@firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.social

Not quite

The point is that permission prompts are shown when a permission is required to fulfill a user request.

To create a tab group in #Firefox you do not need #AI, so such popup-wide, easy to mis-click, button is a gratuitous waste of user attention. It's just an #ads of a feature that you want people to use and get used to.

As for this being #privacy preserving: where are the models downloaded from? Is it a #CDN that could identify otherwise logged users by their IP and thus learning about the fact they use such model? And how often Firefox will chech for model updates?

@jaffathecake @barubary “Not able to action” is quite load bearing

I offer to you: you could’ve made another poll, such as the one that outperformed yours. And then you could have taken those values and said in a meeting “hey, it kinda seems none of our users want this”

So I want to ask: are you under a directive that explicitly told you not to do that? Or perhaps under some implicit kind of situation (e.g. “I know $manager won’t listen”) which made you not even consider that?

@barubary your "this is disgusting" point was in reply to me challenging someone on sneaking untrue accusations into their longer posts. That sneaky behaviour is what I was referring to when I said "I do not let people get away with that".

I did give you the benefit of the doubt with the "if". I now know you're referring to something else.

Yes, there was a tangent, but if people don't want me to pick up on deliberate false accusations in their messages, I suggest they not make them.

@firefoxwebdevs oki good

I'd love if this stuff is either configurable via about:config or policies, since I'm able to generate those via nix but im not able access the normal settings which caused me quite some long nights of cursing and debugging in the past

@jaffathecake

your "this is disgusting" point was in reply to me challenging someone on sneaking untrue accusations into their longer posts

No. This is a direct lie.

@froztbyte @barubary

> are you under a directive that explicitly told you not to do that?

No.

> Or perhaps under some implicit kind of situation (e.g. “I know $manager won’t listen”) which made you not even consider that?

No, but a poll that gives me the evidence to say "hey, you know that place that has a strong representation of people who don't like AI? They don't like AI." did not seem like a good use of my time.

@barubary it was a reply to this post https://mastodon.social/@jaffathecake/116006262879508507. It seems reasonable to assume that this is what you were referring to by "this". But if you're saying otherwise, okay.

@duke_of_germany
just to confirm: i've used Firefox almost since it was released, and been the person who pushes it on people i know.

i've stopped using it, 100% caused by the odd priorities at Mozilla, with AI as the final drop.

not saying this in order to convince them to change direction. i'm gone and i no longer care. it's just a factual contribution to the discussion.

@jonny @jaffathecake @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard

@jaffathecake @barubary If the "untrue accusation" you're referring to is the (within quote-marks, but not a quite, instead a restating and possible hyperbole of your position) "anti-AI crazies", then you most definitely need to take a (virtual step back) and consider that it most probably was not ever intended to be a quote, @duke_of_germany can probably confirm, but having spent a fair while reading text written by human beings, I read the quote marks as indicating not a quote, but a somewhat hyperbolic summary.

Without the quotes, I probably would have interpreted it as an actual quote.

@froztbyte @barubary whereas, I'd seen mocks where you couldn't block AI, whist enabling specific features like translation. I felt this was a major missing use-case, so I creating a poll somewhere that is well represented by people who'd want to use such AI controls.

It's really that straight forward.

@schrottkatze I guess try the setting, and see what changes in the profile.

@mike @firefoxwebdevs This is precisely where I get confused.

The web is an enormously large sea of connected dynamic content.

Why does the interface to that sea of content need to provide AI? Shouldn't the user use the interface to -find- AI in the sea of content?

For example, instead of the browser providing translation services, people who want translation services can go to their content page of choice to obtain them.

Make "default translator" a setting and let the user choose where to get it.

People who want AI-generated slop can go to their AI-generating slop provider of choice.

Why is it necessary to put it in the interface instead of leaving it in the sea?

This feels like Netscape Navigator "we must have an integrated email client" all over again.

@davidgerard @jaffathecake @duke_of_germany @firefoxwebdevs Oh, I see: "Developer relations lead" at Mozilla (and previously "developer advocate" at Google). No wonder he's putting "developer of sorts" in all his profiles/blurbs/blogs.

@giacomo I'll ask about the download location & update checking. I don't know off the top of my head.

But needless to say this is more privacy preserving than browsers that perform translation by sending the text off-device.

@jaffathecake @barubary okay so if the (for lack of a better term) problem is that gathering data from the fedi might be biased, what about shipping a survey and linking it in update notes?

Firefox 148, pop it into the release notes. "hey, we've done this update. also, we want to know whether you want us to work on this stuff". you'll get answers from a fairly solid bit of your userbase. it'd be quite interesting to see those numbers, don't you think?

@vatine @barubary @duke_of_germany even ignoring the quotes…

> Stop portraying Mastodon users as the anti-AI crazies.

Is pretty clearly accusing me of portraying people as anti-AI crazies. This is untrue, and feels like a deliberate attempt to put words in my mouth.

@jaffathecake @barubary @duke_of_germany

I will posit that 'anti-AI crazies' is a succinct (and slightly exaggerated) summary of (and this is a direct quote) "I'm sure you're aware that Mastodon has a high representation of folks who don't like AI, so presenting evidence that Mastodon users don't like AI is kinda… well… not really useful."

Just... not so wordy.

So, if that is indeed what you are referring to, again, please take a few virtual steps back, take a deep breath, and consider that maybe, just maybe, you overreacted.

@froztbyte @barubary user research has been carried out, so repeating it doesn't seem necessary at this stage. I've been asking if there are details I can share publicly, but I haven't heard back.

@jaffathecake No.

"This is disgusting" were only the first three words of my reply. You can't just ignore the other 96% of the message that explain what exactly it is I found disgusting and decide it is "reasonable to assume" whatever.

Also: That post is not you "challenging someone on sneaking untrue accusations into their longer posts". Which is another thing I mentioned in my first reply. And which you ignored (again).

@vatine @barubary @duke_of_germany if you feel that way, let me be clear: I do not think people who dislike AI are crazy.

If I did, I'm not sure why I'd go to this extent to gather and represent their views in order to change direction of a particular feature.

I don't think it's unreasonable to object to the accusation that I think people are "crazy" - that's a pretty strong word, and not one I want people to put in my mouth.

I hear that you feel that's an overreaction. I simply disagree.