I'm not sure if you remember, but site rings were what you used instead of Google. They were useful.
And I've seen some guest books with lots of people at some point in my childhood, but about half a year after that everybody firmly chose in favor of hierarchical boards.
And I don't share that hate for <marquee>, it served the purpose of showing you a long line in a small space, implicitly saying that it's secondary temporary information, a bit like on TV.
And what's wrong with animated GIFs, animation is nice.
It really grinds my gears. Why does my bank insist on installing an app to approve transactions, and why does that app have a huge background video playing every time i open it? It really should consist of an MFA code generator.
The "upvote good, downvote bad" mentality needs to die. As others have said, the arrows are to promote/reduce visibility of content. Whether you agree with the content of the post should be irrelevant.
People have been saying some variant of this at least as far back as Slashdot in the late 90s. Nobody has come up with a viable way to change peoples habits.
Instead of fighting it, what can we do knowing that this is how it works?
New idea I've just come up with, we make it so, before upvoting or downvoting something, you have to press a button, and then wait at least a minute, or, better yet, solve a captcha, and then you don't even have to have accounts anymore and that takes about a minute. The only people upvoting or downvoting will be those who are really reflecting on what it is that they're doing, or the people who are really really committed and pissed off about something. I'm sure the latter won't happen like, ever.
I think maybe that's exactly how people are using it, it's just that most people aren't thinking "oh, well, this post made me a little mad or uncomfy, but I like the content and discussion that it's spurned, so I'll toss it an upvote". I think most people are more inclined to go "THIS POST MADE ME MAD! GRUG DOWNVOTE!". It doesn't even really not make sense, it would be kind of insane to spend like, even just a minute, thinking consciously about every single upvote or downvote you make, it would take a million years for anyone to ever upvote or downvote anything, and a lot of people would just not engage unless they were really committed, which doesn't necessarily map to their level of discernment, but might just instead map to how mad people could get over a given thing. Plenty of people could get mad enough about a thing to sit through a minute long wait period to downvote something.
Been saying the writing is on the wall for their enshittification for months. On lemmy. Every time I end up with 20+ downvotes.
Eat me. Here it comes.
Still using Firefox until it officially sucks, but if you haven't seen it coming you've been willfully ignorant.
I expect a Ubuntu fork packaged with Firefox a la windows 98/IE as a paid OS in the next 5 years to try to undercut Microsoft. Or something. Idk the future.
oh hey it's you! I actually thought about your comments as soon as I saw this headline. I switched from Firefox to brave a few years ago, then recently switched to waterfox as they are again independent of system1 like before. the browser itself removes a lot of unnecessary Mozilla integrations and also reverts the proton UI. maybe forks like this or Librewolf are the future for this browser?
No, I think you're right. (I think people will strip down Firefox and those strip down versions will probably persist to be the ideal browser for years to come)
Unfortunately none.
Developing a rendering engine that can handle css, html, javascript, while also rendering a website in the exact same way as Chrome and Firefox is a huge tasks, and not something a hobby programmer can whack out in a few weeks. Thats the reason why even Microsoft abandoned their own rendering engine, because things did always look and work different in IE.
This is not true. Pale Moon, Ice Weasel, Librewolf....
Developing a rendering engine that can handle css, html, javascript, while also rendering a website in the exact same way as Chrome and Firefox is a huge tasks
It doesn't have to be from scratch. Not even Apple did this with Safari (they based in on KHTML, the rendering engine of KDE's Konqueror.)
librewolf is a firefox fork, anything thats a fork of firefox/chrome is automatically not counted, because it is inherently bulkier than the original (though maybe more secure)
anything thats a fork of firefox/chrome is automatically not counted
Says who?
because it is inherently bulkier
How is "being bulkier" relevant at all? But let's just go down that route and say that a fork does not necessarily end up in a bulkier product. A dev team could decide to fork, then remove unwanted features from the original project; which is what's happening with Librewolf as far as I know (e.g. no Pocket bs.)
Finally, let's remember that both Safari and Chrome have their roots on Konqueror's KHTML rendering engine. By your metric, we should be saying that they don't count either; because they're "(definitely) bulkier forks" of KHTML.
