17 ms·

Firefox will have an option to disable all AI features

586 points by twapi 9mo ago

jamesgill 9mo ago
Why not make them disabled by default, with the option to turn them on?
- RegnisGnaw 9mo ago
  Because money! Seriously that's the answer to most of these questions.
  - al_borland 9mo ago
    Is there a business model behind actually making profit off this stuff yet? Last I looked, Mozilla is still making almost all their money from Google.
    - nemomarx 9mo ago
      The new CEO said he views it as a monetization source. I'm not really sure how, but he apparently has something in mind I can't think of.
      - reidrac 9mo ago
        The chatbot can provide sponsored responses. Not sure how evident those will be, but I think it will happen. Surely is in Google's mind.
        al_borland 9mo ago
        If the responses are sponsored, it seems the value drops dramatically. I want the AI agent to act more like a fiduciary, an independent 3rd party acting in my best interest. I don't need an AI salesman interjecting itself into my life with compromised incentives.
        chaosharmonic 9mo ago
        Is there a reason such a thing couldn't present a bunch of neutral options, but with affiliate links that provide revenue back to Mozilla? (I mean, that could still steer it toward places that have affiliate programs, but if you're running a local AI tool to help you search for these things that seems like something you should reasonably be able to toggle on and off/configure in a system prompt/something.)
        al_borland 9mo ago
        What we’ve seen from other companies is exactly what you mention. Unfair ranking and promotion of items with affiliate links or the highest payouts for them. Changing incentives compromise the integrity of the results.
        chaosharmonic 9mo ago
        Huh. Somehow I'd thought those programs were platform level and not item level. Which, yeah, does explain the problem a lot more clearly.
        johnnyanmac 9mo ago
        Us “AI hostile users” are this way partially because we know that our desires do not align with those funding these tools. OpenAI was already taking steps to integrate ads, amd Grok shows how much we should be trusting AI as some impartial 3rd party. The goal was always about control and profiting off of said control. Pretty much the antithesis of hacker mindsets.
        prmoustache 9mo ago
        There are other ways to monetize. For instance small local AI models by default with option to pay to use faster/more efficient AI models remotely.
- lawtalkinghuman 9mo ago
  They could even make the AI features available as extensions, downloadable from addons.mozilla.org That way, the users who want them can download them, and the users who don't, don't.
  - rk06 9mo ago
    to pump adoption number. it is well known that adoption rate is much higher when people are forced to opt-in be default. because no one in right mind, would opt-in AI seriously. and definitely never on corporate machine
    - lawtalkinghuman 9mo ago
      Mozilla shouldn't need to worry about adoption numbers though.
- HelloUsername 9mo ago
  > Why not make them disabled by default, with the option to turn them on? "All AI features will also be opt-in"
  - jamesgill 9mo ago
    He said there would be both an "AI kill switch" but that it's also "opt-in". Taken together, his two statements seem a little...odd.
    - prmoustache 9mo ago
      I guess that just means that there will be a number of AI related features you can choose to select but if at some point you want it all gone you just hit the checkmark Disable all AI.
    - neobrain 9mo ago
      People are already getting worked up about being prompted to opt into a new feature on update (even if that prompt is hidden behind an icon that doesn't do anything until the user clicks it), so it's not inconceivable that the kill switch just disables those opt-in prompts for AI-related features.
- netsharc 9mo ago
  I think Facebook did a study that making options opt-in means only a tiny tiny percentage of users will ever activate them. People never look around in settings. I suppose if - after you click away the popup that says "Thank you for loving Firefox"(1) - a popup shows that says "Hey, hey, look at me, look we have this new feature, it'll blow you away. Do you want to enable it?" would be obnoxious but satisfies the idea of "opt-in". (1) https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1791524 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1791524 - I still remember how icked I was seeing this popup.
  - bigstrat2003 9mo ago
    > making options opt-in means only a tiny tiny percentage of users will ever activate them Why exactly should I, a user, care about this? I don't want useless crap shoved in my face, period. I don't care that people might not turn on someone's pet feature if they don't enable it by default.
    - dzikimarian 9mo ago
      Because if this browser will have zero appeal to wider public it will die and you will have to pick between Chrome forks.
  - eps 9mo ago
    Don't need to run studies to understand that. If it's off be default it will stay off unless the user is somehow made to try it. Default opt-in is one option to do that, the simplest one, but it's not the only one. The rest require explaining clearly what the user will get out of enabling it ... and that often is difficult to do succinctly, or convincingly. So shovelling it down everyone's throat it is.
  - johnnyanmac 9mo ago
    Yes, that’s the intent of the argument. If it’s so valuable , people will find it, talk about it, amd it’ll spread on its merits.
kevin061 9mo ago
Yeah the option is called Waterfox, Palemoon, or even Vivaldi.
- forgotpwd16 9mo ago
  Quite surprised at Vivaldi. Considered that as Opera spiritual successor including any possible feature, will've been one of the first browsers adding AI.
- reidrac 9mo ago
  Vivaldi is not open source. Not quite an option.
  - kevin061 9mo ago
    https://vivaldi.com/source/ https://vivaldi.com/source/
    - butz 9mo ago
      Wait, what? Vivaldi is open source? Now I am confused and really not sure what was the reason I ignored it for so long. Was there something iffy with Linux desktop integration?
      - presbyterian 9mo ago
        It is not open source. Some of the backend is.
    - dntbrsnbl 9mo ago
      I think the UI code is not open source (so you can't build the browser yourself). https://vivaldi.com/blog/technology/why-isnt-vivaldi-browser-open-source/ https://vivaldi.com/blog/technology/why-isnt-vivaldi-browser...
evo_9 9mo ago
I hope Zen disables this by default, or completely removes it if that’s an option.
- VortexLain 9mo ago
  Such features should be disabled by default, but as a user of Zen, I really hope it'd be possible to enable AI features.
runtimepanic 9mo ago
This feels less like an “anti-AI” stance and more like a trust and control issue. For browsers especially, users have very different threat models and performance expectations, and “always on” AI features blur that line quickly. An explicit opt-out makes sense, but I wonder if the more important question is whether these features can be implemented in a way that’s truly local and auditable. If users can’t clearly understand where data goes and what runs on-device, toggles become a necessary safety valve rather than a preference.
- ronsor 9mo ago
  I haven't paid close attention, but as far as I can tell, Mozilla has mostly invested in local AI for tasks such as translation, summarization, and organization. As long as that's the case, I don't see any particular safety or privacy risks; if it works without an Internet connection, it's probably OK.
  - forgotpwd16 9mo ago
    Summarization is using a chosen cloud-based AI provider.
    - freehorse 9mo ago
      Are you sure? I see a huge spike in CPU when I long-click on a link to see the preview and summary. This is the newest summarization feature, not the older one with the chatbot on the side.
      - forgotpwd16 9mo ago
        Ah, didn't know they moved to local models. My comment was about the old chatbot-based feature.
ekjhgkejhgk 9mo ago
Mullvad browser doesn't have an option to disable all AI features because it doesn't have any. (The Mullvad guys took Tor browser for its resistance to fingerprinting and removed the connection the Tor network. You don't need Mullvad VPN to use the browser) https://mullvad.net/en/browser https://mullvad.net/en/browser
e2le 9mo ago
Of all the AI features added recently, local translations is one that I would be OK with being enabled by default. It's useful, and its value proposition is much less dubious.
- mhitza 9mo ago
  I had to use it a couple times recently in Firefox on Android, and it's a nice thing to have. The UX is not polished, and not responsive. No indicator that translation is happening, then the interface disappears for the translation to materialize, with multisecond delays. All understandable if the model is churning my mobile CPU, but it needs a clear visual insicator that something happening
- marcosdumay 9mo ago
  What are all the recent AI features? Because I ever only noticed the local translation, and can't find anything else by looking at the menu. EDIT: Oh, I've found a context menu item-list.
- AuthAuth 9mo ago
  What about voice to text, text to voice, alt text generation for images that dont have them. Search suggestions, auto correct, malicious website detection. Those are all features using AI and features I consider to be useful
- Dwedit 9mo ago
  I don't like how translation is only unavailable when the browser "thinks" the whole site is in a particular language. What if there's a single sentence that's not? Or if it guesses the site's language incorrectly? No translation for you. We need more control over the feature. Even just the ability to select text, right click, and have a "Translation" menu would be huge. Looks like there is such a feature, but it doesn't let you pick the language pairs, which is the most basic requirement of translation.
  - fooofw 9mo ago
