[HN Gopher] Mozilla downsizes as it refocuses on Firefox and AI
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Mozilla downsizes as it refocuses on Firefox and AI
        
       Author : awkwardpotato
       Score  : 96 points
       Date   : 2024-02-13 20:34 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (techcrunch.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (techcrunch.com)
        
       | beretguy wrote:
       | > Mozilla will focus on bringing "trustworthy AI into Firefox."
       | 
       | I hope they will give us ability to turn it off. Or at least
       | LibreWolf will turn it off / remove it. I'd rather they add
       | optional small subscription fee to support themselves if they
       | have to than add AI or some other questionable functionalities.
        
         | kbelder wrote:
         | And the ability to turn off whatever guardrails they put on it
         | in an attempt to make it trustworthy.
        
           | creatonez wrote:
           | They seem to be inclined towards the idea of running language
           | models on your own computer, given Mozilla released a cross-
           | platform runtime for llama that can make use of either the
           | CPU or GPU. So I won't be surprised if it's swappable.
        
             | Am4TIfIsER0ppos wrote:
             | Predicting: swappable on "nightly" versions only and
             | release versions are 100% "I'm sorry Dave I'm afraid I
             | can't do that"
        
               | noirscape wrote:
               | That's more a Chrome thing than a Firefox thing.
        
               | coryrc wrote:
               | I see you aren't a Firefox Mobile user.
        
               | yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
               | No, that's a Firefox thing:
               | https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/add-on-signing-in-
               | firef...
        
           | rtkwe wrote:
           | Aren't those generally burned into the model itself so not
           | really configurable?
        
         | JohnFen wrote:
         | I assume that they will. They've been better than most at
         | making sure we can disable various things that some users find
         | objectionable.
         | 
         | The last thing that they need is the firestorm that would
         | certainly erupt if they didn't include a way to keep this
         | disabled.
        
         | Dwedit wrote:
         | There's already AI in there, see the current Translation
         | feature.
        
           | elric wrote:
           | Perfect example of why this is a bad idea. There is no
           | immediately obvious way to turn off this obnoxious feature,
           | which insists on hogging part of my precious screen real
           | estate. By default, it only has a poorly worded way to
           | disable it for a single language, but no way to simply turn
           | it off forever. (Yes, you can disable it in about:config).
           | 
           | If I want something translated, I'll ask for it. Feel free to
           | add a menu item or a button somewhere to do this, but
           | randomly popping up door hangers really grinds my gears.
        
             | zztop44 wrote:
             | On the flip side if I navigate to a page I may not be able
             | to read (due to the language being different to my browser
             | settings), offering to translate it seems like a good and
             | helpful thing. Certainly better than a button I don't know
             | about buried in a menu somewhere I won't find.
             | 
             | And if you personally don't like it, you can disable the
             | feature in the settings. What's wrong with that?
        
           | jszymborski wrote:
           | Which, I might add, is entirely local.
        
         | klyrs wrote:
         | > I hope they will give us ability to turn it off.
         | 
         | I'm sorry, Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that.
        
         | clumsysmurf wrote:
         | Recently there was some discussion about Jetbrains pre-bundled
         | AI-related plugin:
         | 
         | https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/LLM-1973/Provide-the-po...
         | 
         | Hopefully Mozilla will do the same, ship the AI functionality
         | as a plugin and allow people to explicitly opt in if they want
         | to use it. Its OK if they show it during on-boarding, as long
         | as there is an option.
        
       | rvense wrote:
       | Is there any sort of corporate structure around one of the forks?
       | There's no doubt in my mind that if it were organized somehow the
       | community would be able to fund a few developers to work on
       | Firefox alongside Mozilla.
       | 
       | I don't want an aggressive split, but I'd like to be able to
       | support the project. I've donated to Mozilla in the past but it
       | apparently was not going to Firefox directly.
        
         | mozempthrowaway wrote:
         | You shouldn't donate. The donations don't go to MoCo which is
         | the for profit subsidiary of Mozilla Foundation under which FF
         | is developed.
         | 
         | All the donations go to MoFo, where they barely covered
         | Mitchell's salary and what was left went to her pet political
         | projects. People are pretty unaware/misled about how Mozilla is
         | structured/funded.
         | 
         | The only way you can contribute to FF directly is to keep and
         | use Google as the default search engine.
        
