this post was submitted on 23 May 2024
703 points (99.0% liked)

Technology

59414 readers
3731 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 138 points 5 months ago (5 children)

tab grouping

Sure, okay.

vertical tabs

To each their own.

profile management

Whatever, it's fine.

and local AI features

HOLLUP

[–] [email protected] 181 points 5 months ago (1 children)

We’re looking at how we can use local, on-device AI models -- i.e., more private -- to enhance your browsing experience further. One feature we’re starting with next quarter is AI-generated alt-text for images inserted into PDFs, which makes it more accessible to visually impaired users and people with learning disabilities. The alt text is then processed on your device and saved locally instead of cloud services, ensuring that enhancements like these are done with your privacy in mind.

IMO if everything’s going to have AI ham fisted into it, this is probably the least shitty way to do so. With Firefox being open source, the code can also be audited to ensure they’re actually keeping their word about it being local-only.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 5 months ago (5 children)

Don't you need specific CPUs for these AI features? If so, how is this going to work on the machines that don't support it?

[–] [email protected] 60 points 5 months ago

Nope, they can use your NPU, GPU or CPU whatever you have.. the performance will vary quite a bit though. Also, the larger the model the more memory it needs to run well.

[–] [email protected] 43 points 5 months ago (1 children)

With it being local it’s probably a small and limited model. I took a couple courses on machine learning years ago (before it got rebranded as “AI”), and you’d be surprised at how well a basic image recognition model can run on the lowest-spec macbook from 2012.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Tbh the inversion of typical intuition that is LLMs taking orders of magnitudes more memory than computer vision can mess people unfamiliar up on estimates of the hardware required

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 22 points 5 months ago

You only need lots of precessing power to train the models. Using the models can be done on regular hardware.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 92 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

While I dislike corporate ai as much as the next guy I am quite interested in open source, local models. If i can run it on my machine, with the absolute certainty that it is my llm, working for my benefit, that's pretty cool. And not feeding every miniscule detail about me to corporate.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I mean that's that thing. They're kind of black boxes so it can be hard to tell what they're doing, but yeah local hardware is the absolute minimum. I guess places like huggingface are at least working to try and apply some sort of standard measures to the LLM space at least through testing...

[–] [email protected] 25 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I mean, as long as you can tell it's not opening up any network connections (e.g. by not giving the process network permission), it's fine.

'Course, being built into a web browser might not make that easy...

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 5 months ago

Focus on "local". Mozilla is working since a while on that.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 months ago

I tried one of their test builds. Seems like the AI part just means the browser can integrate with llamafile (Mozilla’s open source solution for running open source llm’s with just one file on any platform)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 129 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (5 children)

If you're here because of the AI headline, this is important to read.

We’re looking at how we can use local, on-device AI models -- i.e., more private -- to enhance your browsing experience further. One feature we’re starting with next quarter is AI-generated alt-text for images inserted into PDFs, which makes it more accessible to visually impaired users and people with learning disabilities.

They are implementing AI how it should be. Don't let all the shitty companies blind you to the fact what we call AI has positive sides.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 5 months ago (1 children)

They are implementing AI how it should be.

The term is so overused and abused that I'm not clear what they're even promising. Are they localizing a LLM? Are they providing some kind of very fancy macroing? Are they linking up with ChatGPT somehow or integrating with Co-pilot? There's no way to tell from the verbage.

And that's not even really Mozilla's fault. It's just how the term AI can mean anything from "overhyped javascript" to "multi-billion dollar datacenter full of fake Scarlett Johansson voice patterns".

[–] [email protected] 15 points 5 months ago (4 children)

there are language models that are quite feasible to run locally for easier tasks like this. “local” rules out both ChatGPT and Co-pilot since those models are enormous. AI generally means machine learned neural networks these days, even if a pile of if-else used to pass in the past.

not sure how they’re going to handle low-resource machines, but as far as AI integrations go this one is rather tame

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 107 points 5 months ago (8 children)

People that wanted vertical tabs must be really excited

[–] [email protected] 57 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Anything to fill all that absolute wasted space from every website formatting things to fit phones and not desktops. Ultra wide really sucks ass for a lot of things.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

IMO that's mostly a window-management problem, not an app layout problem. The point of an ultra wide monitor setup (other than flight sims or something) is to be able to view a bunch of different things side-by-side.