    My version of Firefox (146.0 on Debian) has exactly this. If I select a sentence and right-click, I get the menu item "Translate selection to <LANGUAGE>". In the resulting box, I can change the language pair - but the defaults that I have seen were also reasonable. https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/website-translation https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/website-translation has the text: "A new Translate selection feature has been added starting in Firefox version 128, that enables you to highlight and translate selected text." Edit: Sorry, I misread the comment to say that there was no such menu item. Edited to reflect this.
joduplessis 9mo ago
> We've been calling it the AI kill switch internally. I'm sure it'll ship with a less murderous name, but that's how seriously and absolutely we're taking this. Honestly, is anybody reading what's getting written anymore? If it gets taken seriously it would ship with an enable-AI button, not the other way round.
- yoavm 9mo ago
  I love threads about Mozilla. New CEO says he's not going to remove adblockers, people suspect him for planning to remove adblockers. Mozilla says they'll add a killswitch for all AI features (so that the tiny but vocal anti-AI minority will be happy), and people blame them for not having it as an enable-switch. Whatever they do, they simply cannot win. I'm personally starting to suspect the main issue with Mozilla is its users.
  - reidrac 9mo ago
    so that the tiny but vocal anti-AI minority will be happy [citation needed]
    - yoavm 9mo ago
      Citation for what really? That the anti-AI movement is a minority? Just ask around you "have you used AI today?" and I'm pretty sure you'll see what I mean. I don't have a horse in this game and I'm not an AI fan, but the numbers speak for themselves so much that the mere question is odd.
      - gldrk 9mo ago
        The anti-AI ‘movement’ is a minority like all partisans are a minority. You shouldn’t be comparing them to passive consumers but to enthusiasts who actively demand ‘AI’ in their browser/Paint/Notepad.
        yoavm 9mo ago
bhhaskin 9mo ago
It should be a plugin. Anything that isn't directly related to the core mission of a web browser should be a plugin.
- asadotzler 9mo ago
  Browsers don't do plugins any more. Firefox hasn't had NPAPI for almost a decade.
jonathanstrange 9mo ago
I can't imagine any reasonable use case for having AI tightly integrated into a browser (or an operating system, for what it's worth). Why not make a browser plugin or a web page or an app? I don't get it.
- freehorse 9mo ago
  Local translations?
  - koolala 9mo ago
    Is it just as easy to make an extension that runs a local AI translation model? Translation would benefit from having a community continuously updating and tuning local models for languages. If it was an extension it would be nice if people could fork it with other models. Just like their AI Tab Grouping feature would be much better forked with a deterministic non-AI grouping system.
  - ooterness 9mo ago
    Sounds like a great plugin.
  - johnnyanmac 9mo ago
    I had a translation extension for a good 2 years before it was built into FF
    - asadotzler 9mo ago
      You and a few others. Now it's well over 100 million who have it. We didn't make the back button an extension even though we could have. There's good reasons for making some features default and high on that list is "most people would use it and find it valuable for everyday browsing" which well covers web page translation.
      - johnnyanmac 9mo ago
        I see it as 100 million who didn't care enough to find a translation extension. Which is fine. Most people stay on the same 20 sites, after all (and some of those even have built in translation tools). >We didn't make the back button an extension even though we could have. The back button isn't even a KB of extra data and and I'd put navigation as the primary job of a web browser. I'm not against a built in translator, but it's a strange comparison to a back button. On a slight tangent, I think there's an under talked about boon yo machine translation: it's widely agreedbti be a comoromise and not a source of truth. That wariness has been missing as of late.
BoredPositron 9mo ago
The problem with the "Trust me bro." stuff is that it only works if you are trusted and after the last decade Mozilla is anything but.
- vlowther 9mo ago
  None of the big browsers can be trusted at this point. Firefox is at best the least worst out of the big cross platform browsers.
samschooler 9mo ago
I'm going to chime in here, I think 1. This is great and Mozilla is listening to it's core fans and 2. I want Firefox to be a competitive browser. Without AI enabled features + agent mode being first class citizens, this will be a non-starter in 2 years. I want my non-tech family members/friends to install Firefox not because I come over at Christmas, but because they want to. Because it's a browser that "just works." We can't have this if Firefox stays in the pre-ai era. I know Mozilla doesn't have much good will right now, but hopefully with the exec shakeup, they will right the ship on making FF a great browser. While still staying the best foil to Chrome (both in browser engine, browser chrome, and extension ecosystem).
- gigel82 9mo ago
  I'd love to live in your world for a bit... I can't imagine any future where having AI in your browser is a net positive for any user. It sounds like an absolute dystopian privacy and security nightmare.
  - afavour 9mo ago
    Most users are entirely ignorant of privacy and security and will make choices without considering it. I don’t say that to excuse it but it’s absolutely the reality.
  - tgsovlerkhgsel 9mo ago
    Why? Imagine you have an AI button. When you click it, the locally running LLM gets a copy of the web site in the context window, and you get to ask it a prompt, e.g. "summarize this". Imagine the browser asks you at some point, whether you want to hear about new features. The buttons offered to you are "FUCK OFF AND NEVER, EVER BOTHER ME AGAIN", "Please show me a summary once a month", "Show timely, non-modal notifications at appropriate times". Imagine you choose the second option, and at some point, it offers you a feature described as follows: "On search engine result pages and social media sites, use a local LLM to identify headlines, classify them as clickbait-or-not, and for clickbait headlines, automatically fetch the article in an incognito session, and add a small overlay with a non-clickbait version of the title". Would you enable it?
viktorcode 9mo ago
The difference between this and "will have an option to enable AI features" shows what the development resources will be focused on. I mean, f** JPEG XL support; we have a bigger investment fish to fry
t1234s 9mo ago
Is there a fork of firefox where you have all the same core functionality and support for extensions but with all the mozilla services (pocket, safe browsing, forced crap on the new tab page, any AI service, etc...) removed?
- Quot 9mo ago
  My preference is Zen (https://zen-browser.app/ https://zen-browser.app/), but there's also LibreWolf (https://librewolf.net/ https://librewolf.net/) if you want a less customized fork.
  - moderation 9mo ago
    I moved to Zen but have subsequently moved to Glide [0] which I find to have less UI fluff and the keyboard shortcuts and scriptability are excellent. 0. https://glide-browser.app/ https://glide-browser.app/
- Saris 9mo ago
  Zen, Waterfox, Librewolf, Floorp.. For android there's Fennec, Iceraven. There are more, those are just the ones I can recall.
  - rjdj377dhabsn 9mo ago
    For Android, Ironfox is currently the best option IMO.
  - baobun 9mo ago
    Zen and Floorp are not obvious improvements from a privacy and control perspective. Waterfox, Librewolf and Mullvad Browser are worth considering.
    - Saris 9mo ago
      Why is that? I remember seeing that Zen strips out the Firefox telemetry. Librewolf is nice but breaks a lot of stuff, sites that use webrtc or canvas related things, lots of banking sites refuse to load, and some other issues I can't remember.
AuthAuth 9mo ago
I'm glad to see some mozilla employees standing their base in the comments. That guy trying to make the point that Mozilla was wasting resources chasing trend only for an employee to say it was a few people checking it out while 1000 people continued work on the normal stuff is nice to see. The non mozilla people in that thread are so petty. Maybe it'd be better to have them go use another browser and stop dragging down firefox's reputation.
- vaylian 9mo ago
  Can you point to some of these comments?
- veeti 9mo ago
  People on Mastodon being insufferable, say it ain't so
butz 9mo ago
Firefox should release a separate build - "base", "core", "classic" - clearly, I am not a marketing person, but idea behind it, that this is only a browser without any extra features added. No "AI", no studies, no account sync. Only bare minimum browser, that allows user to do their internet things and, if they ever desire, will install all extra bells and whistles as extensions. No need to agree to any EULA either (remember, that it was added to Firefox?). And, the best part, all existing users will still keep using the same old Firefox version, no surprises for them. Now, I assume that someone will tell me, that this version already exists and is called ESR :)
- bondarchuk 9mo ago
  For example at the moment multi-account containers is a plugin. I needed it and installed the plugin and it's fine.
  - netule 9mo ago
    It kind of sucks that this isn’t a core feature of the browser, but the AI stuff will be. At least Firefox sync is good enough to sync extensions.
- yjftsjthsd-h 9mo ago
  I'm pretty sure ESR is a different thing, but yeah, that sounds like a good idea. I think it even should be relatively easy, insofar as that a lot of the non-base functionality is in built-in extensions?
- driverdan 9mo ago
  Firefox should be a browser, period. It should render pages. All other features should be extensions.
  - GaryBluto 9mo ago
    That would've been possible if they didn't kill XUL.
crossroadsguy 9mo ago
There are two things to note here: 1. Pocket/etc is not even ancient history, 2. At this point I don’t think Firefox or Mozilla ought to be taken without a truck of salt. A bonus third :D 3. People bleeding their hearts out for Mozilla and calling others out for constantly criticising Mozilla — it’s history baby, history!