How is “being bulkier” relevant at all? But let’s just go down that route and say that a fork does not necessarily end up in a bulkier product. A dev team could decide to fork, then remove unwanted features from the original project; which is what’s happening with Librewolf as far as I know (e.g. no Pocket bs.)
now you just have a patched together, disjointed, mess of a browser, on top of a second dev team, who now needs to unpatch it together, re patch it together, and then somehow repackage that. It's just hopeless. It's like trying to turn a full size pickup into a small lightweight town car. It's just not going to happen.
Finally, let’s remember that both Safari and Chrome have their roots on Konqueror’s KHTML rendering engine. By your metric, we should be saying that they don’t count either; because they’re “(definitely) bulkier forks” of KHTML.
It's worth noting that when a fork is building on top of something, there is a point where the original roots are no longer present, or no longer significantly present. It's like saying that android is linux. Which doesnt stop the charts from displaying android separately to linux, or chromeos for that matter. Even if it did i don't like the browsers because they're too bulky so it's not like it influences my opinion anyway lol.
now you just have a patched together, disjointed, mess of a browser, on top of a second dev team, who now needs to unpatch it together, re patch it together, and then somehow repackage that. It’s just hopeless. It’s like trying to turn a full size pickup into a small lightweight town car. It’s just not going to happen.
You are assuming way too much. As if Apple and Google did all this with KHTML. Which lead us to:
It’s worth noting that when a fork is building on top of something, there is a point where the original roots are no longer present, or no longer significantly present.
And what's your point by saying this? What does it matter if the roots "disappear," if the product is good enough for competition?
Even if it did i don’t like the browsers because they’re too bulky so it’s not like it influences my opinion anyway lol.
I mean yeah, but it's my opinion on the matter. Even then my original claim is based on the fact of something being an active fork of another browser. Which is still going to line up with my point just fine.
You are assuming way too much. As if Apple and Google did all this with KHTML. Which lead us to:
assuming too much if you think modern applications are programmed/designed well. Ultimately no matter what you do, having a product be around for a decade, let alone multiple of them, is going to incur substantial tech debt, and significant feature creep. There is nothing you can do about this. It happens in EVERY industry. In fact the only thing that helps to prevent this is an almost religious and fervent dedicated to pure minimalism when it comes to what your software is doing. Look at something like DWM for example.
And what’s your point by saying this? What does it matter if the roots “disappear,” if the product is good enough for competition?
My point is that beyond a certain point, a fork is no longer a fork, but more like a competing piece of software. You see this all the time, look at android or chromeos. Technically "based" on linux, but so far gone that almost nobody considers it linux, i only ever see it mentioned in jokes. Something like prism which is a fork of poly, which is a fork of multimc is starting to get to the point where it's more of an alternate piece of software, than a direct fork. It's twice independently maintained, it's feature set is focused differently.
If you need more examples why dont we have a look at a COW filesystem? When you make a change to a file, a fork is created, and that change is then saved on that forked path, so now you have multiple different versions, throughout the chronological history of that fork. If you have auto-deletion enabled for old forks, as you should, at some point you will have "orphaned" forks. Which no longer represent in anyway the original file, but exist as an independently separate instance of that file, in a different state. It's a similar idea, in a different scale, on a different system. There is also a point where it no longer exists as a fork, but as an implementation on top of that original piece of software. How that's defined is a little more complicated though.
It's a little bit philosophical, and semantical, but my point is simple, if your piece of software exists as a fork on top of another piece of software, you don't get to call yourself "faster" or "leaner" or "more optimized" than the original. Your base browser is still a piece of shit, you've taken a bad car, and repainted it, now it looks a little bit better. But it's still a shit car. You turn a beater into a race car by completely stripping it to bits, at a certain point, it's not really a fork anymore. In the same way that putting a body on a different frame isn't the same as the original.
What bulky browsers don’t you like?
it's not like i've literally named them or anything.
assuming too much if you think modern applications are programmed/designed well. Ultimately no matter what you do, having a product be around for a decade, let alone multiple of them, is going to incur substantial tech debt, and significant feature creep.
I still don't understand what this has anything to do with "forking makes a product bulkier," the original claim. At most, what you're saying is that the fork will have its own set of tech debt. But that doesn't make it bulkier by default. Again, a fork of Firefox without the Pocket and "experiments" crap will be lighter.
My point is that beyond a certain point, a fork is no longer a fork, but more like a competing piece of software.
