After the controversial news shared earlier this week by Mozilla’s new CEO that Firefox will evolve into “a modern AI browser,” the company now revealed it is working on an AI kill switch for the open-source web browser.
On Tuesday, Anthony Enzor-DeMeo was named the new CEO of Mozilla Corporation, the company behind the beloved Firefox web browser used by almost all GNU/Linux distributions as the default browser.
In his message as new CEO, Anthony Enzor-DeMeo stated that Firefox will grow from a browser into a broader ecosystem of trusted software while remaining the company’s anchor, and that Firefox will evolve into a modern AI browser and support a portfolio of new and trusted software additions.
What was not made clear is that Firefox will also ship with an AI kill switch that will let users completely disable all the AI features that are included in Firefox. Mozilla shared this important update earlier today to make it clear to everyone that Firefox will still be a trusted web browser.
Does anyone even talk about what the “AI features” are?
Could I, liked recolor webpages? Automate ublock filters? Detect SEO/AI slop? Create a price/feature table out of a shopping page?
See, this would all be neat like auto translate is neat.
But I’m not really interested in the 7 millionth barebones chatbot UI. I’m not interested in loading a whole freaking LLM to auto name my tabs, or in some cutsie auto navigation agent experiment that still only works like 20% of the time with a 600B LLM, or a shopping chatbot that doesn’t do anything like Amazon/Perplexity.
That’s the weird thing about all this. I’m not against neat features, but “AI!” is not a feature, and everyone is right to assume it will be some spam because that’s what 99% of everything AI is. But it’s like every CEO on Earth has caught the same virus and think a product with “AI” in the name is like a holy grail, regardless of functionality.
Right right. If they had real innovation, they would have defined it clearly as you suggested. But they didn’t, so they don’t. It’s all snake oil, again, because that’s the entire AI industry.
Not buying it. Kill switch will migrate further and further into about:config until it eventually too goes away without notice in an update six months from now.
No that’s way too paranoid. Honestly 20 years not 6 months. And by then ladybird will be viable so nbd
Firefox is no longer trusted. Fuck that AI bullshit. We don’t want it, we don’t need it, and they don’t care.
Too late. He’s already shown his true colors.
Everyone has. At least they are small enough to be wary of their user base.
Why not just ship it without any of the AI stuff and give users the option to install and use it instead of bloating the application? This also confirms that the stuff is essentially OPT OUT instead of OPT IN
And also … will the kill switch turn off the AI entirely … or partially? Since the AI system is baked in, will elements of it still operate in the background even if you turn off the switch?
What he wrote doesn’t seem ambiguous on this at all. But we’ll see.
So you agree that it will be baked in and impossible to actually turn off. Yep.
Otherwise, they would have made it an extension, right? If it’s optional, it needs to actually be optional … that’s what am extension is. That’s the whole point of them.
All AI features will also be opt-in. I think there are some grey areas in what ‘opt-in’ means to different people (e.g. is a new toolbar button opt-in?), but the kill switch will absolutely remove all that stuff, and never show it in future. That’s unambiguous.
Sounds like they will be opt in, not opt out
No, go deeper into that mastodon thread.
The dev has a really hinky defention of “opt-in” thats basically “yes we push all this on by default and realize it will be the norm for most of our users because of that, but you technically dont have to interact with it so thats opt-in.”
Somehow, eventually having a buried menu option that “opts out” of AI is also part of how it will be opt-in as well? Its a self serving mess of rationaliztions and doublethink, no matter the claim on the tin.
I mean yeah, that’s a fair point, and the dev said that themselves, that the definition of opt in is ambiguous. The definition they seem to use is that AI won’t run unless you explicitly tell it to, and I think that’s ok. There’ll be a button that you can press to do some AI action and you can hide it using the kill switch.
I do hope the kill switch isn’t hidden behind 5 layers of menus
Thats not ambuguity. AI will be opt out in firefox, which is them abandoning core principles like user choice and privacy.
They can do that, but playing like they aren’t by redefining well established terms in UI/UX is disengenious, and cuts right through the “we will earn your trust back” messaging made by the same dev.
I think it’s quite clear there’s ambiguity (hence this discussion). How would you define opt in? Should a user not even see the button for an opt in feature?
I don’t see why there is a big outrage. Sure I’m not a fan of the AI features and I certainly will disable them but it’s tot like they’re forced upon me. Some people like (want) AI in the browser and good for them, this makes the browser better and easier to use for them. For me, it doesn’t change my experience at all
(Commented this separately on purpose)
Come to think of it, I do enjoy the translation feature in Firefox
The bubble is AI and they want some of that bubble investor money is my guess, so they put optional AI
“On by default unless you run down a setting buried in a menu” is the thinnest type of optional in computing.
That’s fair, but also if you search AI in the settings it shows you all the options
In their defense a very tiny percentage of users even open options and of those an even smaller actually change stuff.
Maybe slighlty different for Firefox as probably more power user use it than other random programs. But basically if something is not enabled by default, it doesn’t exist.
Because they’re counting on people who know nothing about technology using the AI stuff when it’s placed in front of them.