squigz 9mo ago
I'll never understand why people feel so strongly about features like this and that they have to be opt-in. I don't use bookmarks. Should those be opt-in? What about the other 85% of the browser's features I don't use?
- baobun 9mo ago
  The bookmarks feature doesn't silently connect to their servers in the background to function. The supposed local-only features like translations will download at least model updates and configuration, which leaks metadata.
- johnnyanmac 9mo ago
  > I don't use bookmarks. Should those be opt-in? You can choose not to use bookmarks, remove the bar reserved for it, and it’s taking up kilobytes in the background. Can’t say the same about shoving an LLM in a browser. But sure, I’m much closer to the extreme of “make bookmarks a plug-in” than “make everything a default”.
BeetleB 9mo ago
Could someone summarize the problem with Firefox's AI features? At least when I last checked (months ago), none of those features that involve communicating with external servers would work unless you configure them to (i.e. provide credentials to an LLM provider). Was I wrong? Have things changed?
- ksherlock 9mo ago
  I don't use firefox so I can't confirm, but one issue might be 15+ (?!) different config settings needed to disable AI and it still won't go away. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46095873 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46095873
  - BeetleB 9mo ago
    That's a UX issue, but I keep hearing complaints about privacy.
    - phyzome 9mo ago
      Anything that makes it easy to accidentally send local data elsewhere is a privacy issue.
      - BeetleB 9mo ago
        > Anything that makes it easy to accidentally send local data elsewhere is a privacy issue. How is it "easy" if nothing is sent unless you configure the AI? What I'm asking is: If I do a brand new profile, default configuration, how can any AI related feature send anything that is of privacy concern? If you don't set up an LLM provider, it has nowhere to send to. I may be wrong, which is why I'm asking in the thread. So far, no one has shown what the problem is.
        phyzome 9mo ago
        I have no idea whether any of the AI features require explicit setup vs. automatically use a paid-for API somewhere. But it also doesn't matter, because that's the kind of distinction that I've seen go back and forth elsewhere.
999900000999 9mo ago
Have it as a stand alone plugin. I should have to manually install this AI stuff.
- worldsavior 9mo ago
  You're not a normal user of Firefox then.
  - 999900000999 9mo ago
    Who is a "normal" user. Normal users install Chrome.
    - bayindirh 9mo ago
      We want "normal" users to use Firefox, not to push it to a smaller niche with more force. Even though I don't like or use this "AI thingy", it should be equally easy to use and equally easy to disable. If Firefox can provide a more anonymized gate to these providers and guarantee that prompts are not used for training, this would be a net win for people who want to use AI but doesn't know better, i.e. the "normal" users.
      - reyqn 9mo ago
        That's how normal users stay on chrome while your users leave firefox. That's how you get no users at all.
        andrepd 9mo ago
        Hardly. Hundreds of millions of "normies" want a browser that just "gets rid of ads and spam and stuff". If ff can be that go-to browser, they have hundreds of millions of potential users.
        reyqn 9mo ago
        Potential users are not users, and firefox can't be that browser. Actually that browser is brave, and it also doesn't have hundred of millions of users. You can't fight defaults browsers, people don't care.
alexgotoi 9mo ago
This is exactly the kind of boring, unsexy feature that actually builds trust. It’s the opposite of the usual “surprise, here’s an AI sidebar you didn’t ask for and can’t fully disable” pattern. If they want people to try this stuff, the path is pretty simple: ship a browser that treats AI like any other power feature. Off by default, clearly explained, reversible, and preferably shippable as an extension. You can always market your way into more usage; you can’t market your way back into credibility once you blow it.
- bstsb 9mo ago
  saying "trying to slow down, I promise" doesn't magically make your blatant advert not spam edit: the original post ended with words to the tune of "Totally unrelated, but I run [insert newsletter here]... "
  - alexgotoi 9mo ago
    Edited and removed.
    - all2 9mo ago
      Why? Why kowtow to people who don't care about your wellbeing or long term success?
- RunSet 9mo ago
  > This is exactly the kind of boring, unsexy feature that actually builds trust. Though not so much trust as an option to enable AI features would build.
- taurath 9mo ago
  > It’s the opposite of the usual “surprise, here’s an AI sidebar you didn’t ask for and can’t fully disable” pattern. They literally shipped an AI sidebar nobody asked for.
  - teaearlgraycold 9mo ago
mort96 9mo ago
I still don't want to use an "AI browser". I don't want to use a browser where all or most development effort goes into "AI features" that I need to disable. I want a browser where the development effort goes into making it better at browsing the web.
micromacrofoot 9mo ago
I'm not sure why people still believe this, especially developers. We're starting to literally just build AI into everything... you're not even going to know what's AI and what's not. The phase of labeling everything with cute little sparkles is starting to end and AI is going to be used similarly to external libraries. If you don't like AI you need to seek legislation and pressure your local politicians. It's the only way to stop it.
- johnnyanmac 9mo ago
  >If you don't like AI you need to seek legislation and pressure your local politicians. It's the only way to stop it. Yup. So we're screwed for up to 3 years. Maybe much less depending on nature or the result of certain hot topic issues. That might be a minor factor why we seem to be speedrunning everything in 2025. Get ahead of the crash, of the legislation, of the wool coming off the common citizen's eyes.
Tepix 9mo ago
I don't understand why it's so difficult (impossible?) with Firefox to use your own private AI server (that's not running on localhost). With Brave it's pretty easy.
leothetechguy 9mo ago
Honestly this should've been introduced with the new AI Features from the start, it's just shipping slightly too late to fully regain my trust.
oybng 9mo ago
Firefox had options for many things, until those options were removed
deleted 9mo ago
[deleted]
VortexLain 9mo ago
This would be useful for many people who want to avoid AI features being forced on them by every piece of software imaginable. Hopefully, a centralized kill switch like this will also make it easy for Firefox forks such as Zen and Floorp to let users enable AI features if they want to without changing about:flags.
rolph 9mo ago
get your non AI versions here while they last: Index of /pub/firefox/releases/ https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/ https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/ A LITTLE HELP: How do I revert Firefox to a previous version and keep my profile intact? https://superuser.com/questions/1643618/how-do-i-revert-firefox-to-a-previous-version-and-keep-my-profile-intact https://superuser.com/questions/1643618/how-do-i-revert-fire...
wkat4242 9mo ago
I don't really care so much about that. I worry more about the CEO speaking about blocking adblockers like it's a normal business decision. Wtf
- johnnyanmac 9mo ago
  That’s what turned me off of Chrome. It will 100% have me migrate if it happens again. I’m not freely giving my attention away for even more people to shove crap in my face.
kgwxd 9mo ago
i don't even want the code present on my machine, only being held back by a checkbox that may or may not be correctly respected. this is what extensions we invented for.
- 4k93n2 9mo ago
  its funny how multi-account containers is a such a killer feature of firefox (that none of the other browsers are able to implement, as far as i remember) but its kept as an extension and they never seem too bothered about promoting it either
mwkaufma 9mo ago
Where's the kill switch to remove AI from development?
Timwi 9mo ago
I actually saw the “summarize this page” feature in the right-click menu today and clicked on it out of curiosity. The box that appeared had a “remove AI features” button which I accidentally clicked. Now the feature is completely gone and I don't know how to get it back. (Don't really care much, wasn't planning on using that feature anyway, just giving feedback on my first impression)
zelphirkalt 9mo ago
How about we don't enable AI features by default in the first place?
BeaverGoose 9mo ago
I would pay $100 a year for a Firefox that just focused on privacy and was competitive speed and features (at rendering) with chrome.
- kilroy123 9mo ago
  Perhaps, but I would guess 99% of what few users they still have would not do this. This leaves Mozilla in a tough spot of taking its main competitors' cash instead.
geekamongus 9mo ago
Oh, this is great news!
Madmallard 9mo ago
Doesn't matter? https://youtube.com/shorts/FObvkFtr2ZU?si=U6fCphjmGcNMb5ac https://youtube.com/shorts/FObvkFtr2ZU?si=U6fCphjmGcNMb5ac Until they change this back they are not trustworthy at all.
est 9mo ago
I am out of the loop, but what AI features does Firefox offer these days?
gooob 9mo ago
what i hate most about this (and the discussion happening in the comments), is that nobody is even defining "AI". "artificial intelligence" is not a technical term. what is mozzila doing exactly? what does it mean to put AI in the browser?
- hollerith 9mo ago
  There is kind of software that is created using techniques very different from the techniques used to create the vast majority of socioeconomically-important software until about 4 years ago. We need a name for this thing that definitely exists in reality and definitely differs from software created the traditional way. That name is AI. We're probably going to keep on calling it that even if lots of people protest that having "intelligence" in the name is misleading or erroneous.