Well, yeah, isn't that the point of forking? I still don't see why a forked browser being "yet another competing browser" is a bad thing. It's the opposite!
if your piece of software exists as a fork on top of another piece of software, you don’t get to call yourself “faster” or “leaner” or “more optimized” than the original.
I completely disagree with you, and I think I know why you think the way you think. It seems like you assume that all forks:
Must always follow the development of the original software. Nope. Not true. It can happen, but not with all forks.
Are inherently bulkier because devs add features on top of it. Which again, it's not true for all forks. Some forks solely exist to remove crap in the original software.
Your base browser is still a piece of shit, you’ve taken a bad car, and repainted it, now it looks a little bit better. But it’s still a shit car.
Man, have you never seen TV shows about mechanics taking shitty cars and making them awesome? Yes, they strip it to pieces, and reassemble said pieces. That's part of engineering practices. It appears that you have a narrow way of seeing how software development works. Devs don't need to take in the whole "shitty project" and be resigned to deal with it. They can take the good parts, and rewrite the bad parts. And that's just one example.
it’s not like i’ve literally named them or anything.
You haven't mentioned any browser that's a fork from Firefox and that is also bulkier than Firefox. Librewolf? Bulkier than Firefox? Really?
I still don’t understand what this has anything to do with “forking makes a product bulkier,” the original claim. At most, what you’re saying is that the fork will have its own set of tech debt. But that doesn’t make it bulkier by default. Again, a fork of Firefox without the Pocket and “experiments” crap will be lighter.
I mean yeah, removing two features removes two features, that still doesn't optimize the entirety of the browser, all of the rest of the browser will behave the exact same with no difference (unless, somehow, those features are actually so badly implemented they actively impede performance) Thats like taking a corolla and removing the entirety of the interior to strip weight, and doing literally nothing else to it. It's just marginally faster now. Handles a little better maybe. Everything else is still stock though.
Well, yeah, isn’t that the point of forking? I still don’t see why a forked browser being “yet another competing browser” is a bad thing. It’s the opposite!
I dont inherently have an issue with forks, i have an issue with stuff like thorium, you forked chrome, that's great, chrome is faster than firefox by most accounts. You made it maybe 40% faster in some instances? Cool. It's still basically chrome though. They describe it as The fastest browser which, if that's true, that's great! It's still basically chrome though. The issue here is that the modern web, and the web browsers designed around it are just massively overbuilt and bloated. We're solving problems that shouldn't exist, and we're adding features that do almost nothing other than cause problems half the time. That's not a good starting point. Unless you completely rip everything out, and rebuild it. Which is inherently not what a fork is.
Man, have you never seen TV shows about mechanics taking shitty cars and making them awesome? Yes, they strip it to pieces, and reassemble said pieces. That’s part of engineering practices. It appears that you have a narrow way of seeing how software development works. Devs don’t need to take in the whole “shitty project” and be resigned to deal with it. They can take the good parts, and rewrite the bad parts. And that’s just one example.
Yes, you wanna know what they do most of the time? Completely strip it down, and then rebuild it. If you have done that with either chromium or firefox, you wouldn't be calling it a fork of chrome/firefox, and everybody would ALL over it. As far as im concerned, any fork of either of those browsers is just removing the most egregious garbage, which is a good thing, but it's still just a bad browser underneath the removed garbage.
Let's compare forks, firefox and librewolf, both browsers i have installed, and both browsers i use. As far as i can tell they're effectively the same thing. Librewolf probably has some cruft removed and some good defaults compared to firefox, but other than that, nothing inherently different.
Lets look at chrome and chromium why dont we, this is actually just the reverse, but wouldn't you be surprised to discover that i dislike chromium equally as much as chrome because they have equal design decisions? It's almost like 90% of the feature base is going to be identical between them or something!
Thorium? I've not used that one yet, i assume it's just chrome, equally annoying to use, but with the slight added benefit of having marginally less time to ponder my bad life choices in between bouts of loading heavily ad bloated sites, and JS infested messes of web design. Plus all the ram that it probably still consumes. Because it's a web browser, why wouldn't it.
I don't even where to start, but let's just say that I now see where you're coming from. You seem to have an issue with this Thorium browser, then project your perspective over other projects that are also forks. Just because one implementation sucks doesn't mean they all do.
