Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. Chrome looks set to ship an LLM Prompt API to the web platform.

Chrome looks set to ship an LLM Prompt API to the web platform.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
47 Posts 25 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • marc_eu@veganism.socialM marc_eu@veganism.social

    @stux @firefoxwebdevs
    Read first before you react. Mozilla opposes the *API*.

    stux@mstdn.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
    stux@mstdn.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
    stux@mstdn.social
    wrote last edited by
    #21

    @marc_eu @firefoxwebdevs Yes, AI API

    marc_eu@veganism.socialM placebo@mastodon.ieP 2 Replies Last reply
    0
    • firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.socialF firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.social

      Chrome looks set to ship an LLM Prompt API to the web platform. At Mozilla, we oppose this API.

      We feel it has a large interoperability risk, and Google imposing T&Cs on a web API sets a dangerous precedent.

      Full details: https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1213#issuecomment-4347988313

      wcbdata@vis.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
      wcbdata@vis.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
      wcbdata@vis.social
      wrote last edited by
      #22

      @firefoxwebdevs I'm assuming @Vivaldi will disable the whole thing, yes?

      firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.socialF techienotnetie@social.vivaldi.netT 2 Replies Last reply
      0
      • stux@mstdn.socialS stux@mstdn.social

        @marc_eu @firefoxwebdevs Yes, AI API

        marc_eu@veganism.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
        marc_eu@veganism.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
        marc_eu@veganism.social
        wrote last edited by
        #23

        @stux @firefoxwebdevs
        En dus is de reactie van Mozilla niet zo gek?

        yokhai@gaygeek.socialY 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.socialF firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.social

          @xela it's possible an LLM API will come along that solves the issues, but yeah… it seems really tricky. The open ended nature of it will always be a huge interop problem.

          If the use-cases are tightened, e.g. translation, the problem is reduced.

          xela@troet.cafeX This user is from outside of this forum
          xela@troet.cafeX This user is from outside of this forum
          xela@troet.cafe
          wrote last edited by
          #24

          @firefoxwebdevs honestly, currently I couldn't think of any "magical twist", that makes the problems (model neutrality, legal pitfalls) go away.

          Our perspectives seem to differ a bit - to me yours reads like
          "is it technically feasible, is it fun to implement?"
          while mine's rather
          "do I want that in my browser and which problem does that solve, anyway?". 😁
          But that's only my interpretation, of course. 😹

          firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.socialF 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • wcbdata@vis.socialW wcbdata@vis.social

            @firefoxwebdevs I'm assuming @Vivaldi will disable the whole thing, yes?

            firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
            firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
            firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.social
            wrote last edited by
            #25

            @wcbdata @Vivaldi tagging the unimpeachable @brucelawson to answer that one.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • toldtheworld@mastodon.socialT toldtheworld@mastodon.social

              @Aedius @firefoxwebdevs but doesn't Firefox already allow us to disable AI features?

              aedius@lavraievie.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
              aedius@lavraievie.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
              aedius@lavraievie.social
              wrote last edited by
              #26

              @toldtheworld @firefoxwebdevs

              Yes but it mean that they still burn money for crap.

              toldtheworld@mastodon.socialT 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • xela@troet.cafeX xela@troet.cafe

                @firefoxwebdevs honestly, currently I couldn't think of any "magical twist", that makes the problems (model neutrality, legal pitfalls) go away.

                Our perspectives seem to differ a bit - to me yours reads like
                "is it technically feasible, is it fun to implement?"
                while mine's rather
                "do I want that in my browser and which problem does that solve, anyway?". 😁
                But that's only my interpretation, of course. 😹

                firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
                firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
                firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.social
                wrote last edited by
                #27

                @xela eh I'd say my view is "is this good for the web?", and I don't think this API is. If the technical issues were sorted, then maybe it's worth another look, but like I said in the standards position, I think developer desire of this API is being massively overstated by Google.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.socialF firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.social

                  Chrome looks set to ship an LLM Prompt API to the web platform. At Mozilla, we oppose this API.

                  We feel it has a large interoperability risk, and Google imposing T&Cs on a web API sets a dangerous precedent.