nektro 9mo ago
after the disaster of comms from the new ceo, this is really great to see.
CodeCompost 9mo ago
Can we please stop calling LLMs "AI"? It's obvious now that there is no intelligence here and no trying to make it talk to itself and call is "reasoning" is not the answer.
- TonyStr 9mo ago
  Nope, it's too late. It sounded stupid when they called it AI in the start, but now AI means something like "tools that can perform tasks that typically requires human faculties to complete". Just like a computer does more than compute, words change meaning, sometimes influenced by marketing.
tliltocatl 9mo ago
I think people screaming "but AI is the future" doesn't recognize what the problem is. The problem is not AI. The problem is that Mozilla keeps jumping on fads instead of focusing on their browser core. There are a tons of "we bundled all the latest crap" Chrome forks out there. Nobody needs more those. Stop pushing bells and whistles. Give us more extensibility instead. Keep supporting v2 manifest and add more. There were genuine technical reasons for why XUL and NPAPI had to die, but we need an equally powerful alternative. And yea, having a faint through about removing adblock support, yet alone speaking it aloud is a really bad sign for Mozilla's future.
- echelon 9mo ago
  > people screaming "but AI is the future" I witnes far more people screaming against AI. The media started kicking this off in 2021, 2022. It blossomed into a fully distributed, organic, memetic device from there. It has a life of its own now. Children and young people are practically indoctrinated if you look at social media comments. I was invited to give lectures to several art schools about using Blender, Unreal Engine, and mocap software with diffusion models. The students weren't very polite. Most of the "questions" I got at each of the campuses were simply statements of affirmation about how much they hate AI. Good looking and well-reviewed indie games that incorporate AI elements or tools are dumped on by these folks. It's like butting into conversations to say something bad about AI scores points or something. > Mozilla keeps jumping on fads Agreed on this point, though. They're rudderless. And Google is probably quite happy about the fact that their antitrust litigation sponge can't steal away their users.
  - epgui 9mo ago
    > simply statements of affirmation about how much they hate AI I wonder what that might mean!
  - tliltocatl 9mo ago
    If you keep shoveling a thing to people who don't care, you'll get tons of irrational pushback no matter how the good this thing is. And AI isn't even particularly good.
bannana2033 9mo ago
Average Joe or Joan will install some crap AI assisted browser if some idiot in Tiktok or FB says follow me and I will DM you a special link to get baby-clothes for -10% discount. Hope your family is not that. My spouse despite reading HN etc thinks that anyway privacy is lost - so why notget at least that 10% discount. Another problem for Mozilla: - If they don't pivot to AI people will leave it. Yes, some hardcore RMS fans will use some clone of Firefox - all others will not - If they adopt modern AI people scream - Same happened when Mozilla accepted DRM (for Netflix etc). Many tech writers, commentators were against that. But if Firefox did not adopt it then all those tech writers would have used Chrome to see Netflix. No one of these commentators say they will boycott Netflix.
DICloak 9mo ago
[dead]
emsign 9mo ago
Firefox has AI features?? wth
forephought4 9mo ago
5 step plan for Mozilla to succeed against the Behemoth Googzilla and the leviathans of MAWS. 1. build a team in Europe to create an email service comparable to gmail/protonmail - domains: mozmail.com, mmail.com, godmail.com, pmail.com, dogmail.com, meowmail.com - promoted as a simple everyday email – no overly complicated/advanced federati features in order to increase inter-operability, reduce spam and dealing with federalism - for more advanced features, integration links with something like signal, or a hosted comms platform 2. invest heavily in Firefox core development and service features - push for system resource and performance optimizations, even if it requires extensive architectural changes - focus on perfecting a core browser experience then developing an extension API that allows a level of UI customisations that XUL did, have unsafe/hackers warning for any extension that uses this API, even official ones - invest in KeePassXC ux and integrate it as a first class and core feature in Firefox that is useable by hackers, consumers and enterprises – offer paid services for simple database sync/backup, as well as a decent managed solution for enterprise. 3. Expand further with a suite of other services that have both self-hosted and paid management extras - calendar and email client, universally usable between providers, but first class with Firefox and mmail. - integrate something like libreoffice into a desktop client that can also be embedded into a Firefox tab. - straight forward self-hostable teams communication platform, managed cloud versions also availabe - self-hosted / managed file storage platform with web UI with integration links to other services - all of the above require a unified web, desktop and mobile ux - offer further software and hardware integrations to completely streamline personal digital management 4. Extensive marketing and brand exposure over TV and social media, while staying charitably non-profit and recognizing the digital roots - Use the firefox, gecko and other digital animals as icons - Themes and scapes from origins such as mosaic/netscape 5. In this scene Mozilla continues knocking down the buildings of the titans.
stainablesteel 9mo ago
maybe they should have an option to enable it instead? i don't want this being the default
M95D 9mo ago
Can I ./configure it completely out?
feelamee 9mo ago
better add a button to *enable* AI
petre 9mo ago
How about disable them by default or I switch browsers to something else?
sometimez 9mo ago
Didn't even know Firefox was planning on adding AI features. I wonder how much more bloated it'll be.
anovikov 9mo ago
Internet economy already made a full circle with this once before: at first, ads existed to sell things online for advertisers, and make money for publishers (also as a machine for circular deals to propel stock valuations, during the dotcom boom). Then they became so pervasive and annoying that eventually they just became a method of making user experience worse, and get paid for ad-free, thus making money. Today, no one cares about performance of those ads, they are just a replacement of "nag screens" of the shareware era. It sounds like AI will made this circle a lot faster.
jajuuka 9mo ago
This was made clear when they talked about this previously but once again people don't want to hear that and instead want to rant about AI. The only thing stopping Firefox is its own users.
perryizgr8 9mo ago
I think Firefox is an excellent browser. Their problem is simply that they have too much revenue for too many years. They need a fraction of that. If I were the ceo, I would drastically cut back operations. Scale down the org to 10% of its current strength, keep shipping a solid and boring browser, accept donations that directly support development of the browser. No fads, no ai, just a high performance, bug free, standards compliant browser. The users and donations will come. Firefox will survive. One year of google revenue can kar them for 10 years of lean operation!
- The_President 9mo ago
  Revenue is good for the company - and they'll want as much as possible in order to support their obligations to the business plan, but unfortunately layoffs were still part of that plan these past few years. Mozilla's CEO pay: 2018: $2.46 million 2020: $2.97 million 2021: $5.59 million 2022: $6.90 million 2023: $6.26 million I block requests to Mozilla infrastructure, not by mistake.
quitit 9mo ago
If they want to position themselves with a point of difference from competitors, they could provide a settings list of AI features with check boxes for each. This would tap into the insight that not everyone dislikes the same AI features. For many AI isn't a dirty word, but rather they've seen plenty of examples where it's simply annoying or over-taxing resources. For example some like AI to build a quick reference summary from a set of web results, but don’t want a full agenic-style AI to extend beyond that. This could potentially entice users not to throw the baby out with the bathwater, and maybe even make a few converts.
gitlinuxgreat 9mo ago
When a company has monopolistic practices, its products ride their anticompetiveness to majority market share by force of their dominance. The result is the Netscapeification of anything that competes with any monopoly. A monopoly anticompetitiveness needs to be dealt with powerfully by Congress to increase competition. Though the lobbyists of these anticompetitive companies and the billions deployed from the lobbying companies effectively is a significant detriment to competitors, healthy competition, and always in many subtle, loss of innovation ways, the consumer. This is the tip of the iceberg for anyone in competition to the oligarchical status quo that is in effect, and detrimenting the consumer in multitude ways that you are not comprehending.
gitprolinux 9mo ago
When a company has monopolistic practices, its products ride their anticompetiveness to majority market share by force of their dominance. The result is the Netscapeification of anything that competes with any monopoly. A monopoly anticompetitiveness needs to be dealt with powerfully by Congress to increase competition. Though the lobbyists of these anticompetitive companies and the billions deployed from the lobbying companies effectively is a significant detriment to competitors, healthy competition, and always in many subtle, loss of innovation ways, the consumer. This is the tip of the iceberg for anyone in competition to the oligarchical status quo that is in effect, and detrimenting the consumer in multitude ways that you are not comprehending.
28304283409234 9mo ago
....until it doesn't.

