Firefox uses on-device downloaded-on-demand ML models for privacy-preserving translation.
-
Firefox uses on-device downloaded-on-demand ML models for privacy-preserving translation.
They're not LLMs. They're trained on open data.
Should translation be disabled if the AI 'kill switch' is active?
@firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.social i maintain that the "AI kill switch" is a stupid name for such a feature. Stop calling it AI, this term is meaningless as indicated by the disagreement in this poll. You should rephrase it in a way that makes it more obvious what features would be included.
I mostly care about the AI kill switch from a privacy standpoint. I don't want any chatbot sidebar, or a summarization tool that sends my stuff off to some API. But I do like device-local ML features that work offline.
For me, these two toggles would be perfect:
[ X ] Enable ML features
|
\-- [ ] Enable ML features that require an Internet connection.
Turning off the top one would obviously disable translations. But turning off just the bottom one would obviously keep translations. -
@sotolf @nuintari @firefoxwebdevs @angelfeast @heptapodEnthusiast no it's in the *mozilla* credits
-
@firefoxwebdevs @heptapodEnthusiast @nuintari @davidgerard @zzt and you've just done it to me by saying that a mention of "explicit install" throws the baby out with the bathwater.
You've called @davidgerard 's position "immutable" as if we're unable to have a serious, unified stance against a very clear overstep between a passive web browser and the encroachment of something which is not that.
@fasterandworse @firefoxwebdevs @heptapodEnthusiast @nuintari @zzt every accusation is a confession. he's admitted after that accusation that in fact he considers the AI immutable.
-
@davidgerard @firefoxwebdevs @fasterandworse @heptapodEnthusiast @nuintari @zzt honestly the way Mozilla is going it's more likely they instead break the extension API to prop up their ad businesses
@gourd @firefoxwebdevs @fasterandworse @heptapodEnthusiast @nuintari @zzt the CEO literally floated doing just that
-
@sotolf @nuintari @firefoxwebdevs @angelfeast @heptapodEnthusiast (specifically i cowrote the Mozilla 1.0 FAQ. I got a Mozilla 1.0 CD as a thank you! So many hours in the volunteer documentation mines ... I had to write XSLT ...)
-
@barubary @firefoxwebdevs @fasterandworse @nuintari @davidgerard @zzt Nevermind that the origin of Firefox *itself*, back when it was an experimental rogue project named Phoenix, was to jettison the accumulated weight of Mozilla Suite and move all the bells and whistles to optional add-ons. Back when the browser also included an e-mail, Usenet, calendar, and chat app that couldn't be turned off. Mozilla is actively unlearning the original lesson of Firefox's wild success.
@barubary @firefoxwebdevs @fasterandworse @nuintari @davidgerard @zzt I can only assume that Mozilla is angling to be bought by AOL Time Warner like Netscape was.
-
@firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.social I believe it’d be better if Firefox stopped referring to unwanted slop like chatbots with meaningless marketing terms such as ‘AI’ instead
@mkljczk @firefoxwebdevs exactly. Gen AI / Slop machines should be distinguished from other kinds of AI.
-
@m0rpk @firefoxwebdevs mozilla did deliver this as a plugin in the beginning. What's your point? "Don't make the web open, unless it's something that I approve?"
@funkylab @m0rpk @firefoxwebdevs
Quite the friendly tone here. Firefox shipping a feature that unilaterally makes derivative work of any written content on the internet without the author's review or consent isn't exactly part of my definition of the open web. Please don't conflate your opinion on widespread machine translation with the term.
Translation also brings its own ethical can of worms. Say Firefox mistranslates a critical information, resulting in loss or injury. Who's responsible?
-
@sotolf @nuintari @firefoxwebdevs @angelfeast @heptapodEnthusiast (specifically i cowrote the Mozilla 1.0 FAQ. I got a Mozilla 1.0 CD as a thank you! So many hours in the volunteer documentation mines ... I had to write XSLT ...)
@davidgerard @nuintari @firefoxwebdevs @angelfeast @heptapodEnthusiast
I had to write XSLT
Ooof, my condolances, I've only done a little bit of it, and I already have scars.
-
@heptapodEnthusiast @nuintari I didn't see the point in including options that were never going to be actioned. If anything, that would be extremely misleading.
@firefoxwebdevs @heptapodEnthusiast @nuintari so you admit that your interpretation of what "the vast majority of people feel" is based on a dataset you deliberately doctored to exclude anything you don't want to hear?
Your "interpretation" of popular userbase opinion is less than worthless, it's actively dishonest, self deluding, and alienating to the userbase.
Your behavior on mastodon is why today I finally switched to waterfox.