And we have different ideas of software engineering. To you, features are just the things that the user can interact with. When you say things like "that's like someone stripping the interior of a Corolla and doing nothing else." Except that I was thinking, precisely, of working on the whole car, including tweaking the engine, the electrical system, the fuel pump, etc. Sounds like a lot of work? Maybe. But it's better than building a car from scratch.
including tweaking the engine, the electrical system, the fuel pump, etc. Sounds like a lot of work? Maybe. But it’s better than building a car from scratch.
that would be more of a rebuild than a fork. If your end product is more similar to the OEM car than it is to the end product. It's more like a fork. If the car is more akin to a custom built racer, than the OEM, it's a rebuild.
There are plenty of browsers. Dillo, NetSurf, surf, w3m, Lynx, Links, Via, Midori, Pale Moon although it's based on a fork of Gecko, Tunnel, qutebrowser. And there are even options for a search engine, although the only one worth considering that isn't just a layer on top of other search engines is Kagi which costs $10 a month, and I wouldn't exactly call it minimalist.
The problem is that no browser can allow you to escape the horror that is web standards & practices that have been developed over decades and are almost unchangeable, without sacrificing basic web functionality and just making it a worse experience than it needs to be at least. The fact is that practically the entire web is reliant on JavaScript, on top of HTML and CSS which take a lot more resources to utilize/display than it looks, meaning 3 interpreters constantly running that must be sandboxed to each tab you have open with a lot of overhead to manage security.
In an ideal world we'd all just be using provably-safe high-performance compiled WASM-but-stronger (from functional languages or more likely Rust or something less boiler-platey but similar), without having such a complex and fucked dependency situation*, where we wouldn't need to sandbox interpreted languages and slaughter performance. Of course, in an ideal world, we also wouldn't have to be concerned about aggressive tracking, ads, clickbait, SEO abuse, scams, or even malware, so there's not much use in imagining a reality where we actually have quality web browsing.
The actual answer to using the web without the fucked-ness of browsers is to not use a web browser at all for sites you use frequently. Use stuff like this instead.
*seriously, you can write the most basic website with JavaScript and it'll probably rely on tens of thousands of expressions of code which realistically should just be expressable in like a small page or two, you do webdev and you'll probably accidentally be implicitly committing a sacrifice to some Aztec God in order to check if a number is even or odd
Also just imagine if all of web dev was just ML/Scala/Rust/Swift/Erlang without compiling to JavaScript 🤤 That is the definition of a perfect universe
The problem is that no browser can allow you to escape the horror that is web standards & practices that have been developed over decades [...] practically the entire web is reliant on JavaScript, [...]
I've been saying it for a while: continuing to play catch is a losing move for Mozilla or for any independent browser maker.
The real move, is to switch to or at least integrate an alternate internet, something that uses a protocol that is simpler and more limited by design - just get rid of Javascript (or of "remote execution", really) and you instantly get a much leaner, much securer internet design.
I've heard pretty good things about the Gemini protocol, but IMHO they went too far too extremist into the "text internet" philosophy, and as a result is a raw downgrade from Gopher. Gopher could actually be a good option.
I'll definitely have to check out a few of those browsers at some point. It's kind of insane how much tech debt we've accrued over the years.
I think honestly we just need to start waning off half the shit we support. Minimize the amount of support required, and somehow manage to provide a smaller attack window so that way we can stop writing protections for problems that honestly shouldn't even exist to begin with. Bonus points to microsoft for creating security certs that don't do their jobs because hahafunneemalware.exe is signed by fucking oracle of all people, and i guess we should just blindly execute that file because it says it's trustworthy!
Though it would be interesting to have a sort of "web browser" which is actually just an application based on plugins for different frontends, for stuff like yewtube, we do only use a handful of sites from time to time. Plus maybe a basic web fronted for stuff that isn't JS because honestly who wants it anyway.
i literally dont open the steam client anymore, that's how bad it is, it regularly consumes an ENTIRE gigabyte of ram doing literally nothing in the background, the UI is buggy, messy, and just generally hard to navigate. It's also just not a very good platform, steam doesn't have a particularly good linux release binary.
"Doing nothing" is probably downloading an update. There's also a difference between reserved RAM and actually used one.
For example .NET applications grab RAM when they need it, but they don't just free it afterwards if not necessary (Like it needs 1 GB, uses that, but when the work is done your task manager keeps showing 1 GB). This helps performance, if the application needs RAM again a short time later it's already reserved and ready to go.
The whole behavior changes when Windows is low on free RAM, then applications are forced to free up their reserved RAM so you don't start swapping too much.