586 points by twapi 9mo ago

jamesgill 9mo ago

Why not make them disabled by default, with the option to turn them on?

RegnisGnaw 9mo ago
Because money! Seriously that's the answer to most of these questions.
- al_borland 9mo ago
  Is there a business model behind actually making profit off this stuff yet? Last I looked, Mozilla is still making almost all their money from Google.
  - nemomarx 9mo ago
    The new CEO said he views it as a monetization source. I'm not really sure how, but he apparently has something in mind I can't think of.
    - reidrac 9mo ago
      The chatbot can provide sponsored responses. Not sure how evident those will be, but I think it will happen. Surely is in Google's mind.
      - al_borland 9mo ago
        If the responses are sponsored, it seems the value drops dramatically. I want the AI agent to act more like a fiduciary, an independent 3rd party acting in my best interest. I don't need an AI salesman interjecting itself into my life with compromised incentives.
        chaosharmonic 9mo ago
        Is there a reason such a thing couldn't present a bunch of neutral options, but with affiliate links that provide revenue back to Mozilla? (I mean, that could still steer it toward places that have affiliate programs, but if you're running a local AI tool to help you search for these things that seems like something you should reasonably be able to toggle on and off/configure in a system prompt/something.)
        al_borland 9mo ago
        What we’ve seen from other companies is exactly what you mention. Unfair ranking and promotion of items with affiliate links or the highest payouts for them. Changing incentives compromise the integrity of the results.
        chaosharmonic 9mo ago
        Huh. Somehow I'd thought those programs were platform level and not item level. Which, yeah, does explain the problem a lot more clearly.
        johnnyanmac 9mo ago
        Us “AI hostile users” are this way partially because we know that our desires do not align with those funding these tools. OpenAI was already taking steps to integrate ads, amd Grok shows how much we should be trusting AI as some impartial 3rd party. The goal was always about control and profiting off of said control. Pretty much the antithesis of hacker mindsets.
      - prmoustache 9mo ago
        There are other ways to monetize. For instance small local AI models by default with option to pay to use faster/more efficient AI models remotely.
lawtalkinghuman 9mo ago
They could even make the AI features available as extensions, downloadable from addons.mozilla.org That way, the users who want them can download them, and the users who don't, don't.
- rk06 9mo ago
  to pump adoption number. it is well known that adoption rate is much higher when people are forced to opt-in be default. because no one in right mind, would opt-in AI seriously. and definitely never on corporate machine
  - lawtalkinghuman 9mo ago
    Mozilla shouldn't need to worry about adoption numbers though.
HelloUsername 9mo ago
> Why not make them disabled by default, with the option to turn them on? "All AI features will also be opt-in"
- jamesgill 9mo ago
  He said there would be both an "AI kill switch" but that it's also "opt-in". Taken together, his two statements seem a little...odd.
  - prmoustache 9mo ago
    I guess that just means that there will be a number of AI related features you can choose to select but if at some point you want it all gone you just hit the checkmark Disable all AI.
  - neobrain 9mo ago
    People are already getting worked up about being prompted to opt into a new feature on update (even if that prompt is hidden behind an icon that doesn't do anything until the user clicks it), so it's not inconceivable that the kill switch just disables those opt-in prompts for AI-related features.
netsharc 9mo ago
I think Facebook did a study that making options opt-in means only a tiny tiny percentage of users will ever activate them. People never look around in settings. I suppose if - after you click away the popup that says "Thank you for loving Firefox"(1) - a popup shows that says "Hey, hey, look at me, look we have this new feature, it'll blow you away. Do you want to enable it?" would be obnoxious but satisfies the idea of "opt-in". (1) https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1791524 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1791524 - I still remember how icked I was seeing this popup.
- bigstrat2003 9mo ago
  > making options opt-in means only a tiny tiny percentage of users will ever activate them Why exactly should I, a user, care about this? I don't want useless crap shoved in my face, period. I don't care that people might not turn on someone's pet feature if they don't enable it by default.
  - dzikimarian 9mo ago
    Because if this browser will have zero appeal to wider public it will die and you will have to pick between Chrome forks.
- eps 9mo ago
  Don't need to run studies to understand that. If it's off be default it will stay off unless the user is somehow made to try it. Default opt-in is one option to do that, the simplest one, but it's not the only one. The rest require explaining clearly what the user will get out of enabling it ... and that often is difficult to do succinctly, or convincingly. So shovelling it down everyone's throat it is.
- johnnyanmac 9mo ago
  Yes, that’s the intent of the argument. If it’s so valuable , people will find it, talk about it, amd it’ll spread on its merits.

kevin061 9mo ago

Yeah the option is called Waterfox, Palemoon, or even Vivaldi.

forgotpwd16 9mo ago
Quite surprised at Vivaldi. Considered that as Opera spiritual successor including any possible feature, will've been one of the first browsers adding AI.
reidrac 9mo ago
Vivaldi is not open source. Not quite an option.
- kevin061 9mo ago
  https://vivaldi.com/source/ https://vivaldi.com/source/
  - butz 9mo ago
    Wait, what? Vivaldi is open source? Now I am confused and really not sure what was the reason I ignored it for so long. Was there something iffy with Linux desktop integration?
    - presbyterian 9mo ago
      It is not open source. Some of the backend is.
  - dntbrsnbl 9mo ago
    I think the UI code is not open source (so you can't build the browser yourself). https://vivaldi.com/blog/technology/why-isnt-vivaldi-browser-open-source/ https://vivaldi.com/blog/technology/why-isnt-vivaldi-browser...

evo_9 9mo ago

I hope Zen disables this by default, or completely removes it if that’s an option.

VortexLain 9mo ago
Such features should be disabled by default, but as a user of Zen, I really hope it'd be possible to enable AI features.

runtimepanic 9mo ago

This feels less like an “anti-AI” stance and more like a trust and control issue. For browsers especially, users have very different threat models and performance expectations, and “always on” AI features blur that line quickly. An explicit opt-out makes sense, but I wonder if the more important question is whether these features can be implemented in a way that’s truly local and auditable. If users can’t clearly understand where data goes and what runs on-device, toggles become a necessary safety valve rather than a preference.

ronsor 9mo ago
I haven't paid close attention, but as far as I can tell, Mozilla has mostly invested in local AI for tasks such as translation, summarization, and organization. As long as that's the case, I don't see any particular safety or privacy risks; if it works without an Internet connection, it's probably OK.
- forgotpwd16 9mo ago
  Summarization is using a chosen cloud-based AI provider.
  - freehorse 9mo ago
    Are you sure? I see a huge spike in CPU when I long-click on a link to see the preview and summary. This is the newest summarization feature, not the older one with the chatbot on the side.
    - forgotpwd16 9mo ago
      Ah, didn't know they moved to local models. My comment was about the old chatbot-based feature.

ekjhgkejhgk 9mo ago

Mullvad browser doesn't have an option to disable all AI features because it doesn't have any. (The Mullvad guys took Tor browser for its resistance to fingerprinting and removed the connection the Tor network. You don't need Mullvad VPN to use the browser) https://mullvad.net/en/browser https://mullvad.net/en/browser

e2le 9mo ago

Of all the AI features added recently, local translations is one that I would be OK with being enabled by default. It's useful, and its value proposition is much less dubious.

mhitza 9mo ago
I had to use it a couple times recently in Firefox on Android, and it's a nice thing to have. The UX is not polished, and not responsive. No indicator that translation is happening, then the interface disappears for the translation to materialize, with multisecond delays. All understandable if the model is churning my mobile CPU, but it needs a clear visual insicator that something happening
marcosdumay 9mo ago
What are all the recent AI features? Because I ever only noticed the local translation, and can't find anything else by looking at the menu. EDIT: Oh, I've found a context menu item-list.
AuthAuth 9mo ago
What about voice to text, text to voice, alt text generation for images that dont have them. Search suggestions, auto correct, malicious website detection. Those are all features using AI and features I consider to be useful
Dwedit 9mo ago
I don't like how translation is only unavailable when the browser "thinks" the whole site is in a particular language. What if there's a single sentence that's not? Or if it guesses the site's language incorrectly? No translation for you. We need more control over the feature. Even just the ability to select text, right click, and have a "Translation" menu would be huge. Looks like there is such a feature, but it doesn't let you pick the language pairs, which is the most basic requirement of translation.
- fooofw 9mo ago
  My version of Firefox (146.0 on Debian) has exactly this. If I select a sentence and right-click, I get the menu item "Translate selection to <LANGUAGE>". In the resulting box, I can change the language pair - but the defaults that I have seen were also reasonable. https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/website-translation https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/website-translation has the text: "A new Translate selection feature has been added starting in Firefox version 128, that enables you to highlight and translate selected text." Edit: Sorry, I misread the comment to say that there was no such menu item. Edited to reflect this.

