Firefox going AI, to the surprise of nobody

[Potkeny]

As Mozilla moves forward, we will focus on becoming the trusted software company. This is not a slogan. It is a direction that guides how we build and how we grow. It means three things.

First: Every product we build must give people agency in how it works. Privacy, data use, and AI must be clear and understandable. Controls must be simple. AI should always be a choice — something people can easily turn off. People should know why a feature works the way it does and what value they get from it.

Second: our business model must align with trust. We will grow through transparent monetization that people recognize and value.

Third: Firefox will grow from a browser into a broader ecosystem of trusted software. Firefox will remain our anchor. It will evolve into a modern AI browser and support a portfolio of new and trusted software additions.

https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/lea ... o-new-ceo/

They had a chance to remain the "sane", adblocking, non-AI browser for "power users", seems like they will chase the usual crowd instead..

[Mæstro]

I was wondering a few days ago about whether Linux distributions would feel pressured in the next few years, if they have not already, to force versificator technology upon their users, because many distros do what Windoes. The outcome shall most likely depend on who manages to read the writing on the wall before our kingdom is given over to the Mede. What business has a not-for-profit institution got talking about raising money like this, if it is not just Google’s puppet, as it surely is not? Capitalist realism ruins everything again. Presumably, Mozilla’s implementation would be no worse than DuckDuckGo’s, which maintains LLM-free subdomains, but it is the principle that counts. Recent Firefox forks, like Waterfox (which I have readopted as a last resort), are the real browsers to watch here.

Ecosystem has always been a funny word to apply to software. The word conjures pictures of lush rainforests, monkeys and jaguars prancing on trees and whatnot, little to do with software. I am old enough to remember when a set of related applications were a suite: internet, office, security… This was good, standard English, not business jargon. (Likewise, I agree with the FSF in rejecting monetise for exploit.) Firefox has already experimented with auxiliary features, but the current developers have all presumably joined the project too late to know about any of these abortive features.

[Moonchild]

our business model must align with trust. We will grow through transparent monetization that people recognize and value.

He's got some balls saying that. Firefox monetization is anything but transparent.

[Night Wing]

Concerning Firefox, as long as I can turn off the AI "crap", that is fine with me. My concern is with Waterfox since it is my backup browser to Pale Moon. I am wondering what Waterfox is going to do with regards to AI. I am also wondering what Floorp will do as well.

[Gemmaugr]

What they're actually saying: " As we become a (more) privacy-invasive, data-gathering, AI/agentic browser, we will try to make you have dogmatic belief in us when we flail around for any additional revenue stream program/service to support our CEO, top brass, and activism."

In actuality, they're just rewording what they're turning into to sound nice. PR. They're already heavy users of google tech (WebExtensions, WebRTC, WebComponents, Widewine, Safe Browsing, V8 IrregEx Shim, Skia, Geolocation), and having google search as default for that sweet life-sustaining 90%+ of income they get. Their talk of agency also ring hollow when they're known for having installed extensions without users knowledge or approval, as well as being able to uninstall them without notice too. They also really shouldn't talk about agency or trust when they want to silence people and have a dubious duality of wanting donations (giving the air that it's going) to Mozilla Foundation/Firefox, when it actually goes to the Mozilla Corporation. A different beast entirely.

[Kerebron]

He's got some balls saying that.

Of course he has. It's all bollocks.

Concerning Firefox, as long as I can turn off the AI "crap", that is fine with me.

Being able to turn the crap off is not as fine as it sounds. It's still there - thick, smelly crust attached to the hull, slowing the boat down and increasing the risk of flipping over. Optional crap is fine if you can avoid it completely. Like, you know, adding it with an extention, not in the core. Firefox has extentions, right? Ri-... oh, wait...

[Night Wing]

Concerning Firefox, as long as I can turn off the AI "crap", that is fine with me.

Being able to turn the crap off is not as fine as it sounds. It's still there - thick, smelly crust attached to the hull, slowing the boat down and increasing the risk of flipping over.

There is already IA in Firefox. Click on Edit, go to Settings, then go to General . Scroll on down to Tabs and at the bottom of the Tabs, there is this little diddy below and I am quoting it:

"Use AI to suggest tabs and a name for tab groups"

And the small box to the left of the above which I just quoted is "blank" since I unchecked the box. After every new update for Firefox, I go into it's Settings to make sure what I have unchecked is still unchecked.

And then I go through the entire Settings to see if Firefox has added anything else "new" which is checked. If it is something I do not want, I uncheck it.

[Mæstro]

Perhaps it would attract other users to this browser if some official statement were made categorically rejecting any future inclusion of LLM tripe in Pale Moon. There are many people out there looking to avoid this sort of thing who would be happy to read such a declaration on the homepage or among the browser features.

[andyprough]

They had a chance to remain the "sane", adblocking, non-AI browser for "power users"

Firefox hasn't been that for quite a lot of years, at least since Mozilla abandoned xul. The only browsers that description applies to are Pale Moon and Basilisk.

[Gemmaugr]

I forgot to post this link,which shows that Mozilla has invested in AI/LLM since 2022, so it really shouldn't come as a surprise.

https://www.soeren-hentzschel.at/mozilla-invests/en/

[Mæstro]

Fatalism about new technology is endemic, even among those who would rather not use it. We have witnessed this again and again in so many fields that it would be pointless even to name examples. Understanding that this is what most people really believe explains a lot, in the same way it does to know most people reject online anonymity in principle. The degree to which these opinions are manufactured by those who stand to gain from them (after Chomsky) is another matter, one even more opaque to study, but whatever its origins, we are fighting the fact that these browsers enjoy mass favour (US and UK figures).