                  Full details: https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1213#issuecomment-4347988313

                  scudo@antani.cyouS This user is from outside of this forum
                  scudo@antani.cyouS This user is from outside of this forum
                  scudo@antani.cyou
                  wrote last edited by
                  #28

                  @firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.social the same guys that have put AI in Firefox said "we won't put AI in Firefox"

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • aedius@lavraievie.socialA aedius@lavraievie.social

                    @toldtheworld @firefoxwebdevs

                    Yes but it mean that they still burn money for crap.

                    toldtheworld@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                    toldtheworld@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                    toldtheworld@mastodon.social
                    wrote last edited by
                    #29

                    @Aedius @firefoxwebdevs ah, you mean during development? I suppose there's no good alternative right now; I can't imagine a browser developer not using LLMs for coding. The biggest problem I see arises from lack of transparency on energy usage (and environmental impact) on the part of providers. Blaming them would be more productive. If we can get them to report the true impact of each inference request, I'm pretty sure people will freak out and slow down.

                    aedius@lavraievie.socialA 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • toldtheworld@mastodon.socialT toldtheworld@mastodon.social

                      @Aedius @firefoxwebdevs ah, you mean during development? I suppose there's no good alternative right now; I can't imagine a browser developer not using LLMs for coding. The biggest problem I see arises from lack of transparency on energy usage (and environmental impact) on the part of providers. Blaming them would be more productive. If we can get them to report the true impact of each inference request, I'm pretty sure people will freak out and slow down.

                      aedius@lavraievie.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
                      aedius@lavraievie.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
                      aedius@lavraievie.social
                      wrote last edited by
                      #30

                      @toldtheworld @firefoxwebdevs

                      The alternative is to continue the human development, lower the entry level for contribution.

                      LLM development is producing technical debt faster than ever before.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • stux@mstdn.socialS stux@mstdn.social

                        @marc_eu @firefoxwebdevs Yes, AI API

                        placebo@mastodon.ieP This user is from outside of this forum
                        placebo@mastodon.ieP This user is from outside of this forum
                        placebo@mastodon.ie
                        wrote last edited by
                        #31

                        @stux @marc_eu @firefoxwebdevs if only you guys knew how many times I typed openai instead of openapi and vice versa

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • marc_eu@veganism.socialM marc_eu@veganism.social

                          @stux @firefoxwebdevs
                          En dus is de reactie van Mozilla niet zo gek?

                          yokhai@gaygeek.socialY This user is from outside of this forum
                          yokhai@gaygeek.socialY This user is from outside of this forum
                          yokhai@gaygeek.social
                          wrote last edited by
                          #32

                          @marc_eu if not for the fact that Mozilla ships Firefox with AI chatbots despite a majority of people telling them, "don't do that"...this *would* have been a noble cause.

                          marc_eu@veganism.socialM 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.socialF firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.social

                            @valpackett yeah, "strongly positive" seems so misrepresentative that it'd break Google's T&C's if it was fed to the Prompt API.

                            phl@mastodon.socialP This user is from outside of this forum
                            phl@mastodon.socialP This user is from outside of this forum
                            phl@mastodon.social
                            wrote last edited by
                            #33

                            @firefoxwebdevs @valpackett Incidentally that links to a github md file which itself says merely positive and links further to an issue with ONE comment, and a blog that doesn't exist — and two other things. That's not exactly overwhelming support and excitement.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • yokhai@gaygeek.socialY yokhai@gaygeek.social

                              @marc_eu if not for the fact that Mozilla ships Firefox with AI chatbots despite a majority of people telling them, "don't do that"...this *would* have been a noble cause.

                              marc_eu@veganism.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                              marc_eu@veganism.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                              marc_eu@veganism.social
                              wrote last edited by
                              #34

                              @yokhai
                              Yeah, but in all fairness, they're focusing on only local LLM's and, more importantly they implemented a AI kill switch that turns every AI functionality off and is enabled (= no AI) by default.

                              yoasif@mastodon.socialY 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.socialF firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.social

                                Chrome looks set to ship an LLM Prompt API to the web platform. At Mozilla, we oppose this API.