           | JohnFen wrote:
           | These truths are, in my opinion, a great tragedy. I'd
           | absolutely pay for Firefox if I could, but I can't.
           | 
           | > The only way you can contribute to FF directly is to keep
           | and use Google as the default search engine.
           | 
           | Which is a much greater cost than I'm willing to pay.
        
         | offmycloud wrote:
         | I would be willing to make a monthly donation, but only if I
         | knew that it was going to the development of Firefox and/or
         | Thunderbird.
        
       | NoboruWataya wrote:
       | An org like Mozilla making a real effort to bring open, privacy-
       | focused AI to Firefox is interesting for sure. But I hope they
       | don't get too distracted by the AI hype train.
       | 
       | Interesting that they are still as focused as ever on Pocket.
        
         | gnicholas wrote:
         | Does Pocket give them the ability to create useful data for use
         | in their AI efforts?
        
           | autoexec wrote:
           | It certainly gives them the ability to collect a lot of data,
           | which is why I disable it on every install.
        
       | throwawa14223 wrote:
       | Can they get rid of AI? Blockchain was annoying trend but it
       | wasn't wrecking products I actually used.
        
       | pupppet wrote:
       | The new CEO mantra...nobody got fired for pivoting to AI.
        
         | jsheard wrote:
         | Not yet, at least.
        
           | chasd00 wrote:
           | I was on a call this morning where a team had decided to
           | break it to their leadership that genai was not the answer
           | they thought it was going to be. I bet there's going to be a
           | lot of that this year.
        
             | __loam wrote:
             | This is what is so frustrating about this technology.
             | Everyone seems completely convinced this is going to be
             | bigger than sliced bread but a year later, I haven't seen a
             | truly good killer app. A year ago we had chatgpt, co-pilot,
             | mid journey, and stable diffusion, and today we have
             | basically the some products. I've seen a lot of bad code, a
             | lot of boring prose, and a lot of bad art. Meanwhile
             | there's people breathlessly yelling us we'll get agi in 5
             | years.
        
       | chmod775 wrote:
       | > its leadership argued that diversifying its product portfolio
       | beyond Firefox was necessary to ensure Mozilla's survival in the
       | long run
       | 
       | This always bugged me. Are they expecting Firefox to die? If that
       | happened, there would be _little_ reason for Mozilla to exist.
       | 
       | The project lives and dies with the browser. Having a "plan B" is
       | complete nonsense and an unnecessary distraction.
       | 
       | I'm glad they're shifting focus back on the browser.
        
         | skywhopper wrote:
         | Agreed. The goal was to create and maintain an open web
         | browser. If the goal of Mozilla is now to ensure Mozilla
         | continues to exist, that's a bad sign.
        
         | wmf wrote:
         | I hope the idea is for the profits from other products to fund
         | Firefox but so far every attempt has failed.
        
           | mozempthrowaway wrote:
           | The other products are very unprofitable. FF profits actually
           | fund everything else. Search deals on FF are over 80% of
           | revenue yet less than half the company works on FF.
        
         | jsheard wrote:
         | The monkey's paw outcome is they re-focus on the browser, but
         | follow Opera and Edge in pivoting to Yet Another Chromium
         | Reskin, massively cutting their development costs while
         | _technically_ remaining in the browser market. Hopefully it
         | doesn 't come to that but I'm not ruling it out.
        
           | Atotalnoob wrote:
           | This would be very sad.
           | 
           | One browser engine would be really bad for the web
        
       | skywhopper wrote:
       | Sure sounds like they haven't learned any lessons from past
       | trend-chasing. They are shutting down their VR world and their
       | Mastodon instance. This content-free AI promise just sounds like
       | more of the same desperate grabbing for hype, while also cutting
       | jobs and notably not mentioning any actual initiatives to prop up
       | the core product and actual reason for Mozilla's existence.
       | 
       | The main difference between the past hype-grabs and generative AI
       | is that genAI is incredibly expensive. So long as Mozilla follows
       | this pattern of chasing the latest hypewagon instead of working
       | on its core product, they will continue to lose relevance. It's
       | too bad.
        
         | zuminator wrote:
         | Not quite shutting down mozilla.social yet, just scaling back
         | for now it seems.
        
