Link: https://github.com/mozilla-firefox/firefox/commit/71cc24b6a400dbd434e4df37087960d94b764791

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.

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

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

I'm really going to miss Firefox

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.

ill no longer use firefox now... i think vivaldi is better

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.

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

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

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).

What do you use now?

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.

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

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

It was horse shit when jakearchibald wrote it; its still horse shit now.

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.

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

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.

K

Vivaldi, EU made, fuck AI by default

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

Well i didnt know vivaldi wasnt foss... then ill give librewolf a shot, i have it installed too.

I’m sure there will be some that won’t. But it will probably be a shockingly small number of them that care enough to not.

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

I use Vivaldi and it's miles better than default chrome or Firefox, but it is still chromium.

There's also edge, or opera. But, Vivaldi is nice for its blockers + note taking

Well, in the case of Vivaldi "proprietary soft" is pretty relative. A small part of it's unique UI is proprietary of Vivaldi, but full auditable, means source available not closed source, even modificable by the user (they show you how, at own risk naturally). There is nothing shady in Vivaldi. employee owned cooperative in Norway.

https://vivaldi.com/source/

https://github.com/ric2b/Vivaldi-browser

Firefox has gotten corrupted multiple times for me with normal use, to the point it wasn't worth it. Specifically the user profile.

Ublock is great though.

You tell people they can turn their brain off and trust the AI enough and they might just start doing it.

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.

That is, as said, 5% of the code related to the UI is proprietary, only this isn't allowed to use for other products (eg. Chrome, EDGE), but the user is free to modify it for his Vivaldi browser, they show you even how to do it. The rest is a de-googled Chromium, which is FOSS and other layers with several different OpenSource licenses.
For Gecko browsers it's way easier to go full FOSS, because there isn't any big corporation which have browsers with this engine,same for relative basic Chromium forks, but not so with browsers like Vivaldi, which is more an online suite as only an simple browser. It would be a shot in the own knee if Google or MS could fork it freely.

Librewolf is Firefox.

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

Yes, but its a fork without ai slop. It has better privacy functions too.

• The freedom to run the Browser as you wish for any purpose is given in Vivaldi more than in any other existing browser
• Same for study how it works and change it to your wish, the source code is available
• Redistribute isn't allowed, but with already over 100 different browsers, most Chromiums, the need of it is anyway pretty debatable.
• You are free to distribute your mods to other Vivaldi users, the Forum is full of it. As said, the Source is modificable by the user to his like (naturally at own risk, but it isn't avoided by Vivaldi, they show you even how).

Currently there are 4 Millon users of Vivaldi and with all the possibiñities to customize the browser, there are no 2 users with the same.

It is not a fork. It is a set of patches on top of Firefox Stable.

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.

I know what they say and I know the reasons and what it means for its users. Would be nice if Mozilla had this transparency.

Waterfox or Floorp?

I don’t use either currently but I’m thinking of switching off the main Firefox browser.

!waterfox@programming.dev

It's firefox minus the slop

LibreWolf for a security and privacy focused version

Yeah also a great option!

At one point I had programmed my own, but that was for college and I doubt it's secure in today's world, that was over 10 years ago.

Why? They all depend on Firefox.

You commented on the others saying they were not forks, which it seems like these are.