[Moonchild]

Mozilla’s new CEO is doubling down on an AI future for Firefox

Anthony Enzor-DeMeo says he thinks there’s room for another browser, even an AI browser — as long as you can trust it.
...
At some point, though, Enzor-DeMeo will have to tend to Mozilla’s own business. “I do think we need revenue diversification away from Google,” he says, “but I don’t necessarily believe we need revenue diversification away from the browser.” It seems he thinks a combination of subscription revenue, advertising, and maybe a few search and AI placement deals can get that done. He’s also bullish that things like built-in VPN and a privacy service called Monitor can get more people to pay for their browser. He says he could begin to block ad blockers in Firefox and estimates that’d bring in another $150 million, but he doesn’t want to do that. It feels off-mission.

I'll defer to a very apt social media response I saw quoted to this:

2f22dfc4-40d7-4d3e-a5cc-05d4ea2f458c.jpg

(Yes that is much older but super applicable)

[Night Wing]

If Enzor-DeMeo thinks making Firefox subscription based, then many people will not use Firefox. And I imagine with the majority of linux distros having Firefox as their installed browser in their distro, I think they will drop Firefox immediately.

If that happens, I think many distros will take a look at Waterfox or Floorp as a substitute for Firefox. I do not think linux Chrome will make much headway in distros because Chrome has a terrible reputation for their extensions store.

Lots of extensions for Chrome contain malware and Chrome does nothing about removing malware because of their huge market share. Granted, those malware laden extensions are targeted at "Windows" Chrome. Malware used for Windows Chrome does not work in Linux Chrome.

I think Enzor-DeMeo needs a "reality check" and take a refresher course in "common sense" because he does not have any.

[andyprough]

I'll defer to a very apt social media response I saw quoted to this:

(Yes that is much older but super applicable)

I know I'm violating Meme Rule #1 (never argue with a meme - it's just a meme, not to be taken literally). However, a good argument could be made that Firefox was the FIRST browser to harm its own genitalia with carpentry tools. What other browser ruled the world and then drove away the vast majority of its own loyal fans by abandoning everything good and useful? And that was many years ago. So I would say that particular meme misses the mark, and is not super applicable.

[Moonchild]

So I would say that particular meme misses the mark, and is not super applicable.

Well you have a point. I guess they did it first, then are now setting up to doing it again only much worse? XD

[andyprough]

Well you have a point. I guess they did it first, then are now setting up to doing it again only much worse? XD

I wonder if it really matters at this point? I have very limited understanding of Firefox's code and design other than what you have written regarding the differences between Pale Moon and Firefox. But it seems from that data that you've provided that Firefox is more of a blink-light browser, borrowing heavily in their design and code from chromium. Firefox's use of Manifest v2 and Mozilla's comments about trying not to be pulled into using Manifest v3 are very telling in that regard. So if this is true that Firefox borrows so much code and design from Google that it is largely a chromium fork at this point, then the speed at which Firefox continues to morph into being just another chromium browser shouldn't really matter. Whether it integrates AI or starts charging a subscription or limiting ad blocking is really just window dressing.

I also look at how Brandon Eig started Brave as a Firefox fork, and then quickly abandoned that and changed it to a chromium base. Eig should have been intimately familiar with Firefox's code and design, and if he decided it was a dead end and the only way to have a profitable "privacy" browser was by going straight to chromium, that should tell us a great deal about the future prospects for Firefox.

[Moonchild]

Firefox is more of a blink-light browser, borrowing heavily in their design and code from chromium.

Not even that. By shoving Chrome-isms into Firefox it regularly becomes heavier than Blink. And then there's the Rust-obsession.
But as to what all has been borrowed/imported (almost) verbatim from Chromium... it's just too much. regex parser from V8, Skia (and its bad font rendering), WebExtensions, IPC/e10s, WebRTC, EME/DRM, i can go on...

[andyprough]

Not even that. By shoving Chrome-isms into Firefox it regularly becomes heavier than Blink. And then there's the Rust-obsession.
But as to what all has been borrowed/imported (almost) verbatim from Chromium... it's just too much. regex parser from V8, Skia (and its bad font rendering), WebExtensions, IPC/e10s, WebRTC, EME/DRM, i can go on...

Then wouldn't Firefox users actually be better off if Mozilla dropped the pretense of independence and just switched to being a 100% chromium fork? Sounds like half-assing it the way you describe probably causes more problems than any benefits that it confers.

[Moonchild]

Then wouldn't Firefox users actually be better off if Mozilla dropped the pretense of independence and just switched to being a 100% chromium fork?

The users probably would be, but Mozilla isn't about the users anymore. If they do that then they basically remove the reason for Firefox users, and for Mozilla to exist.
Also, I don't think Google would be happy with Mozilla dropping away because it would make it harder to get the "2 required votes" for new draft pushing.

[andyprough]

The users probably would be, but Mozilla isn't about the users anymore. If they do that then they basically remove the reason for Firefox users, and for Mozilla to exist.
Also, I don't think Google would be happy with Mozilla dropping away because it would make it harder to get the "2 required votes" for new draft pushing.

Brandon Eig is in a good spot now. He's got more users, he's got a browser that works better than Firefox on mobile, he doesn't have the technology handicaps that Mozilla gave itself by half-assing their chromium transition all these years, and he's got a self-sufficient company that doesn't need anything but free code from Google. Plus, Brave has basically built uBlock into the browser, so the manifest v2/v3 issue doesn't really matter to them.

He's basically built a solid business by stealing Firefox's core audience by marketing them a "privacy" chromium-fork.

Of course, at the same time he's inherited all the technical problems and CVE's and zero-day exploits associated with chromium, which are legion. So it's not without its drawbacks.

A smart werewolf such as yourself could make a killing by spitting out a better privacy chromium-fork. Pale Chrome anyone?