Edit: speaking of which, now that we've come almost full-circle from no tab support, to multiple tabs in the same process, to one process per tab, it seems to me that tabs themselves ought to be part of the window decoration, not the app. I mean, they're useful for almost everything you might want to have multiples of (editors, file managers, terminals, etc.) so why force every app maker to implement them over and over again?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Its honestly the only reason i use brave and edge over Firefox. Can fully commit to FF now.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 5 months ago (9 children)

The TreeStyleTab extension for Firefox has added vertical tabs for a decade

[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 months ago (2 children)

The way tree style tabs worked after they broke it was never very good. Floorp is what to use if you wanted side tabs on Firefox.

That said I still went back to Vivaldi after trying to use Floorp because of stupid little ux issues like pinned tabs not being protected from closing, and broken session saving.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 91 points 5 months ago (14 children)

This is what Mozilla should have done a LONG time ago - focussed on browser features, ease of use, compatibility and speed. Make a better browser if you want to win a browser war.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Maybe they should, but focusing on adding new features endlessly is how we ended up with this state of internet browsers. The most complex app running on a desktop are too big, it's basically impossible to create a new one. (Yes you can fork but that's just adding toppings to ice cream). The browser war ends only one way.

If we break up the do-everything application into significant parts then a healthy "war" can exist. Why does a browser need to play video, you already have an app for that.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
[–] [email protected] 50 points 5 months ago (4 children)

One of these things is not like the other

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 44 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (4 children)

I want fewer built-in features, not more of them. All of these things should be extensions, not built into the browser core.

I mean, I'd be perfectly happy for said extensions and more to be shipped by default -- it would be good for Firefox to come "batteries included" even with adblocking and such, and that's most likely the way I would use it. But I just want it to be modular and removable as a matter of principle.

I remember how monolithic Mozilla SeaMonkey got too top-heavy and forced Mozilla to start over more-or-less from scratch with ~~Phoenix~~ ~~Firebird~~ Firefox, and I want it to stick close to those roots so they don't have to do it again.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

They are probably extensions, just like pip, pocket, screenshot upload, languages, search engines, themes, etc.

Shipped by default, handled like extensions internally but not exposed to the user. You see it in the extension*.json files in your profile folder.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 5 months ago (1 children)

In that case, I want them exposed just like user-installed extensions, so it's more obvious how to get rid of them if you want.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 5 months ago (4 children)

We need modular browsers. It is hard for Mozilla to keep the track to the W3C and all the nonstandard stuff that Google, Microsoft and Apple add to their browsers. If those elements were modules, it would be easier for people to collaborate and for Google and Microsoft to be obligated to add support for other browsers.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 38 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Local AI sounds nice. One reason I'm cynical about the current state of AI is because of how many send all your data to another company

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 35 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (3 children)

Profile management

Fucking finally!

The fact that you had to use external applications or manually go to an internal Firefox menu to change from one to another sucked!

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 28 points 5 months ago (14 children)

Tab grouping, nice! Finally back after they removed then years ago..

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 5 months ago (1 children)

"AI", more like A-eyeroll 🙄

[–] [email protected] 25 points 5 months ago (3 children)

There's AI and there's AI. I really like that Firefox has local models for translating content. Them adding AI that describes images for visually impaired people is pretty cool.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Yeah people forget that AI isn't just the garbage generators of late. It's all machine learning based software. There are lots of perfectly valid applications of AI that have been used for decades. The term has just become tainted recently by LLMs.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 5 months ago

Local AI, or also, how AI should be. Actually helpful, instead of a spying and data gathering tool for companies

[–] [email protected] 12 points 5 months ago (8 children)

That's all fine and good but Firefox on Android is currently in a sorry state. No per-site process isolation, buggy, can't keep tabs open, slow, choppy, drains battery. Had to uninstall it on my brand new Galaxy S24+ and my Pixel 6 Pro because it was draining so much battery. When are you going to finally stop ignoring Firefox Android, Mozilla?

[–] [email protected] 30 points 5 months ago

I've been using it for at least a decade now and haven't encountered any of the issues you mention.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 5 months ago (4 children)

I've used it exclusively for a long time and haven't experienced any of this

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 5 months ago (9 children)

slow, choppy, drains battery

Sounds like you don't have an adblocker.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Idk, it seems to work fine on my old, crappy Moto G, and it also seems to work fine so far on my new Pixel 8 (just bought it recently).

Maybe Chrome is a little faster, idk, I don't use it much, but Firefox is completely fine.

Then again, maybe my standards are lower. I just want it to browse the web, and it does that pretty well. The ad-blocker is an absolutely killer feature which is why I don't use Chrome, so maybe I'm willing to put up with worse performance. But it seems plenty smooth to me.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Building back to that 2005 standard feature set.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›