joduplessis 9mo ago

> We've been calling it the AI kill switch internally. I'm sure it'll ship with a less murderous name, but that's how seriously and absolutely we're taking this. Honestly, is anybody reading what's getting written anymore? If it gets taken seriously it would ship with an enable-AI button, not the other way round.

yoavm 9mo ago
I love threads about Mozilla. New CEO says he's not going to remove adblockers, people suspect him for planning to remove adblockers. Mozilla says they'll add a killswitch for all AI features (so that the tiny but vocal anti-AI minority will be happy), and people blame them for not having it as an enable-switch. Whatever they do, they simply cannot win. I'm personally starting to suspect the main issue with Mozilla is its users.
- reidrac 9mo ago
  so that the tiny but vocal anti-AI minority will be happy [citation needed]
  - yoavm 9mo ago
    Citation for what really? That the anti-AI movement is a minority? Just ask around you "have you used AI today?" and I'm pretty sure you'll see what I mean. I don't have a horse in this game and I'm not an AI fan, but the numbers speak for themselves so much that the mere question is odd.
    - gldrk 9mo ago
      The anti-AI ‘movement’ is a minority like all partisans are a minority. You shouldn’t be comparing them to passive consumers but to enthusiasts who actively demand ‘AI’ in their browser/Paint/Notepad.
      - yoavm 9mo ago

bhhaskin 9mo ago

It should be a plugin. Anything that isn't directly related to the core mission of a web browser should be a plugin.

asadotzler 9mo ago
Browsers don't do plugins any more. Firefox hasn't had NPAPI for almost a decade.

jonathanstrange 9mo ago

I can't imagine any reasonable use case for having AI tightly integrated into a browser (or an operating system, for what it's worth). Why not make a browser plugin or a web page or an app? I don't get it.

freehorse 9mo ago
Local translations?
- koolala 9mo ago
  Is it just as easy to make an extension that runs a local AI translation model? Translation would benefit from having a community continuously updating and tuning local models for languages. If it was an extension it would be nice if people could fork it with other models. Just like their AI Tab Grouping feature would be much better forked with a deterministic non-AI grouping system.
- ooterness 9mo ago
  Sounds like a great plugin.
- johnnyanmac 9mo ago
  I had a translation extension for a good 2 years before it was built into FF
  - asadotzler 9mo ago
    You and a few others. Now it's well over 100 million who have it. We didn't make the back button an extension even though we could have. There's good reasons for making some features default and high on that list is "most people would use it and find it valuable for everyday browsing" which well covers web page translation.
    - johnnyanmac 9mo ago
      I see it as 100 million who didn't care enough to find a translation extension. Which is fine. Most people stay on the same 20 sites, after all (and some of those even have built in translation tools). >We didn't make the back button an extension even though we could have. The back button isn't even a KB of extra data and and I'd put navigation as the primary job of a web browser. I'm not against a built in translator, but it's a strange comparison to a back button. On a slight tangent, I think there's an under talked about boon yo machine translation: it's widely agreedbti be a comoromise and not a source of truth. That wariness has been missing as of late.

BoredPositron 9mo ago

The problem with the "Trust me bro." stuff is that it only works if you are trusted and after the last decade Mozilla is anything but.

vlowther 9mo ago
None of the big browsers can be trusted at this point. Firefox is at best the least worst out of the big cross platform browsers.

samschooler 9mo ago

I'm going to chime in here, I think 1. This is great and Mozilla is listening to it's core fans and 2. I want Firefox to be a competitive browser. Without AI enabled features + agent mode being first class citizens, this will be a non-starter in 2 years. I want my non-tech family members/friends to install Firefox not because I come over at Christmas, but because they want to. Because it's a browser that "just works." We can't have this if Firefox stays in the pre-ai era. I know Mozilla doesn't have much good will right now, but hopefully with the exec shakeup, they will right the ship on making FF a great browser. While still staying the best foil to Chrome (both in browser engine, browser chrome, and extension ecosystem).

gigel82 9mo ago
I'd love to live in your world for a bit... I can't imagine any future where having AI in your browser is a net positive for any user. It sounds like an absolute dystopian privacy and security nightmare.
- afavour 9mo ago
  Most users are entirely ignorant of privacy and security and will make choices without considering it. I don’t say that to excuse it but it’s absolutely the reality.
- tgsovlerkhgsel 9mo ago
  Why? Imagine you have an AI button. When you click it, the locally running LLM gets a copy of the web site in the context window, and you get to ask it a prompt, e.g. "summarize this". Imagine the browser asks you at some point, whether you want to hear about new features. The buttons offered to you are "FUCK OFF AND NEVER, EVER BOTHER ME AGAIN", "Please show me a summary once a month", "Show timely, non-modal notifications at appropriate times". Imagine you choose the second option, and at some point, it offers you a feature described as follows: "On search engine result pages and social media sites, use a local LLM to identify headlines, classify them as clickbait-or-not, and for clickbait headlines, automatically fetch the article in an incognito session, and add a small overlay with a non-clickbait version of the title". Would you enable it?

viktorcode 9mo ago

The difference between this and "will have an option to enable AI features" shows what the development resources will be focused on. I mean, f** JPEG XL support; we have a bigger investment fish to fry

t1234s 9mo ago

Is there a fork of firefox where you have all the same core functionality and support for extensions but with all the mozilla services (pocket, safe browsing, forced crap on the new tab page, any AI service, etc...) removed?

Quot 9mo ago
My preference is Zen (https://zen-browser.app/ https://zen-browser.app/), but there's also LibreWolf (https://librewolf.net/ https://librewolf.net/) if you want a less customized fork.
- moderation 9mo ago
  I moved to Zen but have subsequently moved to Glide [0] which I find to have less UI fluff and the keyboard shortcuts and scriptability are excellent. 0. https://glide-browser.app/ https://glide-browser.app/
Saris 9mo ago
Zen, Waterfox, Librewolf, Floorp.. For android there's Fennec, Iceraven. There are more, those are just the ones I can recall.
- rjdj377dhabsn 9mo ago
  For Android, Ironfox is currently the best option IMO.
- baobun 9mo ago
  Zen and Floorp are not obvious improvements from a privacy and control perspective. Waterfox, Librewolf and Mullvad Browser are worth considering.
  - Saris 9mo ago
    Why is that? I remember seeing that Zen strips out the Firefox telemetry. Librewolf is nice but breaks a lot of stuff, sites that use webrtc or canvas related things, lots of banking sites refuse to load, and some other issues I can't remember.

AuthAuth 9mo ago

I'm glad to see some mozilla employees standing their base in the comments. That guy trying to make the point that Mozilla was wasting resources chasing trend only for an employee to say it was a few people checking it out while 1000 people continued work on the normal stuff is nice to see. The non mozilla people in that thread are so petty. Maybe it'd be better to have them go use another browser and stop dragging down firefox's reputation.

vaylian 9mo ago
Can you point to some of these comments?
veeti 9mo ago
People on Mastodon being insufferable, say it ain't so

butz 9mo ago

Firefox should release a separate build - "base", "core", "classic" - clearly, I am not a marketing person, but idea behind it, that this is only a browser without any extra features added. No "AI", no studies, no account sync. Only bare minimum browser, that allows user to do their internet things and, if they ever desire, will install all extra bells and whistles as extensions. No need to agree to any EULA either (remember, that it was added to Firefox?). And, the best part, all existing users will still keep using the same old Firefox version, no surprises for them. Now, I assume that someone will tell me, that this version already exists and is called ESR :)

bondarchuk 9mo ago
For example at the moment multi-account containers is a plugin. I needed it and installed the plugin and it's fine.
- netule 9mo ago
  It kind of sucks that this isn’t a core feature of the browser, but the AI stuff will be. At least Firefox sync is good enough to sync extensions.
yjftsjthsd-h 9mo ago
I'm pretty sure ESR is a different thing, but yeah, that sounds like a good idea. I think it even should be relatively easy, insofar as that a lot of the non-base functionality is in built-in extensions?
driverdan 9mo ago
Firefox should be a browser, period. It should render pages. All other features should be extensions.
- GaryBluto 9mo ago
  That would've been possible if they didn't kill XUL.