                                We feel it has a large interoperability risk, and Google imposing T&Cs on a web API sets a dangerous precedent.

                                Full details: https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1213#issuecomment-4347988313

                                rejzor@mastodon.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
                                rejzor@mastodon.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
                                rejzor@mastodon.social
                                wrote last edited by
                                #35

                                @firefoxwebdevs Thing is, Google doesn't care what anyone thinks, especially not Mozilla unfortunately because they own the internet with Chrome. And they push shit that entirely benefits them and not the internet as ecosystem.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • marc_eu@veganism.socialM marc_eu@veganism.social

                                  @yokhai
                                  Yeah, but in all fairness, they're focusing on only local LLM's and, more importantly they implemented a AI kill switch that turns every AI functionality off and is enabled (= no AI) by default.

                                  yoasif@mastodon.socialY This user is from outside of this forum
                                  yoasif@mastodon.socialY This user is from outside of this forum
                                  yoasif@mastodon.social
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #36

                                  @marc_eu @yokhai None of their LLMs are local, what are you talking about?

                                  PS: Link Previews is enabled by default (and is disabled by the kill switch - weird, right?): https://www.quippd.com/writing/2026/01/06/architecting-consent-for-ai-deceptive-patterns-in-firefox-link-previews.html

                                  marc_eu@veganism.socialM 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • wcbdata@vis.socialW wcbdata@vis.social

                                    @firefoxwebdevs I'm assuming @Vivaldi will disable the whole thing, yes?

                                    techienotnetie@social.vivaldi.netT This user is from outside of this forum
                                    techienotnetie@social.vivaldi.netT This user is from outside of this forum
                                    techienotnetie@social.vivaldi.net
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #37

                                    @wcbdata @firefoxwebdevs @Vivaldi We have been disabling Gemini (GLIC) at compile-time for a while (and we needed to redo that recently after the Chromium team removed all the ifdefs). Several others features are disabled by overriding the "Is this feature enabled?" logic, and in this case, AFAICT this particular API depends on a component that is already disabled that way. (Actually disabling the code for most of those features when building would require hundreds of large and small patches, which would be a maintenance nightmare; I just tried that last week.)

                                    wcbdata@vis.socialW 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.socialF firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.social

                                      Chrome looks set to ship an LLM Prompt API to the web platform. At Mozilla, we oppose this API.

                                      We feel it has a large interoperability risk, and Google imposing T&Cs on a web API sets a dangerous precedent.

                                      Full details: https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1213#issuecomment-4347988313

                                      sterpeto@social.vivaldi.netS This user is from outside of this forum
                                      sterpeto@social.vivaldi.netS This user is from outside of this forum
                                      sterpeto@social.vivaldi.net
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #38

                                      @firefoxwebdevs w3m and lynx our only hopes.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.socialF firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.social

                                        Chrome looks set to ship an LLM Prompt API to the web platform. At Mozilla, we oppose this API.

                                        We feel it has a large interoperability risk, and Google imposing T&Cs on a web API sets a dangerous precedent.

                                        Full details: https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1213#issuecomment-4347988313

                                        rafaelmartins@mastodon.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
                                        rafaelmartins@mastodon.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
                                        rafaelmartins@mastodon.social
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #39

                                        @firefoxwebdevs it is too late to pretend that you care...

                                        firefoxwebdevs@mastodon.socialF 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • techienotnetie@social.vivaldi.netT techienotnetie@social.vivaldi.net

                                          @wcbdata @firefoxwebdevs @Vivaldi We have been disabling Gemini (GLIC) at compile-time for a while (and we needed to redo that recently after the Chromium team removed all the ifdefs). Several others features are disabled by overriding the "Is this feature enabled?" logic, and in this case, AFAICT this particular API depends on a component that is already disabled that way. (Actually disabling the code for most of those features when building would require hundreds of large and small patches, which would be a maintenance nightmare; I just tried that last week.)

                                          wcbdata@vis.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
                                          wcbdata@vis.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
                                          wcbdata@vis.social
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #40

                                          @TechieNotNetie @firefoxwebdevs @Vivaldi Excellent - thank you!

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups