4 ms·

> Because it's a browser that "just works." We can't have this if Firefox stays in the pre-ai era. Strongly disagree. Theres no expectation of AI as a core br

> Because it's a browser that "just works." We can't have this if Firefox stays in the pre-ai era. Strongly disagree. Theres no expectation of AI as a core browsing experience. There isnt even really an expectation of AI as part of an extended browsing experience. We cant even predict reliably what AI's relationship to browsing will be if it is even to exist. Mozilla could reliably wait 24 months and follow if features are actually in demand and being used. Firefox can absolutely maintain "It just works" by being a good platform with well tested in demand features. What they are talking about here, are opt out only experiments intruding on the core browsing experience. Thats the opposite of "It Just Works". >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. Its already a great browser. It doesnt need a built in opt out AI experience to become great.

mcny 11mo ago
There was also no expectation of process isolation in Mozilla Firefox when Google Chrome first came into the scenes. Electrolysis was painful for Mozilla and yet it was necessary.
- protocolture 11mo ago
  So instead of being flexible enough to adapt to new requirements as users demand them, they are blindly implementing things before they are requested just in case?
  - heavyset_go 11mo ago
    Believe it or not well-intentioned developers, product managers, etc can read the writing on the wall and see where user expectations are heading based on the apps and products they already use.
    - protocolture 11mo ago
      Exactly why I am baffled. You would think they could read the writing on the wall.
      - heavyset_go 11mo ago
        I don't like it, but ChatGPT is a product that nearly a billion people are using. It's broken into popular culture. My mom, who has trouble sending an email, uses it. She found it on her own. More importantly, generative AI is incredibly popular with younger cohorts. They will grow up to be your customer base if they aren't already. Their expectations are being set now. Again, I don't like it, but that's the reality.
        krisgenre 11mo ago
        + Children are growing up with ChatGPT and Gemini. It has already become the de facto standard for learning. AI in browsers is inevitable.
        rockskon 11mo ago
        ????? Why does the existance of an AI chat box website mean a browser must do more than take you to that website? The forceful inclusion of LLMs in places that have no value are simultaneously ubiquitous and obnoxious.
        darkwater 11mo ago
        "why do I have to go and fill with copy paste that form or navigate through that page to do $something if that AI browser can do it for me?" And in that scenario, there is a GIGANTIC need for a user-first, privacy-respecting browser using ideally local models (in a few years, when HW is ready)
        rockskon 11mo ago
        Again: ??????? You people need to be forced to use your product in the exact form your product is presented to end users. With the exact frequency it's presented to end users. In all the wrong places as it is presented to end users. Maybe then you'll understand why shoving AI in every conceivable crevice is incredibly obnoxious and distracting and, most importantly, not useful.
  - godelski 11mo ago
    Last I checked Firefox was sitting at 4% browser market share. If you include Brave you just get to 5%[0]. So truth is that privacy isn't enough to get people to switch. 