this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2026
165 points (83.7% liked)

Fuck AI

6367 readers
1259 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Usually code contributions by various LLMs are easily identifiable because the agent is the author for the git commit. Mozilla on the other hand seem to be explicitly encouraging unattributed LLM code in Firefox. Also note jakearchibald, Mozillas AI spin doctor whenever devs question their intentions, lying about the reasons for this change. I think their true intentions are to muddy the waters to hide the amount of slop contributions in Firefox.

all 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world 122 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

This change is about preventing AI from trying to own the change. A human must own the change.

AI cannot own a Firefox contribution. AI cannot commit code to Firefox. Only a human may do that.

If a human uses AI (or autocomplete / a formatter / a transpiler / whatever else) to help them author code, that doesn't devolve them of responsibility. The human must take ownership and responsibility for the output.

For example, if we later run git-blame on a section of the code, we want to see the human that took responsibility for the code, not some AI.

Firefox's policy on AI code: https://firefox-source-docs.mozilla.org/contributing/ai-coding.html

[–] Agrivar@lemmy.world 60 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Wait just a minute, that sounds... reasonable?

This won't do! I've already fetched my pitchfork and ignited my torch!

[–] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 18 points 2 weeks ago

I'm convinced the Brave shills have been posting Firefox misinformation for years

[–] PrinzKasper@feddit.org 34 points 2 weeks ago

That... Sounds like a good change actually??

[–] Railcar8095@lemmy.world 22 points 2 weeks ago

Perfect way honestly. Same philosophy we follow. I don't care how you made the PR, you're responsible for it and you need to be able to defend and explain it. If we get a "I don't know, chatGPT told me this" reject.

[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 17 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

How many human eyes of experienced programmers will have looked at the code?

A whoopsie in the web browser is significantly worse than in an... I don't know... than in a vibe-coded so-called "AI" framework/social network. /s

[–] yabbadabaddon@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 weeks ago

We can crash rockets without use of LLMs, thank you very much https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane_flight_V88

[–] DarkCloud@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago

That's good news! Thanks for looking into it.

Side note, Firefox now has AI settings you have to manually turn off on it's settings.

[–] Reygle@lemmy.world 44 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

JFC is the new CEO a plant to burn the browser to the ground?

[–] the_riviera_kid@lemmy.world 16 points 2 weeks ago

I would believe you if you told me that. There's not much else to explain it other than incompetence (which I suspect is the actual reason).

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Nothing is stopping a human contributor from using AI without attribution already.

Let's say there's an issue and you want to include the original stakeholder about the change. Instead you hit a dead end, annotation says AI but no way to reach the human that initiated the change.

[–] wackyheartfluid@lemmy.world 43 points 2 weeks ago

I'm really going to miss Firefox

[–] egerlach@lemmy.ca 30 points 2 weeks ago

While I think that this isn't on target, I believe it to be mis-executed rather than misguided: I think they were trying to support their AI Coding Policy by removing any notion that Claude was responsible for the work (therefore leaving the human responsible). What it does in practice of course is just hide AI-generated code. Since the commit setting can be anything you want, I believe a disclaimer that the commit was assisted by Claude but that the committer is considered the author of the code would be a better choice (and I said so on the thread). I hope they improve their choice.

[–] the_riviera_kid@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago

I have used firefox since it was netscape, so it was a bit sad when I switched to waterfox after they made the bullshit AI announcement. I'm hoping something better comes along but I have little faith it will happen.

[–] potatoguy@mbin.potato-guy.space 9 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Is there any browser engine left? Servo maybe?

If the engine starts getting crappy because of these LLMs, I think the internet enshittified to the maximum.

[–] rain_worl@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

lynx! i think web browsers should be a good thing to make in your free time, not something that requires thousands of ¤. of course, standards are important, so you're also allowed to use a popular browser

[–] Casterial@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I stopped using Firefox because it was slowly becoming a bug filled mess. It's in the trash with chrome for me now

[–] 1984@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] kadu@scribe.disroot.org 33 points 2 weeks ago

Likely a Chromium fork made by two teenagers larping as security experts, or a guy trying to sell you NFTs in a very brave manner.

[–] drdiddlybadger@pawb.social 1 points 2 weeks ago

Was this linked to a specific report or something? I cannot reach it. Does someone have a backup?

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

!waterfox@programming.dev

It's firefox minus the slop

[–] winkerjadams@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

LibreWolf for a security and privacy focused version

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah also a great option!