crossroadsguy 9mo ago

There are two things to note here: 1. Pocket/etc is not even ancient history, 2. At this point I don’t think Firefox or Mozilla ought to be taken without a truck of salt. A bonus third :D 3. People bleeding their hearts out for Mozilla and calling others out for constantly criticising Mozilla — it’s history baby, history!

squigz 9mo ago

I'll never understand why people feel so strongly about features like this and that they have to be opt-in. I don't use bookmarks. Should those be opt-in? What about the other 85% of the browser's features I don't use?

baobun 9mo ago
The bookmarks feature doesn't silently connect to their servers in the background to function. The supposed local-only features like translations will download at least model updates and configuration, which leaks metadata.
johnnyanmac 9mo ago
> I don't use bookmarks. Should those be opt-in? You can choose not to use bookmarks, remove the bar reserved for it, and it’s taking up kilobytes in the background. Can’t say the same about shoving an LLM in a browser. But sure, I’m much closer to the extreme of “make bookmarks a plug-in” than “make everything a default”.

BeetleB 9mo ago

Could someone summarize the problem with Firefox's AI features? At least when I last checked (months ago), none of those features that involve communicating with external servers would work unless you configure them to (i.e. provide credentials to an LLM provider). Was I wrong? Have things changed?

ksherlock 9mo ago
I don't use firefox so I can't confirm, but one issue might be 15+ (?!) different config settings needed to disable AI and it still won't go away. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46095873 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46095873
- BeetleB 9mo ago
  That's a UX issue, but I keep hearing complaints about privacy.
  - phyzome 9mo ago
    Anything that makes it easy to accidentally send local data elsewhere is a privacy issue.
    - BeetleB 9mo ago
      > Anything that makes it easy to accidentally send local data elsewhere is a privacy issue. How is it "easy" if nothing is sent unless you configure the AI? What I'm asking is: If I do a brand new profile, default configuration, how can any AI related feature send anything that is of privacy concern? If you don't set up an LLM provider, it has nowhere to send to. I may be wrong, which is why I'm asking in the thread. So far, no one has shown what the problem is.
      - phyzome 9mo ago
        I have no idea whether any of the AI features require explicit setup vs. automatically use a paid-for API somewhere. But it also doesn't matter, because that's the kind of distinction that I've seen go back and forth elsewhere.

999900000999 9mo ago

Have it as a stand alone plugin. I should have to manually install this AI stuff.

worldsavior 9mo ago
You're not a normal user of Firefox then.
- 999900000999 9mo ago
  Who is a "normal" user. Normal users install Chrome.
  - bayindirh 9mo ago
    We want "normal" users to use Firefox, not to push it to a smaller niche with more force. Even though I don't like or use this "AI thingy", it should be equally easy to use and equally easy to disable. If Firefox can provide a more anonymized gate to these providers and guarantee that prompts are not used for training, this would be a net win for people who want to use AI but doesn't know better, i.e. the "normal" users.
    - reyqn 9mo ago
      That's how normal users stay on chrome while your users leave firefox. That's how you get no users at all.
      - andrepd 9mo ago
        Hardly. Hundreds of millions of "normies" want a browser that just "gets rid of ads and spam and stuff". If ff can be that go-to browser, they have hundreds of millions of potential users.
        reyqn 9mo ago
        Potential users are not users, and firefox can't be that browser. Actually that browser is brave, and it also doesn't have hundred of millions of users. You can't fight defaults browsers, people don't care.

alexgotoi 9mo ago

This is exactly the kind of boring, unsexy feature that actually builds trust. It’s the opposite of the usual “surprise, here’s an AI sidebar you didn’t ask for and can’t fully disable” pattern. If they want people to try this stuff, the path is pretty simple: ship a browser that treats AI like any other power feature. Off by default, clearly explained, reversible, and preferably shippable as an extension. You can always market your way into more usage; you can’t market your way back into credibility once you blow it.

bstsb 9mo ago
saying "trying to slow down, I promise" doesn't magically make your blatant advert not spam edit: the original post ended with words to the tune of "Totally unrelated, but I run [insert newsletter here]... "
- alexgotoi 9mo ago
  Edited and removed.
  - all2 9mo ago
    Why? Why kowtow to people who don't care about your wellbeing or long term success?
RunSet 9mo ago
> This is exactly the kind of boring, unsexy feature that actually builds trust. Though not so much trust as an option to enable AI features would build.
taurath 9mo ago
> It’s the opposite of the usual “surprise, here’s an AI sidebar you didn’t ask for and can’t fully disable” pattern. They literally shipped an AI sidebar nobody asked for.
- teaearlgraycold 9mo ago

mort96 9mo ago

I still don't want to use an "AI browser". I don't want to use a browser where all or most development effort goes into "AI features" that I need to disable. I want a browser where the development effort goes into making it better at browsing the web.

micromacrofoot 9mo ago

I'm not sure why people still believe this, especially developers. We're starting to literally just build AI into everything... you're not even going to know what's AI and what's not. The phase of labeling everything with cute little sparkles is starting to end and AI is going to be used similarly to external libraries. If you don't like AI you need to seek legislation and pressure your local politicians. It's the only way to stop it.

johnnyanmac 9mo ago
>If you don't like AI you need to seek legislation and pressure your local politicians. It's the only way to stop it. Yup. So we're screwed for up to 3 years. Maybe much less depending on nature or the result of certain hot topic issues. That might be a minor factor why we seem to be speedrunning everything in 2025. Get ahead of the crash, of the legislation, of the wool coming off the common citizen's eyes.

Tepix 9mo ago

I don't understand why it's so difficult (impossible?) with Firefox to use your own private AI server (that's not running on localhost). With Brave it's pretty easy.

leothetechguy 9mo ago

Honestly this should've been introduced with the new AI Features from the start, it's just shipping slightly too late to fully regain my trust.

oybng 9mo ago

Firefox had options for many things, until those options were removed

deleted 9mo ago

[deleted]

VortexLain 9mo ago

This would be useful for many people who want to avoid AI features being forced on them by every piece of software imaginable. Hopefully, a centralized kill switch like this will also make it easy for Firefox forks such as Zen and Floorp to let users enable AI features if they want to without changing about:flags.

rolph 9mo ago

get your non AI versions here while they last: Index of /pub/firefox/releases/ https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/ https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/ A LITTLE HELP: How do I revert Firefox to a previous version and keep my profile intact? https://superuser.com/questions/1643618/how-do-i-revert-firefox-to-a-previous-version-and-keep-my-profile-intact https://superuser.com/questions/1643618/how-do-i-revert-fire...

wkat4242 9mo ago

I don't really care so much about that. I worry more about the CEO speaking about blocking adblockers like it's a normal business decision. Wtf

johnnyanmac 9mo ago
That’s what turned me off of Chrome. It will 100% have me migrate if it happens again. I’m not freely giving my attention away for even more people to shove crap in my face.

kgwxd 9mo ago

i don't even want the code present on my machine, only being held back by a checkbox that may or may not be correctly respected. this is what extensions we invented for.

4k93n2 9mo ago
its funny how multi-account containers is a such a killer feature of firefox (that none of the other browsers are able to implement, as far as i remember) but its kept as an extension and they never seem too bothered about promoting it either

mwkaufma 9mo ago

Where's the kill switch to remove AI from development?

Timwi 9mo ago

I actually saw the “summarize this page” feature in the right-click menu today and clicked on it out of curiosity. The box that appeared had a “remove AI features” button which I accidentally clicked. Now the feature is completely gone and I don't know how to get it back. (Don't really care much, wasn't planning on using that feature anyway, just giving feedback on my first impression)

zelphirkalt 9mo ago

How about we don't enable AI features by default in the first place?

BeaverGoose 9mo ago

I would pay $100 a year for a Firefox that just focused on privacy and was competitive speed and features (at rendering) with chrome.

kilroy123 9mo ago
Perhaps, but I would guess 99% of what few users they still have would not do this. This leaves Mozilla in a tough spot of taking its main competitors' cash instead.

geekamongus 9mo ago

Oh, this is great news!

