Today, I step into the role of CEO of Mozilla Corporation. It is a privilege to lead an organization with a long history of standing up for people and buil
No, fuck that. I am sick and tired of having shit pushed at me and then it being made my responsibility to be eternally hypervigilent to avoid it. It’s abusive and fucking shame on you for defending it!
What if, instead of having to go to the effort of turning it all off, it’s already off though?
Consent in any other scenario doesn’t have yes as the default option, why tolerate it in the tech world? (Autocorrect changed tech to greedy, that’s perhaps more accurate)
Optional has a very simple meaning if you ignore the context of the conversion.
Consider the question “Would you like to be punched in the face or not?” You have the option to choose either, but before you answer I’ll start punching you in the face anyway. Do you see how consent is a requirement of optional in that context?
The same applies for many options in life, the default is almost always “no”. Firefox should make this opt-in, not opt-out for the same reason.
If you’re still not convinced by the argument of consent (which, ooft, red flag if you’re not) then also consider the uproar in both this thread and around the internet/tech world because of this decision by Mozilla. All they have to do is change it from opt-out to opt-in and all this outrage disappears. But they haven’t. Why?
This is not in good faith. There is absolutely no point in a conversation where one person argues for words having meaning and the other person pretending what they’re really doing is arguing against a larger point which they actually happen to agree with.
I disagree, you’re not conversing in good faith, because you’re trying to win a pedantic argument that nobody else is engaging in. You see no way to “win” so you declare it bad faith.
The topic at hand is Mozilla adding AI into Firefox by default, and allowing users to turn it off if desired. So, optional, as you stated. The context that you’re refusing to acknowledge however, because you’re determined to win a pedantic argument rather than engage in a conversation, is that optional in this regard requires consent. Informed consent even. What does AI do to/for the end user? Why should they accept it to be on? What safeguards are in place? Unless they know this context, it should be off by default. Off by default is still optional, the user can still turn it on if they desire.
But you’re hung up on the word optional and care more about the pedantry of that one word rather than the context that brought us all into this conversation in the first place.
No, fuck that. I am sick and tired of having shit pushed at me and then it being made my responsibility to be eternally hypervigilent to avoid it. It’s abusive and fucking shame on you for defending it!
Yes, the only way to talk about something you don’t like is to bend the actual meaning of words to make it sound worse.
…or, we can just respect what words mean. Big ask, I know.
I have turned off every AI feature I can in Firefox and most any other app. I’m not DeFeNdInG jack shit.
What if, instead of having to go to the effort of turning it all off, it’s already off though?
Consent in any other scenario doesn’t have yes as the default option, why tolerate it in the tech world? (Autocorrect changed tech to greedy, that’s perhaps more accurate)
That’s a different conversation. I’m trying to call someone on lying. “Optional” has a very simple meaning.
Optional has a very simple meaning if you ignore the context of the conversion.
Consider the question “Would you like to be punched in the face or not?” You have the option to choose either, but before you answer I’ll start punching you in the face anyway. Do you see how consent is a requirement of optional in that context?
The same applies for many options in life, the default is almost always “no”. Firefox should make this opt-in, not opt-out for the same reason.
If you’re still not convinced by the argument of consent (which, ooft, red flag if you’re not) then also consider the uproar in both this thread and around the internet/tech world because of this decision by Mozilla. All they have to do is change it from opt-out to opt-in and all this outrage disappears. But they haven’t. Why?
This is not in good faith. There is absolutely no point in a conversation where one person argues for words having meaning and the other person pretending what they’re really doing is arguing against a larger point which they actually happen to agree with.
I disagree, you’re not conversing in good faith, because you’re trying to win a pedantic argument that nobody else is engaging in. You see no way to “win” so you declare it bad faith.
The topic at hand is Mozilla adding AI into Firefox by default, and allowing users to turn it off if desired. So, optional, as you stated. The context that you’re refusing to acknowledge however, because you’re determined to win a pedantic argument rather than engage in a conversation, is that optional in this regard requires consent. Informed consent even. What does AI do to/for the end user? Why should they accept it to be on? What safeguards are in place? Unless they know this context, it should be off by default. Off by default is still optional, the user can still turn it on if they desire.
But you’re hung up on the word optional and care more about the pedantry of that one word rather than the context that brought us all into this conversation in the first place.
Again, I simply chose to criticize the false use of a word in order to lie to make a point that was already valid and easily made.
I Am NoT eNgAgiNg In YoUr PoInT tHeReFoRe It DoEsNt ExIsT