this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2024
306 points (99.0% liked)
Technology
59431 readers
2959 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
"We've decided to focus our efforts on AI and advertising. Please tell us why you think that's a good idea!"
"Would you like to see us leverage AI to help address societal issues such as racial justice, climate justice, gender justice, etc.?"
Absolutely fucking not.
There's nothing wrong with using an LLM for offline private language translation. It literally preserves privacy by not simply sending all that data to a Google translation server.
There's nothing wrong with using offline image recognition to aid in helping blind people know what's on their screen.
As for their "advertising" - you should look up what they actually did. It completely preserves privacy while at the same time not completely destroying the economic model that content creators rely on. It's a good thing. With any luck, regulators will enforce it.
My question is, who asked?
I have many opinions about machine learning and its current position in technology, but expressed none of it in the comment. In case you missed it, the point I was trying to make is that this is a bullshit survey with obviously loaded questions and foregone conclusions, uninterested in gathering impartial feedback or addressing concerns.
What do you mean who asked? People were complaining about lack of proper translation in Firefox for a long time. People were definitely asking. Google translate was (and still is) one of the most downloaded Firefox extensions.
And if you've ever used or seen someone use a screen reader on websites, you'll know it's awful. So Mozilla are right to focus on making the web better for blind people.
Yes, I'm aware most people aren't blind, but that doesn't mean those people should receive zero accomodation. Part of Mozilla's mission statement is making the web accessible. That's in their 'mandate', if you will. If people don't want an accessible web, I'm sure there are browsers out there that make zero accomodations for the disabled.
And the survey is not written in a way to direct you towards answers that Mozilla wants. Did you even look? They give plenty of room to criticise.
Nice strawman, bro. I never said a damn thing about screen readers or translators, good or bad. And yes, I've read and filled out the entire survey. It doesn't become a good survey just because it's biased towards your personal views.
It's not a strawman. You complained about Mozilla's AI... That is Mozilla's AI.
You asked who asked for this stuff... I told you.
It's not biased towards "my views". It doesn't seem to be biased at all. Which questions do you take issue with?
What's your issue with offline translation, or better screen reader functionality? That's what Mozilla's AI does, and you clearly have an issue with Mozilla's AI. I'm giving you the opportunity to say what's wrong about it (and so is Mozilla).
Found the person who only reads headlines!
Nice assumption, dingus. I filled out the survey (it's a terribly written survey) and sent it in before even writing that comment.
Well, you have the option to elaborate otherwise. Huge effort to normalize this survey.