Madmallard 9mo ago

Doesn't matter? https://youtube.com/shorts/FObvkFtr2ZU?si=U6fCphjmGcNMb5ac https://youtube.com/shorts/FObvkFtr2ZU?si=U6fCphjmGcNMb5ac Until they change this back they are not trustworthy at all.

est 9mo ago

I am out of the loop, but what AI features does Firefox offer these days?

gooob 9mo ago

what i hate most about this (and the discussion happening in the comments), is that nobody is even defining "AI". "artificial intelligence" is not a technical term. what is mozzila doing exactly? what does it mean to put AI in the browser?

hollerith 9mo ago
There is kind of software that is created using techniques very different from the techniques used to create the vast majority of socioeconomically-important software until about 4 years ago. We need a name for this thing that definitely exists in reality and definitely differs from software created the traditional way. That name is AI. We're probably going to keep on calling it that even if lots of people protest that having "intelligence" in the name is misleading or erroneous.

nektro 9mo ago

after the disaster of comms from the new ceo, this is really great to see.

CodeCompost 9mo ago

Can we please stop calling LLMs "AI"? It's obvious now that there is no intelligence here and no trying to make it talk to itself and call is "reasoning" is not the answer.

TonyStr 9mo ago
Nope, it's too late. It sounded stupid when they called it AI in the start, but now AI means something like "tools that can perform tasks that typically requires human faculties to complete". Just like a computer does more than compute, words change meaning, sometimes influenced by marketing.

tliltocatl 9mo ago

I think people screaming "but AI is the future" doesn't recognize what the problem is. The problem is not AI. The problem is that Mozilla keeps jumping on fads instead of focusing on their browser core. There are a tons of "we bundled all the latest crap" Chrome forks out there. Nobody needs more those. Stop pushing bells and whistles. Give us more extensibility instead. Keep supporting v2 manifest and add more. There were genuine technical reasons for why XUL and NPAPI had to die, but we need an equally powerful alternative. And yea, having a faint through about removing adblock support, yet alone speaking it aloud is a really bad sign for Mozilla's future.

echelon 9mo ago
> people screaming "but AI is the future" I witnes far more people screaming against AI. The media started kicking this off in 2021, 2022. It blossomed into a fully distributed, organic, memetic device from there. It has a life of its own now. Children and young people are practically indoctrinated if you look at social media comments. I was invited to give lectures to several art schools about using Blender, Unreal Engine, and mocap software with diffusion models. The students weren't very polite. Most of the "questions" I got at each of the campuses were simply statements of affirmation about how much they hate AI. Good looking and well-reviewed indie games that incorporate AI elements or tools are dumped on by these folks. It's like butting into conversations to say something bad about AI scores points or something. > Mozilla keeps jumping on fads Agreed on this point, though. They're rudderless. And Google is probably quite happy about the fact that their antitrust litigation sponge can't steal away their users.
- epgui 9mo ago
  > simply statements of affirmation about how much they hate AI I wonder what that might mean!
- tliltocatl 9mo ago
  If you keep shoveling a thing to people who don't care, you'll get tons of irrational pushback no matter how the good this thing is. And AI isn't even particularly good.

bannana2033 9mo ago

Average Joe or Joan will install some crap AI assisted browser if some idiot in Tiktok or FB says follow me and I will DM you a special link to get baby-clothes for -10% discount. Hope your family is not that. My spouse despite reading HN etc thinks that anyway privacy is lost - so why notget at least that 10% discount. Another problem for Mozilla: - If they don't pivot to AI people will leave it. Yes, some hardcore RMS fans will use some clone of Firefox - all others will not - If they adopt modern AI people scream - Same happened when Mozilla accepted DRM (for Netflix etc). Many tech writers, commentators were against that. But if Firefox did not adopt it then all those tech writers would have used Chrome to see Netflix. No one of these commentators say they will boycott Netflix.

DICloak 9mo ago

[dead]

emsign 9mo ago

Firefox has AI features?? wth

forephought4 9mo ago

5 step plan for Mozilla to succeed against the Behemoth Googzilla and the leviathans of MAWS. 1. build a team in Europe to create an email service comparable to gmail/protonmail - domains: mozmail.com, mmail.com, godmail.com, pmail.com, dogmail.com, meowmail.com - promoted as a simple everyday email – no overly complicated/advanced federati features in order to increase inter-operability, reduce spam and dealing with federalism - for more advanced features, integration links with something like signal, or a hosted comms platform 2. invest heavily in Firefox core development and service features - push for system resource and performance optimizations, even if it requires extensive architectural changes - focus on perfecting a core browser experience then developing an extension API that allows a level of UI customisations that XUL did, have unsafe/hackers warning for any extension that uses this API, even official ones - invest in KeePassXC ux and integrate it as a first class and core feature in Firefox that is useable by hackers, consumers and enterprises – offer paid services for simple database sync/backup, as well as a decent managed solution for enterprise. 3. Expand further with a suite of other services that have both self-hosted and paid management extras - calendar and email client, universally usable between providers, but first class with Firefox and mmail. - integrate something like libreoffice into a desktop client that can also be embedded into a Firefox tab. - straight forward self-hostable teams communication platform, managed cloud versions also availabe - self-hosted / managed file storage platform with web UI with integration links to other services - all of the above require a unified web, desktop and mobile ux - offer further software and hardware integrations to completely streamline personal digital management 4. Extensive marketing and brand exposure over TV and social media, while staying charitably non-profit and recognizing the digital roots - Use the firefox, gecko and other digital animals as icons - Themes and scapes from origins such as mosaic/netscape 5. In this scene Mozilla continues knocking down the buildings of the titans.

stainablesteel 9mo ago

maybe they should have an option to enable it instead? i don't want this being the default

M95D 9mo ago

Can I ./configure it completely out?

feelamee 9mo ago

better add a button to *enable* AI

petre 9mo ago

How about disable them by default or I switch browsers to something else?

sometimez 9mo ago

Didn't even know Firefox was planning on adding AI features. I wonder how much more bloated it'll be.

anovikov 9mo ago

Internet economy already made a full circle with this once before: at first, ads existed to sell things online for advertisers, and make money for publishers (also as a machine for circular deals to propel stock valuations, during the dotcom boom). Then they became so pervasive and annoying that eventually they just became a method of making user experience worse, and get paid for ad-free, thus making money. Today, no one cares about performance of those ads, they are just a replacement of "nag screens" of the shareware era. It sounds like AI will made this circle a lot faster.

jajuuka 9mo ago

This was made clear when they talked about this previously but once again people don't want to hear that and instead want to rant about AI. The only thing stopping Firefox is its own users.

perryizgr8 9mo ago

I think Firefox is an excellent browser. Their problem is simply that they have too much revenue for too many years. They need a fraction of that. If I were the ceo, I would drastically cut back operations. Scale down the org to 10% of its current strength, keep shipping a solid and boring browser, accept donations that directly support development of the browser. No fads, no ai, just a high performance, bug free, standards compliant browser. The users and donations will come. Firefox will survive. One year of google revenue can kar them for 10 years of lean operation!

The_President 9mo ago
Revenue is good for the company - and they'll want as much as possible in order to support their obligations to the business plan, but unfortunately layoffs were still part of that plan these past few years. Mozilla's CEO pay: 2018: $2.46 million 2020: $2.97 million 2021: $5.59 million 2022: $6.90 million 2023: $6.26 million I block requests to Mozilla infrastructure, not by mistake.

quitit 9mo ago

If they want to position themselves with a point of difference from competitors, they could provide a settings list of AI features with check boxes for each. This would tap into the insight that not everyone dislikes the same AI features. For many AI isn't a dirty word, but rather they've seen plenty of examples where it's simply annoying or over-taxing resources. For example some like AI to build a quick reference summary from a set of web results, but don’t want a full agenic-style AI to extend beyond that. This could potentially entice users not to throw the baby out with the bathwater, and maybe even make a few converts.

gitlinuxgreat 9mo ago

When a company has monopolistic practices, its products ride their anticompetiveness to majority market share by force of their dominance. The result is the Netscapeification of anything that competes with any monopoly. A monopoly anticompetitiveness needs to be dealt with powerfully by Congress to increase competition. Though the lobbyists of these anticompetitive companies and the billions deployed from the lobbying companies effectively is a significant detriment to competitors, healthy competition, and always in many subtle, loss of innovation ways, the consumer. This is the tip of the iceberg for anyone in competition to the oligarchical status quo that is in effect, and detrimenting the consumer in multitude ways that you are not comprehending.

gitprolinux 9mo ago

28304283409234 9mo ago

....until it doesn't.