5% share isn't enough to stay alive and protect privacy. > they are blindly implementing things before they are requested This is the job of every engineer. Your job is to understand the product and where it advances and where it can help the users. The users don't know the technical side. They barely know what they want. Yes, you should listen to users but you also have to read between the lines to actually figure out what they want. Frankly, the truth of the matter is that what people say they want is very different than what they actually want. Work with customers and you'll experience this first hand... I thought it was a big enough meme that everyone knew this Speaking about reading between the lines, the privacy community is not very good at advocating for privacy. Look at Signal, it has similar backlash to Mozilla. The community shoots itself in the foot because the products are not perfect. But here's the thing, both Signal and Firefox are not products intended to maximize privacy at all costs. They are products to maximize privacy while being appealing to the masses. Are there more secure and private solutions out there? Hell yeah. But are those tools practical for the masses? Don't fool yourselves. So stop with this bullshit, you're shooting yourself in the foot. You don't have to use Firefox to root for them. Go use a fork like the Mullvad browser or Waterfox. If you're a power user then just be a fucking power user. I use Arch but that doesn't mean I'm going to piss on Ubuntu every chance I get. I fucking hate Ubuntu but I'm going to root for them because every new Ubuntu user is one less for Microsoft and Apple and every new Ubuntu user is a potential new <literally any other distro is better> user. So why get angry because someone is making a step in the right direction? So what if their legs aren't long enough to get all the way to where you are (which didn't take one step either!). So let's be very clear about this. I'm not mad at you because I want AI in Firefox (I don't), I'm mad at you because you're attacking our literal last line of defense for a secure and private internet. I'm mad at you for purity testing. Stop with this "no true Scotsman" bullshit. We can have those arguments at a later date when Firefox isn't on its last leg and/or when we have a diverse choice in browsers. But at this point *all you are doing is advocating for Chrome*. Whether you realize it our not. We've been playing this fucking game for a decade now and you can either look at the results or continue to ignore them. But it didn't work, so we need to try something else. [0] https://radar.cloudflare.com/reports/browser-market-share-2025-q1 https://radar.cloudflare.com/reports/browser-market-share-20...
Izkata 11mo ago
> Mozilla could reliably wait 24 months and follow if features are actually in demand and being used. I'm also wondering how much of what they come up with could be implemented as an addon instead of a core part of the browser.
charcircuit 11mo ago
This is how Firefox fell behind Chrome and bled their entire market share. The strategy of letting Chrome out innovate them and then copy what they think is good is not a strategy that works.
- amethyst 11mo ago
  It works pretty well for Apple
  - charcircuit 11mo ago
    Not on desktop. They are losing market share to chrome year over year.
- rightbyte 11mo ago
  I'm quite sure only "we" care about esoteric browser features. "Does it have tabs? OK. Fine." Firefox losing market share were probably more due to Google nagging desktop users than features. What did Chrome have that Firefox didn't?
  - charcircuit 11mo ago
    Not crashing frequently due to having proper tab isolation and a sane extention system.
  - fasbiner 11mo ago
    You and your argument are reductionist.
- noirscape 11mo ago
  Firefox fell behind Chrome because of aggressive marketing from Google in a way that probably violates some antitrust laws if they were actually being enforced, combined with a couple of own-goals from Mozilla. Basically Google exploits their market dominance in Search and Mail to get people to use Chrome (and probably their other services too). When you search in a non-Chrome browser, you'll be constantly informed by Google about how much better their search is with Chrome through pop-ups and in-page notifications (not browser notifs). If you click a link in the Gmail app on iOS, rather than opening the browser, you get a Chrome advertisement if they detect it isn't your default browser. This goes hand-in-hand with Chrome being the default Android browser (don't underestimate the power of being the default) and Mozilla alienating their core audience of power users by forcibly inserting features that those power users despise. Chrome never won on features, it won on marketing and abuse of a different monopoly.