       | pavon wrote:
       | Backing off of VPN, Relay and Monitor sounds like bad news. They
       | are the Mozilla's only source of income if the Google search deal
       | goes away. Mozilla's financial statements never detailed how much
       | money they were spending on their different segments, so perhaps
       | those projects weren't generating profit, and thus weren't worth
       | keeping even though they brought in revenue. I can certainly see
       | how it would be hard to compete with other business that are
       | focused solely on that market, while Mozilla is trying to use it
       | as a side-gig to fund Firefox.
       | 
       | But they were at least an attempt to create alternate revenue
       | streams and seemed like useful products that were complementary
       | to Firefox. I am very skeptical that Mozilla will be able to
       | monetize any AI integration they include, assuming they even
       | build anything worth using given how far removed AI is from their
       | existing competencies.
        
         | mozempthrowaway wrote:
         | It fluctuates a little bit but 80-85% of revenue comes from
         | search deals with Google being the dominant one. Everything
         | else has a lot of overhead because nothing is developed in
         | house; it's just white labeled. VPN is Mullvad, Monitor is
         | OneRep, etc. So even that 15% of revenue doesn't/barely covers
         | all the product/marketing/etc personnel that work on those
         | teams.
         | 
         | Every quarter that segment is behind forecasts - pocket too -
         | mostly because the forecasts are widely optimistic. It's not a
         | viable business strategy to pursue them much further.
        
         | dvngnt_ wrote:
         | literally the only thing i've paid mozilla for lmao. let's see
         | how this works out
        
       | ChrisArchitect wrote:
       | [dupe]
       | 
       | More discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39361493
       | 
       | Actual bloomberg report:
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39361802
        
       | krasin wrote:
       | The new CEO, Laura Chambers, is an MBA and a former McKinsey
       | consultant ([1]). I would not hold my breath about the future of
       | Firefox.
       | 
       | 1.
       | https://www.linkedin.com/in/chamberslaura/details/experience...
        
         | n2d4 wrote:
         | Laura Chambers is only the interim CEO. In the original
         | announcement post, it was stated that she would stay for the
         | "remainder of this year", and Chambers later said that she
         | would move to Australia in 2024 [1].
         | 
         | [1] https://fortune.com/2024/02/08/mozilla-firefox-ceo-laura-
         | cha...
        
           | stefan_ wrote:
           | Obviously she will. Jesus, that's about 2/3rds of the
           | problems of Firefox right there.
        
         | huytersd wrote:
         | Oh, this is going to go the way of Meg Whitman and Marissa
         | Meyer.
        
         | __loam wrote:
         | Maybe time to fork Firefox.
        
           | zamadatix wrote:
           | And then convince ~200 million people to use your browser so
           | you can get the same bare bones level of funding via search
           | deals Mozilla is having trouble sustaining on. Things do get
           | in a progressively easier feedback loop after that though.
           | 
           | I almost wonder if the Edge/Brave approach is the smarter
           | approach. Build something on top of Chromium, trading full
           | independence for the ability to focus on differentiation, and
           | then if you ever show you can actually make a more popular
           | browser you're free to take over/break away from/fork
           | Chromium for full independence again at the end. Either way
           | you have a tradeoff.
        
           | JohnFen wrote:
           | There exist a number of reasonable Firefox forks right now.
        
       | msub2 wrote:
       | While I always marveled at how Hubs survived the 2020 layoffs
       | (which included the people working on WebVR/WebXR at the time),
       | seeing it shutting down is a shame. We used it to run monthly
       | meetups for the WebXR Discord for just about the last 3 years.
       | Very curious what's going to happen to it now, whether it gets
       | handed off to another entity (i.e. Firefox Reality to Igalia) or
       | left to the community somehow.
        
       | bluish29 wrote:
       | What does scaling back investment means in this case, does it
       | mean shutting down these services? Or does it mean that they will
       | put it on maintenance mode? or just not care about it at all?
        
       | mplewis wrote:
       | What if they refocused on building an excellent browser?
        
       | __loam wrote:
       | Keep this shit out of my browser please.
        
       | mvdtnz wrote:
       | I will ditch Firefox the moment they introduce some shitty
       | chatbot no one asked for. I'm already absolutely fed up with the
       | constant problems, missing features and pages failing to work
       | properly.
        
       | piafraus wrote:
       | So many people I know don't switch to FF because of missing tab
       | grouping (and no, not a single addon gives the similar fast and
       | nice experience). It's like number one feature and yet they waste
       | time on stuff like this
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-02-13 23:01 UTC)