6 ms·

I totally agree. It’s just going to become an expectation that AI is in the browser. It’s so nice just to be able to ask the browser to summarize the page, or

I totally agree. It’s just going to become an expectation that AI is in the browser. It’s so nice just to be able to ask the browser to summarize the page, or ask questions about a long article. I know a lot of people on Hacker News are hostile to AI and like to imagine everybody hates it, but I personally find it very helpful.

bayindirh 9mo ago
Considering pirating the whole internet and boiling the planet is required to summarize a single page in a mediocre manner, it’s understandable that people who knows how the sausages are made are against it.
- brokencode 9mo ago
  We need some regulation on them for sure. They should be paying for the content they train on and use in their search results. They’re still very compelling as a user.
  - inferiorhuman 9mo ago
    They’re still very compelling as a user. Nah.
  - bayindirh 9mo ago
    > They’re still very compelling as a user. Very not.
johnnyanmac 9mo ago
>but I personally find it very helpful. Options are nice. They were (and poteitally will) not making it optional and if people like me weren't "hostile to Ai" they wouldn't have had to back-track with this.
- heavyset_go 9mo ago
  It is already optional in Firefox, this is just FUD
  - johnnyanmac 9mo ago
    The FUD is the implications of making it opt out, with reports that there's already other features that requires changing the settings/flags in order to "opt out". It's doubt based on previous actions.
kgwxd 9mo ago
then you can install an extension.
- brokencode 9mo ago
  I’m fine with an extension personally. And I don’t use Firefox to begin with, so I don’t particularly care what they do. I just think the average browser user in 5-10 years will expect the AI features. And plenty of others won’t want to use those features, and that’s fine.
  - ruicraveiro 9mo ago
    If I wanted the average browser, I would have stuck with Chrome, or Edge.
protocolture 9mo ago
>It’s just going to become an expectation that AI is in the browser. Why? Is there evidence to back this up? Are there massive customer write in campaigns trying to convince browser companies to push more AI? >I know a lot of people on Hacker News are hostile to AI and like to imagine everybody hates it, but I personally find it very helpful. I love it. I love going to the AI place and knowingly consulting the AI for tasks I want the AI to perform. That relationship is healthy and responsible. It doesnt need to be in everything else. Its like those old jokes about how inventions are just <existing invention> + <digital clock>. I dont need AI on the desktop, in microsoft office, replying to me on facebook, responding to my google searches AND doing shit in my browser. One of these would be too much, because I can just access the AI I want to speak to whenever I want it. Any 2 of these is such substantial overkill. Why do we have all of them? Justify it. Is there a user story where a user was trying to complete a task but lacked 97% accurate information from 5 different sources to complete the task?
- charcircuit 9mo ago
  The evidence is the billions of people who copy text to and from ChatGPT to other web pages.
  - protocolture 9mo ago
    But not just other web pages, other apps too. So again, why a browser. Why ask firefoxs pop out expansion panel instead of a right click context menu in word, or a chat interface in copilots phat app or a website chat interface or the precious space under a google search or any of the other 10000 places people are inserting this shit. And a copy paste task isnt necessarily going to be aided by a pop out sidebar running a local LLM chewing up already precious RAM. There's no guarantee its going to integrate correctly with the users chosen LLM provider. Like we are looking at having LLM's inserted into almost every customer facing application. At some point, they will want a subscription for each of them or they are all going to need local resources. They are all going to have to be interoperable and run off the same account. Or you are going to have to have something that just works with the whole stack. It doesn't make a lick of sense to try and preempt that situation, with mainline features pushed to all customers. Googles approach, having a separate AI enabled browser makes the most sense. If it takes off its because of affirmative user consent and they can merge it into chrome. If it doesn't work they can silently discontinue it like so many other things.

bayindirh 9mo ago

Considering pirating the whole internet and boiling the planet is required to summarize a single page in a mediocre manner, it’s understandable that people who knows how the sausages are made are against it.

brokencode 9mo ago
We need some regulation on them for sure. They should be paying for the content they train on and use in their search results. They’re still very compelling as a user.
- inferiorhuman 9mo ago
  They’re still very compelling as a user. Nah.
- bayindirh 9mo ago
  > They’re still very compelling as a user. Very not.

johnnyanmac 9mo ago

>but I personally find it very helpful. Options are nice. They were (and poteitally will) not making it optional and if people like me weren't "hostile to Ai" they wouldn't have had to back-track with this.

heavyset_go 9mo ago
It is already optional in Firefox, this is just FUD
- johnnyanmac 9mo ago
  The FUD is the implications of making it opt out, with reports that there's already other features that requires changing the settings/flags in order to "opt out". It's doubt based on previous actions.

kgwxd 9mo ago

then you can install an extension.

brokencode 9mo ago
I’m fine with an extension personally. And I don’t use Firefox to begin with, so I don’t particularly care what they do. I just think the average browser user in 5-10 years will expect the AI features. And plenty of others won’t want to use those features, and that’s fine.
- ruicraveiro 9mo ago
  If I wanted the average browser, I would have stuck with Chrome, or Edge.

protocolture 9mo ago

>It’s just going to become an expectation that AI is in the browser. Why? Is there evidence to back this up? Are there massive customer write in campaigns trying to convince browser companies to push more AI? >I know a lot of people on Hacker News are hostile to AI and like to imagine everybody hates it, but I personally find it very helpful. I love it. I love going to the AI place and knowingly consulting the AI for tasks I want the AI to perform. That relationship is healthy and responsible. It doesnt need to be in everything else. Its like those old jokes about how inventions are just <existing invention> + <digital clock>. I dont need AI on the desktop, in microsoft office, replying to me on facebook, responding to my google searches AND doing shit in my browser. One of these would be too much, because I can just access the AI I want to speak to whenever I want it. Any 2 of these is such substantial overkill. Why do we have all of them? Justify it. Is there a user story where a user was trying to complete a task but lacked 97% accurate information from 5 different sources to complete the task?

charcircuit 9mo ago
The evidence is the billions of people who copy text to and from ChatGPT to other web pages.
- protocolture 9mo ago
  But not just other web pages, other apps too. So again, why a browser. Why ask firefoxs pop out expansion panel instead of a right click context menu in word, or a chat interface in copilots phat app or a website chat interface or the precious space under a google search or any of the other 10000 places people are inserting this shit. And a copy paste task isnt necessarily going to be aided by a pop out sidebar running a local LLM chewing up already precious RAM. There's no guarantee its going to integrate correctly with the users chosen LLM provider. Like we are looking at having LLM's inserted into almost every customer facing application. At some point, they will want a subscription for each of them or they are all going to need local resources. They are all going to have to be interoperable and run off the same account. Or you are going to have to have something that just works with the whole stack. It doesn't make a lick of sense to try and preempt that situation, with mainline features pushed to all customers. Googles approach, having a separate AI enabled browser makes the most sense. If it takes off its because of affirmative user consent and they can merge it into chrome. If it doesn't work they can silently discontinue it like so many other things.