mcny 11mo ago

There was also no expectation of process isolation in Mozilla Firefox when Google Chrome first came into the scenes. Electrolysis was painful for Mozilla and yet it was necessary.

protocolture 11mo ago
So instead of being flexible enough to adapt to new requirements as users demand them, they are blindly implementing things before they are requested just in case?
- heavyset_go 11mo ago
  Believe it or not well-intentioned developers, product managers, etc can read the writing on the wall and see where user expectations are heading based on the apps and products they already use.
  - protocolture 11mo ago
    Exactly why I am baffled. You would think they could read the writing on the wall.
    - heavyset_go 11mo ago
      I don't like it, but ChatGPT is a product that nearly a billion people are using. It's broken into popular culture. My mom, who has trouble sending an email, uses it. She found it on her own. More importantly, generative AI is incredibly popular with younger cohorts. They will grow up to be your customer base if they aren't already. Their expectations are being set now. Again, I don't like it, but that's the reality.
      - krisgenre 11mo ago
        + Children are growing up with ChatGPT and Gemini. It has already become the de facto standard for learning. AI in browsers is inevitable.
        rockskon 11mo ago
        ????? Why does the existance of an AI chat box website mean a browser must do more than take you to that website? The forceful inclusion of LLMs in places that have no value are simultaneously ubiquitous and obnoxious.
        darkwater 11mo ago
        "why do I have to go and fill with copy paste that form or navigate through that page to do $something if that AI browser can do it for me?" And in that scenario, there is a GIGANTIC need for a user-first, privacy-respecting browser using ideally local models (in a few years, when HW is ready)
        rockskon 11mo ago
        Again: ??????? You people need to be forced to use your product in the exact form your product is presented to end users. With the exact frequency it's presented to end users. In all the wrong places as it is presented to end users. Maybe then you'll understand why shoving AI in every conceivable crevice is incredibly obnoxious and distracting and, most importantly, not useful.
- godelski 11mo ago
  Last I checked Firefox was sitting at 4% browser market share. If you include Brave you just get to 5%[0]. So truth is that privacy isn't enough to get people to switch. 5% share isn't enough to stay alive and protect privacy. > they are blindly implementing things before they are requested This is the job of every engineer. Your job is to understand the product and where it advances and where it can help the users. The users don't know the technical side. They barely know what they want. Yes, you should listen to users but you also have to read between the lines to actually figure out what they want. Frankly, the truth of the matter is that what people say they want is very different than what they actually want. Work with customers and you'll experience this first hand... I thought it was a big enough meme that everyone knew this Speaking about reading between the lines, the privacy community is not very good at advocating for privacy. Look at Signal, it has similar backlash to Mozilla. The community shoots itself in the foot because the products are not perfect. But here's the thing, both Signal and Firefox are not products intended to maximize privacy at all costs. They are products to maximize privacy while being appealing to the masses. Are there more secure and private solutions out there? Hell yeah. But are those tools practical for the masses? Don't fool yourselves. So stop with this bullshit, you're shooting yourself in the foot. You don't have to use Firefox to root for them. Go use a fork like the Mullvad browser or Waterfox. If you're a power user then just be a fucking power user. I use Arch but that doesn't mean I'm going to piss on Ubuntu every chance I get. I fucking hate Ubuntu but I'm going to root for them because every new Ubuntu user is one less for Microsoft and Apple and every new Ubuntu user is a potential new <literally any other distro is better> user. So why get angry because someone is making a step in the right direction? So what if their legs aren't long enough to get all the way to where you are (which didn't take one step either!). So let's be very clear about this. I'm not mad at you because I want AI in Firefox (I don't), I'm mad at you because you're attacking our literal last line of defense for a secure and private internet. I'm mad at you for purity testing. Stop with this "no true Scotsman" bullshit. We can have those arguments at a later date when Firefox isn't on its last leg and/or when we have a diverse choice in browsers. But at this point *all you are doing is advocating for Chrome*. Whether you realize it our not. We've been playing this fucking game for a decade now and you can either look at the results or continue to ignore them. But it didn't work, so we need to try something else. [0] https://radar.cloudflare.com/reports/browser-market-share-2025-q1 https://radar.cloudflare.com/reports/browser-market-share-20...

Izkata 11mo ago

> Mozilla could reliably wait 24 months and follow if features are actually in demand and being used. I'm also wondering how much of what they come up with could be implemented as an addon instead of a core part of the browser.

charcircuit 11mo ago

This is how Firefox fell behind Chrome and bled their entire market share. The strategy of letting Chrome out innovate them and then copy what they think is good is not a strategy that works.

amethyst 11mo ago
It works pretty well for Apple
- charcircuit 11mo ago
  Not on desktop. They are losing market share to chrome year over year.
rightbyte 11mo ago
I'm quite sure only "we" care about esoteric browser features. "Does it have tabs? OK. Fine." Firefox losing market share were probably more due to Google nagging desktop users than features. What did Chrome have that Firefox didn't?
- charcircuit 11mo ago
  Not crashing frequently due to having proper tab isolation and a sane extention system.
- fasbiner 11mo ago
  You and your argument are reductionist.
noirscape 11mo ago
Firefox fell behind Chrome because of aggressive marketing from Google in a way that probably violates some antitrust laws if they were actually being enforced, combined with a couple of own-goals from Mozilla. Basically Google exploits their market dominance in Search and Mail to get people to use Chrome (and probably their other services too). When you search in a non-Chrome browser, you'll be constantly informed by Google about how much better their search is with Chrome through pop-ups and in-page notifications (not browser notifs). If you click a link in the Gmail app on iOS, rather than opening the browser, you get a Chrome advertisement if they detect it isn't your default browser. This goes hand-in-hand with Chrome being the default Android browser (don't underestimate the power of being the default) and Mozilla alienating their core audience of power users by forcibly inserting features that those power users despise. Chrome never won on features, it won on marketing and abuse of a different monopoly.