Stop spamming this community. Reported.

Interesting. By couching your skepticism in very dull (but no doubt accurate) legalese, you managed to avoid getting brigaded for effectively dissenting from the (also very dull) jaded-US-progressive groupthink in this community.

The danger of retaining one’s purity is that you risk forfeiting influence over what may (very well) happen anyway.

American robins seem to be fatter and gaudier than their European counterparts. Just saying.

So that’s what it looks like. I know this bird mainly thru the all-hearing ear of my bird-ID app.

Predictably insightful.

multiple groups that prioritize different paired corners of this people-information-scale triangle

Fact remains that we’re struggling mainly with the scale corner here.

As a counterpoint, I’ve used it for the best part of a decade, every single day, without a single issue.

My experience is anecdata. So is yours and OP’s.

This was reported on last year. Good to get a bit of hopeful news. There’s still so much left to save.

PS: species info

[etc etc] The shape supports the palm and lets riders rotate their wrists inward. With bent elbows and a narrow arm position, the hood position can now be surprisingly aerodynamic. [etc etc]

What lot of words to confirm what surely every cyclist has known they were a kid: bull-horns are just more comfortable than any other configuration you could come up with, and if you wanna go faster then just bending yer arms will help.

Brake “horns” always struck me as a tacit admission by bike designers that nobody wants to ride with drops, not really.

Still, interesting article.

What a handsome featherball.

I’m not “pushing for” anything except more control to the user. Where’s the contradiction? I was skeptical about AI chatbots (stochastic parrots etc) but it’s got to the point where the utility is impossible to deny. A one-stop-shop answer to any question, which is probably right and shows its sources, that’s a pretty amazing innovation. Huntnig for information is a lot of my web usage, so I absolutely see the point of putting that prompt alongside the one for URLs and search terms and even for merging it all one day (the first two were once separate prompts too, let’s remember). This is clearly the direction of the web whether we like it or not, and with more voice interface since young people hardly know how to write any more. The role of Mozilla IMO is not to stop this new world singlehandedly, it’s to give us more control over it.

Installing an extension for an occasional use-case like this is not quicker than what I did.

I do of course have extensions installed (including the canonical ad-blocker that you use too). I’ve been on the web since the 90s and was a full-time frontend developer for a decade until quite recently, so I’m hardly the ignoramus you’re making me out to be. From the same facts I just come to different conclusions to you. It happens.

If Firefox offers an off-switch for the features you don’t want (it does) then where is the “forcing down throats”? If this amazing project doesn’t survive because it refused to move with the world around it, then you won’t even have that off-switch and you’ll regret being so obstinate.

PS I see the downvotes, maybe it wasn’t you but I consider downvoting toxic so that’s all I have to say here. You’ve made your point and I did understand it.

There does appear to be a formal definition as well as an informal one:

Sharks are a group of elasmobranch cartilaginous fishes characterized by a ribless endoskeleton, dermal denticles, five to seven gill slits on each side, and pectoral fins that are not fused to the head. Modern sharks are classified within the division Selachii[1] and are the sister group to the Batomorphi (rays and skates). Some sources extend the term “shark” as an informal category including extinct members of Chondrichthyes (cartilaginous fish) with a shark-like morphology, such as hybodonts.

Great write-up! This is YSK premium content.

It would appeal to me. This morning I urgently needed to know the Spanish word for “carabiner”. Instead of searching for it, and then having to click thru (because the search results tend to bury the lede), and bat away cookie warnings and social sign-in banners, and scroll past a bunch of nonsense to find the damn word, I clicked on the dreaded AI button in the Firefox sidebar, typed “carabiner in Spanish” and a second later I had the word.

In my opinion it is fast becoming obtuse to claim that AI is useless bloat. The point should be to give users more control over it. Which is exactly what Firefox’s comparative advantage could be.

Where are all the people threatening to leave

The implication being that Firefox should not even bother trying to compete and win new users, all it needs to do is please its ever-dwindling userbase of grouchy geeks. I know you’ll respond “well without us they’ll have no users at all”, but that’s a pretty depressing argument to have to make, isn’t it?

The economics is simple: nobody is going to pay for their product, they have to find an income and this is what they’ve landed on, presumably after studying the market carefully - their jobs count on it, after all. Have you done that and found an alternative magic solution that keeps everyone happy? If so, tell them.

But this vision of 90s-style nerd-friendly browser which doesn’t even try to track the competition and yet somehow manages to remain relevant - I just don’t buy it.

The unconsented 3rd-party sharing is admittedly scandal-worthy.

As for the rest, IMO the author is tilting at windmills. These days Firefox is a trend-taker not a trend-maker. If the other browsers are metamorphosing into AI agents, then Firefox has no choice but to follow while doing it in the most privacy-respecting way possible. Otherwise Firefox will have no users and we will have no Firefox left to complain about.

To think that “We don’t want this AI crap” is a serious business proposition in 2026 - it’s deluded IMO. There just aren’t enough privacy-obsessed 90s-era geeks left to sustain such a product. We will have to compromise.

It’s always disturbing to see a bird with a faulty wing. The critters wouldn’t survive a day without this crucial bit of high-tech machinery in working order. When watching beat-up pigeons with missing toes etc I often wonder how it ends for them, and can’t help guessing it’s the wings that somehow betray them.

Voilà le résultat quand on est incapable de se remettre en question. Kodak et le numérique, VW et l’électrique, mêmes destins.

This behavior is filmed in episode 8 of Attenborough’s Life of Birds (1998), which remains a wonderful series and is free to watch on the IA.