Too late. I switched to librewolf.
Some websites doesn’t work with librewolf like Onshape.com . Is there an easy solution for website like those?
Firefox is been my second/third choose for years.
Same. I’ve been using Firefox as my primary or secondary browser since early 2000’s. No longer.
Thats nice mozilla.
Installed and set up Librewolf yesterday. Absolutely recommend to everyone.
Some websites doesn’t work with librewolf like Onshape.com . Is there an easy solution for website like those?
Have you tried a user agent switcher?
Yes. LibreWolf ships correctly configured, no switches needed.
Is there nobody with sanity left? This has blown up so much the user base clearly does not want it. Focus your efforts elsewhere. You gain marketshare by putting users first. Also fuck markets.
If all Firefox users donated to Mozilla it could work. Alas, we don’t.
I probably would, if the organizational structure and its spending focus(es) weren’t so fucked up. They have been spending insane amounts of money on bullshit like AI instead of core browser features, and their leadership has extremely high wages for something that should be a non-profit open source organization. And it has been like this for years at this point.
Their CEO makes more than I think CEOs should earn in general, but the rest of their executives earn relatively normal to low salaries for their roles and the sector.
Non-profit doesn’t mean everyone works for free.
Well to be fair they only had that or onlyfans to get paid to sit there playing with themselves.
You can donate to Mozilla, you cannot donate to Firefox.
I would donate if I ever had spare money but I never do.
$5?
Make fun of the poors yeah?
Then let’s
How? Where? I’ll donate, take my money, and ads a voting system where paying users can vote for the next features
https://www.mozillafoundation.org/en/donate/ if you’re actually interested in donating.
A very vocal portion of the user base, but we don’t actually know what absolute portion cares. I’m personally unlikely to use possible AI features outside translation, but Mozilla has generally done enough that I don’t feel particularly worried they’re going to mess with my privacy or force me to use a feature I don’t want.
They could do a survey amongst Firefox users about what they want.
But if the result is anti-AI they can’t claim anymore that they weren’t aware of their users opinions.
The issue is that there aren’t many of us Firefox users left, so asking us while FF wants to get NEW users to expand the market share (which is badly needed, so they do not lose their seat at the table regarding web standards, and to make them less dependent on googles payments) is not helpful at all.
As long as i can switch it off with one click, i couldn’t care less and will continue using FF, but as you can see many existing users will bitch and moan even if it’s just one click.
so asking us while FF wants to get NEW users
This is a balancing act and Mozilla behaves like an elefant in a porcelain shop right now. Worst case they loose their current users without attracting new ones.
existing users will bitch and moan even if it’s just one click
I’m one of them. Why not make it one click for people who want it instead?
Worst case they loose their current users without attracting new ones.
And where to?
Ladybird, Servo and Floorp are all not useable as a daily driver and will take years to get there (and btw, the ladybird guy is a major shithead and last i heard of Servo was that they were going to cater to the embedded market, not a full blown browser).
Firefox forks can do what they want, even switch off the AI button, but i’d still say they help keeping the browser engine itself afloat, because they still depend on Firefox - there’s not one fork with enough dev staff to keep up. That leaves us with chromium based browsers and safari. I’d say the commitment to the current userbase to make the changes optional is good enough to keep most of them.
I ’m one of them. Why not make it one click for people who want it instead?
I’d put current Firefox users much more in the department of “able to find the settings” than the vast majority of users. The majority wants something that works with everything they throw at it out of the box without rummaging through settings.
And where to?
If both noteworthy browser engines are made by companies who make decisions against their user’s interest I might as well switch to the one with higher development budget.
The majority wants something that works with everything they throw at it out of the box without rummaging through settings.
And where does AI come into play here? It’s not like a browser without AI doesn’t work.
At least Firefox isn’t an extension of the worlds largest ad company, no amount of dev budget can fix that.
Context aware search, summarizing in side view or importing an agent directly from a repository into your browser are things that come to mind without much thinking, and i am not a developer.
We need valve but for browsers.
Ladybird I follow since it’s an entirely new browser engine and can help restore a little democracy to the web, but why Floorp? I’m looking through its website and it seems to be a more customizable Firefox, which is nice, but doesn’t seem particularly revolutionary (and forks of Chromium/Firefox are kinda a dime a dozen).
Floorp misses the mark for me. Waterfox and librewolf seem to be a better fit for most people.
Always celebrate more options, though. I hope ladybird does well and doesn’t shit the bed the moment it gets some market share.
These days I’m tempted to just write myself a super minimal front end to Servo though because I don’t want 90% of what modern browsers ship with.
No idea why Floorp has garnered attention but other seem interested.
Funny. That’s exactly what Mozilla used to be.
It seems to me that the issue is how we consume the web versus games: We’re used to pay to play but not to browse the internet. Valve is able to make money without relying on affiliations or donations.
They must’ve noticed people fleeing in droves to librewolf or floorp.
Floorp
And they wanted to accelerate it?
I hope people don’t buy the story that the kill switch was part of the plan all along.
This is clearly the result of mozilla scrambling for a compromise after the backlash to their recent announcement.
As far as i know, in the original interview that started this whole drama the new ceo mentioned that it would always be a choice and people would have the choice to opt out. All of this AI browser drama has been blown out of proportion by a very loud minority.
“Opt-out” means on by default. Installed alongside the parts that you use, and quite possibly embedded into the thing so thoroughly that the next automatic update or feature iteration will either switch it back on or remove the option entirely.
LLMs are controversial to say the least, and accomodation to those who are repulsed by their inclusion should not take the form of an option they need to jump through hoops to turn off.
Leaving them in but saying they can be turned off is like shipping pornography in your video game with a filter someone in the options you can enable. It’s a pain in the ass at the least, and means that anyone making a moral or ethical stand against its inclusion has no choice but to go elsewhere.
very loud minority.
Please share your data that lead you to that conclusion.
I have a better kill switch: Waterfox and LibreWolf. Don’t have to worry about of that nonsense right out the gate.
Some websites doesn’t work with librewolf like Onshape.com . Is there an easy solution for website like those?
👍
Zen has also committed to not include AI features
I jumped to LibreWolf this week. Really like it, it looks acat and feels the same. But I trust it more. Been a FF user for over 10 years.
I’m considering it. The only reason being to get away from a corporate stance that could shift at any time, even though I don’t think it’s quite there yet.
However on issue of Firefox going the way of all the other browsers, I swear that the last update or so of Firefox asked me if I wanted to enable AI, I said no, and it told me how to turn it on if I ever wanted it. Much like when I first used DuckDuckGo. So wasn’t that opt in? Did it change how it prompts a new user?
It’s worth a try. It’s only a few min to do. My extensions seem to be all from Mozilla and working fine.
The only real difference is it has a bit of a classic FF apathetic and seems to highlight who’s abusing privacy. I can click that off but I like it.
I also use DDG but that’s gone downhill on its results in the last few years.
But that’s just saying that instead of using Firefox and not turning on the feature, you’ll use a less maintained version of Firefox where they didn’t enable the feature. I don’t feel like those projects have much value add in the privacy spectrum compared to Firefox, particularly when one of them was owned by an advertising company, and neither of them actually has the resources to maintain or operate a browser in isolation, which is a major concern regarding security and privacy both.
While I can’t speak for LibreWolf, I can tell you that Waterfox is based on the latest ESR builds and is extremely well maintained to the point of evolving into its own thing entirely. It’s one of the oldest forks I’ve known. The fact it’s been around this long should speak volumes. That being said, most modern forks that I’ve tried tend to base themselves on ESR as well and evolved in a similar way.
In their defense, Mozilla doesn’t have their own source of income, they heavily depend on search sponsorships. Jumping onto the AI train is one way to keep afloat for now
How does AI actually improve their financial position? Who pays them to use AI?
Probably whoever becomes the default provider for this new function. Like Google pays to be the default search provider.
The technical information is scarce but I very much doubt Mozilla is going to train and deploy their own model. It’s more likely you will get a free tier access to one of the popular commercial offerings - Gemini, ChatGPT, Anthropic … whoever pays for it.
Right now browser usage patterns are shifting because people are trying new things. Most of those new things are AI integration. If those new things prove popular or have staying power remains to be seen.
Firefox , in my estimation, is looking to leverage their existing reputation for privacy focus while also adding new technologies that people seem at least interested in trying.
A larger user base means that people will pay more for ads, which if they maintain their user control and privacy standards users are less likely to disable on the default landing screen.
It’s why they keep getting flac for working on privacy preserving advertising technology: they want you to use Firefox because they don’t stop you from disabling the bullshit, and they hope to do the bullshit in a way that makes you not mind leaving it on.
All the AI stuff was mentioned in the same context as discussion about how they need to seek money in ways that aren’t simply being paid by Google.
Nobody. That’s the answer. Absolutely nobody does. They’re doing this shit of their free will.
But Lemmy told me Firefox was over and AI would be forced upon every single text field, and that we should migrate to Chrome forks maintained by 15 year old children!
That part of Lemmy didn’t hear of Librewolf, Floorp or Waterfox apparently. Btw, i was rightfully shitting on Firefox for this (i still do). The new ceo “ideas” wasn’t very agreeable, and i’ll totally drop the old Fox the exact second they touch the Adblocks.
Floorp
didn’t hear of Librewolf, Floorp or Waterfox apparently
So projects that depend entirely on Firefox, and therefore the idea of boycotting Firefox and making it economically not viable means also killing these forks… Hmm… I feel like there might be a logical flaw somewhere here…
That’ what i mean. Using a clean derivative is better that going back to chromium.
He’s saying if enough people stop using firefox the base for all of those other ones (Firefox) won’t be able to be maintained and therefore will kill all the forks that you mentioned.
How do you put a kill switch on the radioactive asbestos being deliberately whisked into the code base?
Anyone who frames LLMs as AI is complicit in the grift, and their opinions should be summarily ignored and ridiculed.
Well that’s better than nothing but I will continue to use forks that completely strip that shit out. It would be better if they just didn’t include it at all or it was off by default and could be enabled. But I know they got to get their money somehow but I digress
