@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.

@barubary @davidgerard @jaffathecake @duke_of_germany @firefoxwebdevs You could always report the user as a persistent troll misrepresenting who they are.

@budududuroiu @mike @firefoxwebdevs It's not about being able to turn off the features. It's about having to download and store them and give implicit permission to have them on your computer in the first place.

It's like someone saying "Hey, I mailed you that stack of books you want, but people told us they wanted more pictures so we made illegal copies of artworks and bound them in. The art pages come with preset double-sided tape on them so it's easy for you to stick the art pages together and not see them if you don't want. No harm, no foul, right?"

The harm isn't in the viewing (or not viewing), it's in the implied consent to the unethical behavior that made the viewing possible, and in asking customers to fix it after the fact.

@jaffathecake @barubary just to clarify, with "user research" do you mean the polls on bsky/fedi/etc, or were there other surveys conducted in places?

(asking because I don't think I saw any such surveys anywhere, and I'm _moderately_ on top of seeing this stuff go around)

@froztbyte I don't believe they were social media surveys, as the goal was to get a representative sample among locations and types of user. But it isn't information I currently have, and maybe won't be able to share.

@robotistry @budududuroiu @mike fwiw https://mastodon.social/@firefoxwebdevs/116006634077716055

@jaffathecake if it's not information you currently have, doesn't that leave the possibility that they might in fact reflect a negative or inconclusive outcome in polling?

I mean, I get that you don't have eyes on this yourself and that you can't speak to it, I'm not putting this on *you*. but do you see how it could be possible that, without these results being open, someone could be going full steam ahead _in spite_ of the findings?

@firefoxwebdevs @robotistry @budududuroiu TBF, client-side translation is pretty cool, and generally better than sending the text to Google or similar.

@firefoxwebdevs @alextecplayz For the time being, you can see those models in about:addons, under the “On-device AI” page, and there will be a “Firefox uses this to sugest tabs” description, like this.

@froztbyte I suppose that's literally true. But, I also think a mountain is made out of the molehill that is AI in Firefox. The vast majority of the dev time is on other things.

To be clear, I'm not someone who has personally found AI generally useful in browsers (aside from a couple of one-off automations), but my feelings aren't strong enough to deny those features to others.

@jaffathecake @duke_of_germany @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard forget AI, at this point Jake is putting me off Firefox

@sotolf @firefoxwebdevs the "don't care" market means people love AI, of course!

And if that forms part of Mozilla's measurements, they're absolute idiots.

Better option: release a "No AI" build - https://notnull.space/@paul/statuses/01KGHVQ05QJFHPMBDJT16KCESZ

@duke_of_germany @jonny @jaffathecake @firefoxwebdevs @davidgerard since 20 years ago I've been switching my friends, family, and coworkers and classmates to firefox. Its depressing, but I no longer recommend firefox. Let's ditch the AI please.

@paul well, if we created binaries for all combinations of the current 5 features, that would be 32x-ing the number of binaries per build. And I think people would still be unhappy depending on which was seen as the default.

The AI Controls give an easy way to have that granular control, and you don't need to switch binary just to try a feature.

@sotolf
haaaa. well it is true.

@firefoxwebdevs