this post was submitted on 16 Dec 2025
184 points (95.1% liked)
Firefox
6351 readers
5 users here now
A community for discussion about Mozilla Firefox.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Headline is misleading. That is one sentence from a list of three points.
I think the more important statement, and one that I agree with, is in the first point.
If this is the goal then I agree. Mush as AI annoys me, I don't care if they build AI features into the browser. There are enough people that do want AI features for it makes sense to do so. But it needs to be optional. I don't want to have to keep going into about:config to disable AI features that should have been opt-in in the first place.
No.
AI is something that the user can easily turn on.
If somebody is forced to turn it off before they can use their browser, it's not actually optional.
The best choice is to let the user know that such a feature is available first, ask if they want it on, and tell them how to turn it on if they say no. The problem with having things off by default is that most people don't look around the options, they go with what they're given. This isn't even about AI, but features in general.
Myself on both Firefox and DuckDuckGo I saw the AI selection prominently displayed and I disabled it. Be transparent, but that includes letting your users know things are there.
I hate starting an app and being forced to choose between things that I have no idea what they are or whether I would want them right when it starts. Just leave it off and let me turn it on when I want to, thanks.
This word "optional", I do not think it means what you think it means.
If something is enabled prior to receiving user consent, it's not truly optional.
This got upvoted. A comment that literally doesn't understand the definition of the word "optional". Man, do better Lemmings.
No, fuck that. I am sick and tired of having shit pushed at me and then it being made my responsibility to be eternally hypervigilent to avoid it. It's abusive and fucking shame on you for defending it!
Yes, the only way to talk about something you don't like is to bend the actual meaning of words to make it sound worse.
...or, we can just respect what words mean. Big ask, I know.
I have turned off every AI feature I can in Firefox and most any other app. I'm not DeFeNdInG jack shit.
What if, instead of having to go to the effort of turning it all off, it's already off though?
Consent in any other scenario doesn't have yes as the default option, why tolerate it in the tech world? (Autocorrect changed tech to greedy, that's perhaps more accurate)
That's a different conversation. I'm trying to call someone on lying. "Optional" has a very simple meaning.
Optional has a very simple meaning if you ignore the context of the conversion.
Consider the question "Would you like to be punched in the face or not?" You have the option to choose either, but before you answer I'll start punching you in the face anyway. Do you see how consent is a requirement of optional in that context?
The same applies for many options in life, the default is almost always "no". Firefox should make this opt-in, not opt-out for the same reason.
If you're still not convinced by the argument of consent (which, ooft, red flag if you're not) then also consider the uproar in both this thread and around the internet/tech world because of this decision by Mozilla. All they have to do is change it from opt-out to opt-in and all this outrage disappears. But they haven't. Why?
This is not in good faith. There is absolutely no point in a conversation where one person argues for words having meaning and the other person pretending what they're really doing is arguing against a larger point which they actually happen to agree with.
I disagree, you're not conversing in good faith, because you're trying to win a pedantic argument that nobody else is engaging in. You see no way to "win" so you declare it bad faith.
The topic at hand is Mozilla adding AI into Firefox by default, and allowing users to turn it off if desired. So, optional, as you stated. The context that you're refusing to acknowledge however, because you're determined to win a pedantic argument rather than engage in a conversation, is that optional in this regard requires consent. Informed consent even. What does AI do to/for the end user? Why should they accept it to be on? What safeguards are in place? Unless they know this context, it should be off by default. Off by default is still optional, the user can still turn it on if they desire.
But you're hung up on the word optional and care more about the pedantry of that one word rather than the context that brought us all into this conversation in the first place.
Again, I simply chose to criticize the false use of a word in order to lie to make a point that was already valid and easily made.
I Am NoT eNgAgiNg In YoUr PoInT tHeReFoRe It DoEsNt ExIsT
If something is enabled prior to receiving user consent, it's not truly optional.
TBF if our society and data harvesting practices have taught us anything, it's that the majority of users do not have the willingness or the basic understandings needed to opt out of the default settings. The amount of "install it and forget it" users is astounding.
That's definitely true. I was just criticizing flagrantly redefining a word.
Lemmy has such a hard-on for hating AI that it ignores what I consider to be basic facts. This, combined with the fact that Lemmy leans technical, means being out of touch is common. Seeing suggestions in this thread that the AI features should be opt in is absurd because no-one will use them because 90% of people don't change settings.
The hate for Mozilla also seems short sighted. Mozilla has to follow the group to try to gain marketshare or at least keep what it has. Firefox's marketshare is dwindling and if it gets low enough it will die, which would be bad for everyone
choices like this should always be opt in, not opt out
I generally agree, but if there's a switch at install time, I don't really care what the default value is.
So for those that don't care, what's the problem with off being the default?
Those that do care would prefer it, those that don't care don't care.
I don't think there is a problem, from the user standpoint.
The possibility of choice is a relief. But if one has a lot of storage bloat for some "features" one doesn't use, that's annoying.
Personally, I find all this talk of "choice" from Mozilla to be a red herring. What exactly does it mean?
When Mozilla introduced telemetry, they had to give us a reason. They had to promise it was good because it would help them develop their browser. But with talk of "choice," Mozilla simply implies AI is good without explaining how.
That's a good point.
Sheesh. Out of the 20 comments in this thread this is the only one that actually addressed the contents of the article, the rest of them were all talking about what other browser they were using or going to be using now or just vaguely griping about how much they hate AI.
Are there any other Firefox communities that are actually about Firefox?
I've used Firefox for a long ass time but let's be honest here.. a LOT of recent history has been trying to figure out how to turn off whatever new feature they've been putting energy into. Their community sees them as a tool and they see themselves as an ecosystem. That disconnect is a problem.
Honestly, sometimes it feels like folks are more obsessed about AI than Big Tech CEOs are. With native vertical tabs, tab groups, and the new profiles, there are more new things in Firefox I've been excited about than in the years before, but everybody's only talking about AI.
Why not talk about that stuff instead of AI? That's on the new CEO, not the community.
I'm happy to criticise him for that too, but that doesn't mean that folks don't drag AI into every slightly related or even completely unrelated threads too.
I wasn't aware that he was a moderator here, deciding what threads people create or comment on.
This reads like marketing, but also other browsers have this stuff anyway? It's not a selling point anymore.
It's just a list of recent additions I'm excited about. Of course they come on top of a browser I was already consciously using, so they're just there to sweeten the deal, not as unique selling points by themselves.
It's weird that they want firefox to grow into an ecosystem. They only recently kicked Thunderbird out of the ecosystem.