It's fun playing with local AI stuff. I've been playing with piper-tts and it's fast on a modern system.

1. You can have tons of tabs open while still being able to read what they are

2. Moving the tabs to the side of your browser window frees up more vertical real estate which better matches the webpage layout of most websites, which otherwise have wasted space on the left and right sides of the page when viewing them on a computer

Im a simple man, less browser UI = good. I only want to see what I need to see. I’d hide the address bar if it wasn’t cumbersome to use with hover (as in hover at the top of the browser window to show the address bar).

It’s more efficient to stack wide elements on top of each other than next to each other.

Especially with websites that are optimised for mobile which means they use only the middle 60% of the whole 16:9 screen, not to mention ultrawide. So vertical space is needed more than horizontal space.

In addition, you can have the vertical tabs hide the text, so you can only see the favicon, unless hovered over. I basically have a 50px bar on the left and top. So this (without the right sidebar, I’m not at my PC so I stole the photo from Reddit :P) :

Floorp also exists :)

The lie is that they are always focused on making the best browser. The last few years they have focused on everything but the browser.

Soon, Firefox can block ads better than Chrome. Ads are annoying. I see Chrome losing at least a 5% of the market, if not more, to Firefox, just because they're going to break uBlock Origin, and Firefox isn't.

I'm not talking about pulling more people. I'm talking about my issue as an existing and looooong term user of Firefox. I started using a very low end phone recently, and Firefox vs Chrome on it is night and day difference. I don't notice it on my galaxy phone, but on low end devices it's torturous.

hide the native tabs

YES! i currently have to use custom css to achieve this, would be so much more convenient if it was an extension

I do agree with your point about auto-generated captions being better than no captions. But isn't it bad to insert them automatically on creation? If we use these models to caption images shouldn't it be done by the screen reader instead? That way people can benefit from future advancements of the tech and customize the captioning system for themselves. With the current system there is no way to tell if you got a crappy AI caption that you may want to replace with a better auto-generated caption or a human written caption.

The top comment is usually someone saying nothing should ever change and every feature is bloat and should be an extension.

Ooh will try thanks for the heads up!

I don't know. Maybe make Lemmy more intuitive

Not irrational to be concerned for a number of reasons. Even if local and secure AI image processing and LLMs add fairly significant processing costs to a simple task like this. It means higher requirements for the browser, higher energy use and therefore emissions (noting here that AI has blown Microsoft's climate mitigation plan our of the water even with some accounting tricks).

Additionally, you have to think about the long term changes to behaviours this will generate. A handy tool for when people forget to produce proper accessible documents suddenly becomes the default way of making accessible documents. Consider two situations: a culture that promotes and enforces content providers to consider different types of consumer and how they will experience the content; they know that unless they spend the 1% extra time making it accessibile for all it will exclude certain people. Now compare that to a situation where AI is pitched as an easy way not to think about the peoples experiences: the AI will sort it. Those two situations imply very different outcomes: in one there is care and thought about difference and diversity and in another there isn't. Disabled people are an after thought. Within those two different scenarios there's also massively different energy and emissions requirements because its making every user perform AI to get some alt text rather than generate it at source.

Finally, it worth explaining about Alt texts a bit and how people use them because its not just text descriptions of an image (which AI could indeed likely produce). Alt texts should be used to summarise the salient aspects of the image the author wants a reader to take away for it in a conscise way and sometimes that message might be slightly different for Alt Text users. AI can't do this because it should be about the message the content creator wants to send and ensuring it's accessible. As ever with these tech fixes for accessibility the lived experience of people with those needs isn't actually present. Its an assumed need rather than what they are asking for.

+1 for LibreWolf. I've been using it for ~2 years and it's better than Firefox from a privacy perspective. Development is active, so updates are being pushed regularly. As for vertical tabs, you can easily achieve it with Tree Style Tabs. I strongly recommend it.

I've looked at alternative forks of Firefox before, but there were two problems for me: a) most are not up to date or slow to update, and b) hard to trust my browser to any community or other company. You see, I actually trust Mozilla, specifically Firefox and Thunderbird. At least the AI is local only, but it would add another attack vector and bloat for no reason to me. We'll see if it can be disabled.

Plus I think there will be a way to disable it (like with local translation we have rn).

The visually impaired will certainly agree that not helping them with a local AI model is a sacrifice worth being made for the purely moral stance of “no AI at all”.
/s obviously

Remember the world is not about only you but also people having disabilities.

Remember the world is not about only for people with disabilities. Secondly, this is a nonsense argument, because this does not "require" Ai. Especially not for every user. If its integrated into Firefox and I cannot remove it, then its very much forced. Why not make an extension for people who need or want it? (nobody needs this)

There is no general copyright issue with AIs. It completely depends on the training material (if even then), so it's not possible to make blanket statements like that. Banning technology, because a particular implementation is problematic, makes no sense.

You have no idea what freedom is, if you think I have to accept bullshit.

The problem is, this should be an addon that people can install or at least, remove. I don't want AI in my text editor, in my browser or in my operating system.

The idea is to be able to read the password with your eyeballs, so you can type it into another computer. This fails.

It says nothing about spyware, the article isn't hyped up at all, and describes a token to track installations vs downloads.

"This data will allow us to correlate telemetry IDs with download tokens and Google Analytics IDs. This will allow us to track which installs result from which downloads to determine the answers to questions like, "Why do we see so many installs per day, but not that many downloads per day?"

Also there is an opt-out during installation.

I don't even use Firefox, and I honestly am not attacking but your comment seemed very hyperbolic and with little detail.

You're right that it's good to be aware of this stuff, I also don't see this being a road block for the average user.

Backdrop-filter blur with css animations and box-shadows. Lots of flickering, weird artifacts.

It’s also got an issue on macOS where a sticky element can’t have a backdrop-filter with a background that has alpha/opacity (#0006)

CSS transitions are laggy in general in FF Linux

Works in chrome and safari and FF on windows.