each individual configuration point is additional development and testing burden, both separately, and in combination with other configuration points. Developers need to make all kinds of decisions in order to manage engineering complexity. In some cases, where developers know that people will want to configure things, they'll provide configuration options but it's not practical to do so for every feature, and inevitably in some cases they'll get it wrong (see "legitimate to complain" above).
    - themafia 11mo ago
      > The settings UI. From the posted article: "The main problem with this is users are having this forced on them with no gui option to disable these features." > and you decide to disable them in some unsupported way The preferences file is "unspported?" Why? Is firefox intentionally making their browser hard to distribute? All the settings, even in the UI, have simple textual names. Is there some reason they need to have this support envelope be so underwhelming? What advantage does that actually bring? If there is none, then why _shouldn't_ I complain? The alternative is I can stop using the project and recommend to everyone that they do so as well. Here's the awesome support you get through the UI: "If you are also dealing with CPU spikes and battery drain from Firefox's new AI features, you can disable them through the browser's advanced settings. Head to about:config in a new tab, accept the risk warning, and use the search bar to find the controls. To kill the AI chatbot feature, search for browser.ml.chat.enabled and set it to false. To stop smart tab grouping, search for browser.tabs.groups.smart.enabled and set it to false." Give me a break. > I don't think this is really a reasonable proposition as a general matter. Then I won't use your software. I will recommend against it. I will ensure that everyone understands it's faults. That's the only reasonable response as an irritated user.
- KetoManx64 11mo ago
  How is it an unsupported way of configuring Firefox when they literaly code the browser to accept and parse the config file and set the settings?
  - SahAssar 11mo ago
    A supported way would imply guarantees of compatibility and stability. These sort of perfs in user.js or about:config are clearly labeled as not having those guarantees and therefore "unsupported". As someone who extensively customizes the look, feel and way that firefox works I think this makes sense. I of course would like mozilla to make a lot more options "officially" supported, especially turning off anything that contacts a remote server without explicitly wanted.
pshirshov 11mo ago
There is a much more convenient way to do that through home manager.

by bitsig 11mo ago

ekr____ 11mo ago

I know I'm a broken record on this topic, but messing with prefs directly is not a supported way of configuring Firefox, so if you do this, you shouldn't complain that Mozilla changed the prefs and reenabled these features. It's of course totally fine to be annoyed if Firefox doesn't have a supported preference to disable them (though from the discussion below it sounds like they do) or if you set that preference and then they change it.

themafia 11mo ago
> is not a supported way of configuring Firefox What is the supported way? > you shouldn't complain that Mozilla changed the prefs and reenabled these features. Then they should provide a reliable way of getting what I want. This notion that software developers know better than me is poisonous.
- ekr____ 11mo ago
  > What is the supported way? The settings UI. > > you shouldn't complain that Mozilla changed the prefs and reenabled these features. > Then they should provide a reliable way of getting what I want. As I said in the comment you are responding to, it's perfectly legitimate to complain if Mozilla didn't provide a setting to disable these features (though it seems they have done so in at least some cases). However, if they don't do so, and you decide to disable them in some unsupported way, you shouldn't be surprised that you get unexpected results. > This notion that software developers know better than me is poisonous. I don't think this is really a reasonable proposition as a general matter. A browser is a very complicated piece of software and each individual configuration point is additional development and testing burden, both separately, and in combination with other configuration points. Developers need to make all kinds of decisions in order to manage engineering complexity. In some cases, where developers know that people will want to configure things, they'll provide configuration options but it's not practical to do so for every feature, and inevitably in some cases they'll get it wrong (see "legitimate to complain" above).
  - themafia 11mo ago
    > The settings UI. From the posted article: "The main problem with this is users are having this forced on them with no gui option to disable these features." > and you decide to disable them in some unsupported way The preferences file is "unspported?" Why? Is firefox intentionally making their browser hard to distribute? All the settings, even in the UI, have simple textual names. Is there some reason they need to have this support envelope be so underwhelming? What advantage does that actually bring? If there is none, then why _shouldn't_ I complain? The alternative is I can stop using the project and recommend to everyone that they do so as well. Here's the awesome support you get through the UI: "If you are also dealing with CPU spikes and battery drain from Firefox's new AI features, you can disable them through the browser's advanced settings. Head to about:config in a new tab, accept the risk warning, and use the search bar to find the controls. To kill the AI chatbot feature, search for browser.ml.chat.enabled and set it to false. To stop smart tab grouping, search for browser.tabs.groups.smart.enabled and set it to false." Give me a break. > I don't think this is really a reasonable proposition as a general matter. Then I won't use your software. I will recommend against it. I will ensure that everyone understands it's faults. That's the only reasonable response as an irritated user.
KetoManx64 11mo ago
How is it an unsupported way of configuring Firefox when they literaly code the browser to accept and parse the config file and set the settings?
- SahAssar 11mo ago
  A supported way would imply guarantees of compatibility and stability. These sort of perfs in user.js or about:config are clearly labeled as not having those guarantees and therefore "unsupported". As someone who extensively customizes the look, feel and way that firefox works I think this makes sense. I of course would like mozilla to make a lot more options "officially" supported, especially turning off anything that contacts a remote server without explicitly wanted.

pshirshov 11mo ago

There is a much more convenient way to do that through home manager.