Overall this means: The more RAM your system has the higher the perceived RAM usage of your system. Unused RAM is wasted RAM and it's easy to free up some if you actually hit the limit. As long as your RAM is not full applications will happily use more and hold onto it to be more responsive.
everybody says this in response to my statement. Steam is doing NOTHING. I've checked, it's not downloading an update, it's not pre compiling shaders, it's not caching them, it's not doing ANYTHING. I don't know if people just don't understand how obscene this is, or think im just wrong.
Heroic, a launcher for both epic games, and GOG. idles similarly to steam uses a bit less ram though, launches multiple times faster, and is much more usable. And this is ANOTHER web app.
I use linux, it reports as used ram, not cached ram. Again, im not wrong. I understand the concept of caching ram, i understand the concept of actively used ram, this is not cached ram. That's also not a very complete explanation of ram caching, ram caching helps in the event that you use that same information, that was already cached. For example, you open a game, or a project, and then close it, it's pretty likely that some of that will be cached, so that way when you open it again, it launches quicker (particularly if you open and close it multiple times)
again i use linux, i literally hand formatted my swap partition, i understand how this works. Also generally, how swapping works, is that it actually swaps cached ram into swap, and only upon swap being filled or almost full, does it actually start to clear cached ram. This may not be the default behavior on windows though, since solidstate drives handle different these days. But this is the default on linux (configurable obviously)
The last tidbit is not quite true, it's true to a point, your system will idle at a higher memory usage, the fundamental problem here is different, actually unused ram is wasted ram, having too much ram, does actually just waste ram. (though im sure linux would absolutely love to use it for cache) Caching everything is an obscene proposition, considering that most people don't have a lot of ram. Chances are, if you have 16 gb of ram, and upgrade to 32, you will see a bump in max used ram, and overtime cached ram. However when we upgrade from 32 to 64 in this same scenario, you probably won't notice a change at all, except for the outliers in the data. Though i suppose you might cache more things, but at that point it really doesn't matter tbh.
It's compounded by applications being heavily bloated and stupidly non performant, i would argue it matters more to have more efficient usage of ram application wise, than it would be to have better ram management OS wise. This should be fairly simple to understand why. An application using 1GB of memory, when in reality it should be capable of using as little as 250MB for instance, is the single worst form of wasted memory you can possibly create, because that memory CANNOT be used for anything else. Period, until the application is no longer running.
That said, again to reiterate my original point here, steam on idle, closed, in the background, not in the foreground, no updates, no game updates, etc... Consumes an entire gigabyte of ram. Why? Because the web front end runs at ALL times, for some reason. Steam is running an entirely separate web browser installation, 24/7 because, why not i guess? Fun fact, you used to be able to disable it under linux, and steam ram usage would drop to under 200MB.
Here's another funny pain point of ram caching, when dedicated applications like discord, and steam, start using web backends, you compound this with software bloat, they all use a web backend, and instead of running on a single web browser like all of your tabs, they now run in THREE separate web browsers, thats THREE times the idle wasted ram, because you have three separate web browsers, all running, and all individually sandboxed. This is actually just bad ram management, inherently. It's more secure i suppose, provides a development benefit, technically. But to the end user, and the ram itself, harms it actively.
Ah, I didn't expect it to be actually used RAM. Maybe this is a Linux issue with the Steam build then? Here is my Windows 11 task manager, Steam just downloaded 10 different game updates (so did plenty of work) and is now idle:
In total 516.5 MB RAM on a machine with 32 GB (22 GB free at the moment), if there was any pressure on RAM usage it would probably go down further.
Either way, since upgrading to 32 GB RAM nearly a decade ago I haven't had a single issue with RAM usage (While with 16 GB I actually had games in the past where I ran out of memory). So it's no big deal as far as I'm concerned and if I'd actually run any applications that needs tons of RAM I'd quickly upgrade to 64 GB and be done with it.
The only way this would be annoying is on low-end machines, like 4 or 8 GB RAM in total, but those have plenty of issues anyway in regards to games (otherwise why would you install Steam?). On a high-end machine complaining about 1 GB of RAM is a waste of time in my opinion, there are a ton of better topics you can rage at.
it could very well be a linux build issue, it wouldn't surprise me honestly. The main telling thing for me though is that heroic uses the same if not more ram, and is actually many times more performant.
