Firefox uses on-device downloaded-on-demand ML models for privacy-preserving translation.
-
@joepie91 @firefoxwebdevs Mozilla's tortured definition of opt-in seems to predict that Mozilla will invent features to nag you into enabling AI, as they have already done with Link Previews: https://www.quippd.com/writing/2026/01/06/architecting-consent-for-ai-deceptive-patterns-in-firefox-link-previews.html
@yoasif @joepie91 @firefoxwebdevs if only there were some way to let users tell you what they actually want https://social.treehouse.systems/@dysfun/115746064081228352
-
@StarkRG @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard Firefox only exists because Google subsidize them so they can point to FF as "proof" that Chrome isn't a monopoly. With the new regime in power, that's a dead issue. So Google want FF to push AI adoption now because they've figured out how to monetize it and they don't want precious eyeballs evading their slopware. If Google cut off their "search" payment to FF, Mozilla goes bust and the C-suite lose their jobs. QED.
@cstross @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard
Sure, I just wish they'd stop lying about it and pretending like it's anything anyone actually wants. -
@xela no external service is used. I'm not sure on the resources used for training, but it's useful to know that would factor into your decision. The project is here https://github.com/mozilla/translations
@firefoxwebdevs @xela If you are doing PR for the company about how great AI is, maybe it would be nice for you to know what you are talking about?...
-
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 We don't want a "kill switch" aka Opt-Out, we want a "live switch" aka Opt-In!
I think it should be very clear by now that most people don't want slop by default.
What is so complicated to understand that?Opt-Out == bad
Opt-In == okay
slop as add-on == best option -
Let's ask the real question:
Firefox users,
do you want any AI directly built into Firefox, or separated out into extensions?
I actually left Firefox as a user precisely for their stance on AI, but also other stuff, and won't go back even if they were reconsidering:
I deeply mistrust them now.
-
@xela @firefoxwebdevs Translations involve either 1 or 2 models depending on the language pairs. Each language requires a model going into, and out of English. Training a language involves on the order of hundreds of GPU hours, and the largest models probably get into the thousands range. Early models were in the thousands range probably before we optimized things.
@gregtatum @xela @firefoxwebdevs So that means that if I'm translating something from swedish to norwegian it's getting translated to english and then back into norwegian, that sounds like an enourmous recipe for desaster with how garbage machine translation is with a single translation, another place where the anglophiles makes everything garbage for everyone else by not thinking through things...
-
@duke_of_germany @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard @tante
4th option: i was a Firefox user until they fed it up with AI@efialto
That's me too!
@duke_of_germany @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard @tante -
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 I voted in the poll for the least bad option, but I now regret that. Because it’s all so pointless isn’t it? You don’t actually care what I think or what the other users think. If you did you would have asked if we wanted ai slop at all, not what flavour of slop we preferred.
-
@mdavis I believe it's a moral stance due to how the models were produced.
@firefoxwebdevs
It might also be about battery usage (be it real or supposed) -
@StarkRG @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard Firefox only exists because Google subsidize them so they can point to FF as "proof" that Chrome isn't a monopoly. With the new regime in power, that's a dead issue. So Google want FF to push AI adoption now because they've figured out how to monetize it and they don't want precious eyeballs evading their slopware. If Google cut off their "search" payment to FF, Mozilla goes bust and the C-suite lose their jobs. QED.
@cstross @StarkRG @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard Yep. Their paying customer is Google, not the people using Firefox.
-
@noah a lot of folks have (reasonable imo) concerns around how these models are trained. I'm not sure how much of that applies to the translation models, but feelings count here.
@firefoxwebdevs @noah We also don't trust to you keep your word.
-
@cstross @StarkRG @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard Yep. Their paying customer is Google, not the people using Firefox.
@bjn @StarkRG @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard Wasn't it Mark Zuckerberg of whom it was said, in the early days of Facebook, "if you're not paying for the product you ARE the product"?
-
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 you know if you had a button in settings that said "no AI" the majority of your userbase would click that button.
Phrased as "you know" because you DO know. You also know that the userbase tend to contain people happy to toggle settings meaning that if the userbase grows to those who don't care that's fine too.
So just get a clear toggle and watch people toggle it.
-
@cstross @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard
Sure, I just wish they'd stop lying about it and pretending like it's anything anyone actually wants.@StarkRG @cstross @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard it's also the great fear because if Google DOES turn off the donations were totally stuck in their control as the browser engine would be defined by them or at best a browser engine version of Open Android and variants
-
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 nobody wants LLMs in our browser. do something useful instead
-
Let's ask the real question:
Firefox users,
do you want any AI directly built into Firefox, or separated out into extensions?
@duke_of_germany @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard @tante BOTH (2) and (3).
The Mozilla I want is one that would pre-install uBlock Origin. An effective adblocker furthers Mozilla's purported mission of "put[ting] control of the internet back in the hands of the people using it" way more than any LLM nonsense.
-
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 "AI" is too general a term that's been coopted numerous times for marketing. Should the AI kill switch kill Pacman ghost logic in an extension? Block ELIZA? Clearly call it what people mean nowadays: an LLM/gen AI chatbot kill switch.
-
A anderslund@expressional.social shared this topic
-
@firefoxwebdevs Missing the option "Remove all so-called 'AI' elements from Firefox and let those who want them install them as extensions"
But at this point I've already voted that way by uninstalling Firefox from all devices.
Cosigning everything written here: https://www.waterfox.com/blog/no-ai-here-response-to-mozilla/
@NicoleJLeBoeuf @firefoxwebdevs
I believe that @librewolf has the same general attitude to AI bollocks as WaterFox.
Both seem to be good versions of the otherwise very good browser.
-
@firefoxwebdevs The frame of this question is risible.
I am begging you to just make a web browser.
Make it the best browser for the open web. Make it a browser that empowers individuals. Make it a browser that defends users against threats.
Do not make a search engine. Do not make a translation engine. Do not make a webpage summariser. Do not make a front-end for an LLM. Do not make a client-side LLM.
Just. Make. A. Web. Browser.
Please.
@m0rpk @firefoxwebdevs I think that battle is already lost. Sooner or later we will be looking for alternative
-
@StarkRG @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard Firefox only exists because Google subsidize them so they can point to FF as "proof" that Chrome isn't a monopoly. With the new regime in power, that's a dead issue. So Google want FF to push AI adoption now because they've figured out how to monetize it and they don't want precious eyeballs evading their slopware. If Google cut off their "search" payment to FF, Mozilla goes bust and the C-suite lose their jobs. QED.
@cstross Ufrisken ligg i at vevaugo som Firefox, Chrome, Brave og Vivaldi omfamner virknadsflod, og dette gjer at dei er bunden av ein godsleg overflod for å ilivehalda seg.
virknadsflod er til gagn for makten
Om me røyndleg har lyst på eit vevauge som ikkje opptrer i maktens namn, så er me naudd for å nøya oss med mindre.
Vevauget Lagrange som er bunden av Gemini framgangsmåten er ein lækjing i dette spørsmålet.
