this post was submitted on 30 Jan 2026
104 points (99.1% liked)
Opensource
5354 readers
149 users here now
A community for discussion about open source software! Ask questions, share knowledge, share news, or post interesting stuff related to it!
⠀
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
The ebook manager that has recently added AI?
No thanks.
(psst... there's a fork called clbre that removes the ai)
Why does it matter if they add the option for ai? You have to configure a provider yourself or setup a local one (cool idea) so I don't really see the problem with giving the option to those who want it.
Because the Argument of Excluded Middle (aka false dichotomy) logical fallacy is king now. With no middle ground for compromise, if you're not 100% for a position then you have to be 100% against that position. It's the rules.
So, with that batshittery in mind, anything that allows you to optionally use something that people (justifiably) detest is, of course, the literal devil.
I blame brain worms.
I recently heard a great interview with the President of Mozilla where he basically says exactly this. It's all about options. Yes, Firefox now incorporates AI, but it makes it super easy to turn it off if you want. Which is a major contrast from Microsoft and Google which shove it down your throat.
Link to interview with timecode.
That's the nuance you need. Give people the option to do what they want. Make it easy either way.
While user consent (default on vs default off, or any choice at all) is a different-but-related topic, Mozilla bake it all in, enable it all by default, and make it difficult to disable. (Settings would be "super easy" and would show it was intended as a permanent choice.)
These aren't actions and design decisions indicative of having the best interests of users in mind. Especially given how closed the mobile client already is.
It seems to be designed in a way that leaves Mozilla the option of removing the ability to disable it, presumably if it becomes profitable enough and/or they think they can get away with it.
But for now on this point they get a pass from me on the desktop version in a personal environment where the user has the most control.
Apart from the notification that there's a new version with AI, I can't say that I've noticed AI in Firefox at all. And I haven't even bothered (as far as I remember) going anywhere to try and turn it off.
That certainly doesn't feel remotely comparable to Chrome and Chredge.
Their blog post about it seems pretty clear, and it sounds good to me.
And considering they're a non-profit, I don't see any particular reason to doubt their honesty.
I disagree with you too.
They never offer you the choice. The turn it on by default, and do not even inform you of how or where to turn it off.
Giving users a choice would mean an option during install or first run.
That to me looks like choice. I do use Firefox as my main.
Do you know if it maintains compatibility with all APIs and plugins? It's extensibility and interoperability are what makes it so popular.
That doesn't justify adding AI to it.
I was asking about the fork. Who said I was justifying the AI in the original. I just wanted to make sure that it maintains compatibility.
Oh.
Sorry, i misread your comment.
Yes, it is still compatible. It is a direct fork of the original just before the AI addition.