-
@davidgerard @nuintari @firefoxwebdevs @angelfeast @heptapodEnthusiast
I had to write XSLT
Ooof, my condolances, I've only done a little bit of it, and I already have scars.
@sotolf @davidgerard The World's Worst LISP
-
@firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard @yoasif @fmasy @Rycochet @zzt
I'm not sure an official firefox account is allowed to make passive-aggressive snipes about "immutable positions", especially when it comes to AI.
@TheEntity @firefoxwebdevs @yoasif @fmasy @Rycochet @zzt yeah this accusation turned out to be a confession, when he admitted the "don't include it" option wasn't in because AI was his immutable position
-
I suspect, even more, that lack of ranked choice voting is hurting hard here.
A lot of people probably voted for the option presented that was closest to what they actually want. What they actually wabt isn't an option because Mozilla won't consider it.
But of the remaining options, there's a preference they'd have over the one they voted for.
Giving people a poll where the options they want are deliberately included is going to generate bad results which will only result in upsetting the community even more, because now you'll claim to have consent..
@firefoxwebdevs @angelfeast @zzt @yoasif @fmasy @Rycochet @davidgerard
@pixx @nuintari @firefoxwebdevs @angelfeast @zzt @yoasif @fmasy @Rycochet he is actually doing just that and taking actions based on this rigged poll!
-
@fasterandworse @heptapodEnthusiast @nuintari @davidgerard @zzt Did you seriously believe that unshipping a largely well-regarded feature like translations was on the table for Firefox 148?
@firefoxwebdevs @fasterandworse @heptapodEnthusiast @nuintari @davidgerard @zzt
I think that was a feature once.
The great browser from the Mozilla suite, but without all the other bloat, so it boots faster and uses less of your expensive RAM and you can install all the other parts a separate applications or extensions. -
@duke_of_germany @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard @tante
you might add : I want an "opt-in" button
@Tacitus @duke_of_germany @firefoxwebdevs @tante jake's already tried "well what even *is* opt in, it's so impossibly complicated you know"
(it isn't, make it an extension)
-
@barubary @firefoxwebdevs @fasterandworse @nuintari @davidgerard @zzt Nevermind that the origin of Firefox *itself*, back when it was an experimental rogue project named Phoenix, was to jettison the accumulated weight of Mozilla Suite and move all the bells and whistles to optional add-ons. Back when the browser also included an e-mail, Usenet, calendar, and chat app that couldn't be turned off. Mozilla is actively unlearning the original lesson of Firefox's wild success.
@heptapodEnthusiast @barubary @firefoxwebdevs @fasterandworse @nuintari @davidgerard @zzt Ghods yes. Mozilla as it was back then wouldn't even run on my elderly 486 laptop, and the brand new Firefox stripped of all its bells and whistles and tat would.
Being lightweight and just a browser was the original feature.
-
@firefoxwebdevs @heptapodEnthusiast @nuintari so you admit that your interpretation of what "the vast majority of people feel" is based on a dataset you deliberately doctored to exclude anything you don't want to hear?
Your "interpretation" of popular userbase opinion is less than worthless, it's actively dishonest, self deluding, and alienating to the userbase.
Your behavior on mastodon is why today I finally switched to waterfox.
@kyle_pegasus @heptapodEnthusiast @nuintari it isn't things I don't want to hear. As you can see, I'm absolutely hearing them and responding to them.
However, the poll represented options available for the initial release of the AI kill switch with regards to translation.
-
@angelfeast @heptapodEnthusiast @nuintari I guess I assumed that it was a given that the options were, well… the options. I see that isn't the case, and will try and cater for that in future. Cheers!
@firefoxwebdevs chiming in to note that I approached the poll, as a user, as selecting the option *closest* to "keep AI out of the browser."
I think we all collectively understand that Mozilla wants AI involved in the browser. I'm not sure who among us using Firefox does, however.
-
@zzt @jaffathecake @davidgerard @firefoxwebdevs Fatality. Objective C... WINS
@errant @zzt @jaffathecake @firefoxwebdevs that's *mister* object
-
@firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard "trained on open data" what kind of open data? and why does this need to be in the browser in the first place instead of being an extension?
your last sentence feels condescending. "it should be disabled" is not the winner, "it should be disabled with the option of enabling" is the winner. why wasn't there an option for "make firefox's machine translation an extension instead"?
if you think i am misunderstanding, consider that i am a very average user of firefox who does not work in anything remotely resembling tech and if you feel like i don't understand something then that means either you are doing a shit job explaining or you are being stubborn and do not want to accept that even average users don't want this forced on them. or both.
@angelfeast @firefoxwebdevs "open data" as in "stolen", not "open" at all
