Firefox uses on-device downloaded-on-demand ML models for privacy-preserving translation.

@firefoxwebdevs nobody wants any of it.

The machine learning, the LLM, the translations, the "open model", the "open data" the open model uses, the kill switch, none.

I've use firefox since 2005 maybe 2006, even spent about 8 hours compiling it on my laptop to have it.

I've keept using your software despite its many flaws because you provided something.
You putting AI is taking the one advantage that justified using firefox over the alternatives.

Just to name a few flaws:
* In the last 20 years I've not managed to make firefox keep 2 dictionaries installed and working as expected over time.

* I'm having to download firefox focus from your FTP because you don't seem to want to have it available outside of the play store.
Why don't you maintain a f-droid repo for it?

* Where is USB midi support? Where is most of the USB support?
So much stuff we have to use chrome for.

* Why do you hate people restoring tabs?
Why move the lines to restore the tabs and delete said tabs next to each other?

The AI push in your software makes none of the effort of using firefox worth it.

@joepie91 I think a lot of people in the replies would consider this sneaky. It's a tricky UX problem. But yes, granular control needs to be part of the solution, along with a kill switch.

@firefoxwebdevs you can't cherry-pick yourself out of your general bad faith engagement.

@m I agree the folks I'm polling here do not represent the average user, but in this case I'm specifically interested in the thoughts of those who really dislike 'AI', and I think I've reached them

@tedmielczarek @wes @firefoxwebdevs Yes, this is what the marketers keep trying to convince us of.

@firefoxwebdevs As worded, and if we can trust Mozilla, then the acceptable answer should be No for these reasons: ML is not AI, and on-device means nothing is sent out of the device. In exchange you get free translation. Win.

BUT… there’s the trust issue now.

And what we REALLY need is not an AI kill switch but more of a “data transfer/phone-home kill switch”, almost like a firewall, where we know the browser is not taking any data and sending it to a device we don’t control ourselves.

@gregtatum @firefoxwebdevs great to hear! I can imagine! Thanks for the link ️

@mdavis folks want to disable 'AI' for more reasons than privacy. Privacy is important of course, but folks are also concerned about the training data, and energy used for the training.

@tante it’s a SLM

@firefoxwebdevs tbh, the open embracement of AI, the addition of AI into the browser, while full well knowing your user base is well known for being anti big tech and privacy focused, was a mask-off moment.

I've already switched to librewolf, and I didn't have to disable/remove bullshit.

I recommend your ELT 1) get a grip and 2) remember you exist because of your userbase, not to please tech giants. If big tech had their way, they'd eat you alive. people who want AI slop aren't using Firefox.

@fasterandworse there are no such interfaces to intercept input boxes with extensions I guess. And also why should Firefox improve other browsers?

@eckes for that usage pattern the results would probably be even worse with more fabrications. So what are we even doing here?

@firefoxwebdevs @zzt How about making a poll "Should Firefox include AI/LLM by default?"

@joepie91 agreed.

@firefoxwebdevs we're not in those meetings so we don't know what all is actually included within the AI module suite, or even if that has been fully defined internally at this point, so of course there won't be a clean consensus externally from us on what "it" is and if it should be included or excluded, as it's up to our interpretation.

@firefoxwebdevs But if the ML/AI training work is processing on the device and not is shared off device, and it is in support of a feature like translating a page (which should be prompted/selectable) then what’s the issue? You can say no and nothing happens. Or you can say yes and the worse that happens is you chew up some local power on your laptop or PC. Or are you saying that even though the translation happens on the device, the RESULT of that training data is sent back out?

@firefoxwebdevs I can only speak for myself of course, but I'm someone who is strongly opposed to sneaky approaches, like hiding things in submenus or requiring people to go back later to disable new things, for example. And I'm also strongly opposed to basically everything in the current generation of "AI" (LLMs, GenAI, etc.) - but personally I wouldn't consider this sneaky, as it's immediately visible that there's a second choice to make, at the exact moment you disable "AI".

Of course if that stops being the case and the second option gets hidden behind an "Advanced..." button or foldout for example, it would be sneaky. But in the way it's shown in my mockup, I would consider it fine as it's both proactively presented and immediately actionable.

(I do still think that exploitative "AI" things should be opt-in rather than opt-out, but it doesn't seem like that's within the scope of options that will be considered by Mozilla, so I'm reasoning within the assumption of an opt-out mechanism here)

@mdavis I believe it's a moral stance due to how the models were produced.

@firefoxwebdevs Like many others, I have a metric ton of thoughts on this topic. I might even try writing something to consolidate them.

In the meantime: I don't consider the translation models to be part of the major AI hype I loathe so much. Machine translation of language has been happening for a long time and has proven largely useful, and it lacks the stink of desperation which so many of the generative applications of recent times carry.

While I'm already thinking about it: even the name "AI kill switch" feels bad to think about. I know that "AI" is the buzzword that gets upper management giddy and which the untrained public is now used to hearing, but the fact of the matter is that if you can't "sell" a feature without appealing to buzzwords, your feature wasn't worth the time and effort put into it.

@chillicampari @joepie91 fwiw I asked about translation because we're figuring out what to do specifically about translation.

@bersl2 I agree it's a meaningless buzzword, but a lot of tech folks are saying they want "no AI" - they're using the buzzword. So the poll is about finding out what folks mean by "no AI".