My main problem with the ram usage is that steam takes equally as long to launch as it does to boot a game, which is super annoying, not including any updates it hasnt performed yet. Heroic launches faster than my web browser does, even though its literally an electron app.
I wouldnt really care how much ram it used if i could just close it when i was done with it, and have it go away, but it's such a mess that's not really feasible.
The whole "just buy more ram" is not really a solution im a fan of. My system has 16GB. which is fine most of the time, it gets stretched sometimes, most of that ram is used by browsers, (because three different containerized browsers run simultaneously for some reason) so my idle ram quickly becomes 8GB. 8GB is still a lot of available ram though, if steam didn't use an additional gig on top of that it would only be beneficial. Maybe i'm just too jaded in general. But saying just get more ram is kind of like saying "just repair a cracked back glass on a phone" When i never wanted to have a piece of glass on the back of my phone which could get broken in the first place.
Although to preface this, i AM a linux user, and i can routinely enjoy a machine with 4GB of ram through the magic of non shit software. i3 + debian cooks. Idle ram usage under 100M is trivial when you aren't running any bloat. In fact, my server actually on average, uses less ram than my workstation. It's probably sitting at like 4GB util right now, running a handful of services, and a handful of game servers.
uggggggggggh. I'm using Firefox because chrome is really going too far with it's manifest v3 garbage killing decent adblockere and Firefox is basically the only non chromium based option. Please for the love of everything that is holy. Just. Make. Your. Browser. Better. Don't need ai gimmicks. Definitely don't need to lay people off. You need to get back on track. Holy heck. This is the worst.
That's not the only use case. It could read a 400 page pdf locally and summarize it for you, answer questions and find which slide the data you want is on.
The use cases are only limited by how powerful the AI is
It’s remarkable really. They are competing against another browser which users have to actively go out and find, then install.
Some people are used to how chrome looks and that’s powerful glue, of course, but very few normal users (ie almost none of us in here on Lemmy) needs things beyond what both Firefox and Chrome does equally well.
The simple difference in adoption rate is this: Google pushing Chrome through people’s use of Google. Diminish the need for Google, diminish people’s discovery of Chrome.
Also, I cannot understand why they need this many people. If 5% of their workforce is 60 people, they have 1200 people employed. I can almost guarantee that Google’s Chrome team isn’t 1200 people strong.
Maybe Firefox would be better being smaller and more nimble. Maybe they should stop pretending they’re a company and start pretending they’re a foundation (which is what they are). 300 people working on a core browser seems a lot of full time people, still, and that’d be a quarter of what they are today.
Also, Mozilla’s inability to produce a simple interface for embedding Firefox is simply baffling to me. The reason so many other skin-browsers are built on chromium is that it’s a LOT easier to embed.
I speak as someone who’s run Firefox since the day it was born.
Well it was 1200 people at Mozilla, not necessarily directly working on Firefox. They have multiple products and they still need HR and lawyers and all the other support roles any other company needs.
The AI is claimed to be local.. Did you know that even local AIs are able to contact the internet again? So without knowing a local LLM system might execute some HTTPS calls for you, without knowing.
Except its open source. So it would last all of 4 seconds before being called out. Those HTTPS calls are a separate service the LLM will access not a part of the LLM itself.
Could we just have the AI part separately? I want an AI that can help me around the house by learning all my books and documents in case someone needs a specific photo of the babies or maybe needs to know a derivation of greens theorem or a recipe for kombucha.
So frustrated to see how this conversation is playing out. This is exactly what people have been asking for but all anybody can seem to see is "AI" in the headline.
This pivot is about refocusing on:
The Browser
Privacy
Ethical AI
This seems like a much better position for Mozilla to operate from, particularly because they've excelled at producing ethical SOTA ML for YEARS before ChatGPT. In all, this seems far more forward looking than the previous strategy of "make weird little web tools to make money maybe" and it's an absolutely massive untapped niche, that they already have the talent to tap into. If we punish the players best positioned to shift the industry standard away from extreme and exploitative data collection, we will end up in exactly the Orwellian AI hellscape that we're all so afraid of.
It is a better position and FF is going to be even better because of it. We need more options than just chromium. Open web standards dont stay open when everyone congregates.
No one asked for the shitty LLMs masquerading as AI. However, an AI that can do specialized things to help people out in day to day tasks would be great.
