TL;DR: Mozilla’s translation bot on Support Mozilla (that is currently overwriting user contributions is based on the closed source, copyright infringing LLM, Google Gemini. This is in spite of Mozilla claiming that they are at the forefront of open source AI, and belies their exhortations to choose to build open source AI and data sets. Although Mozilla has experience in attracting open contributions for data sets in projects like Common Voice, Mozilla is using a closed data set to overwrite open contributions. Since (paid) Gemini queries do not train the model, Mozillians can expect to correct errors every time the bot automatically updates an article.
contrast with vivaldi explicitly taking a no ai stand in the browser.
But also not open source.
True. Still, afaik, they haven’t done anything shady.
They also haven’t written a browser. It’s an apples and oranges comparison. There are plenty of Firefox derivatives that don’t have all the bloat that Mozilla, et cetera, is putting into there. That’s not the point. The point is how controlled they are by one of their competitors, namely Google.
There are only three main browser makers. Chrome by Google Firefox by Mozilla and WebKit/Safari now maintained by Apple but derived from Linux’s K desktop environment web engine. There are a lot of wrappers written around these, but at the end of the day, there’s still just the three.
The one real interesting bright spot though that I’m looking forward to is servo. Originally started by Mozilla, but now completely free of them. It’s not yet in a daily driver’s state, but it’s looking to be quite interesting.
Out of curiosity, how are Konqueror and Falkon relates to the big three?
Their websites say they use KHTML or KDEWebkit (Konqueror) or QtWebEngine (falkon). Are these downstream adaptations of apple-WebKit?
Judging by the QtWebEngine page, it doesn’t explicitly say it, but I think it is based on chromium.
Konqueror is a bit harder to figure out. Maybe QtWebKit. Is this also Chromium?
Yes, they are both WebKit, though largely irrelevant. Personally, I’m a daily KDE user. I did install falkon out of Curiosity for a short while. But neither it or konqueror are generally in any distributions base install. Including KDE neon.
They are usable, so long as you don’t use any sort of add-ons.
Falkon is based on Qt web. So it is also WebKit.
Correction Falkon and Qt web engine are indeed chromium. Konqueror alone then would be WebKit
QtWebEngine is Chromium, not Apple WebKit
Ah you are correct. Thanks for the correction. I may have read otherwise, somewhere, but who knows that may have been an AI-tinted site. It’s been a hot minute since I last messed with programming using QT. I could have sworn it was webkit but the facts are the facts.
Which is entirely not the point.
Some of it is.
Open source is like being pregnant - you either are are you aren’t. Vivaldi isn’t.
This is wrong. There wouldn’t be as many open source license if it was as clear cut.
There are many open source licenses. Being closed source isn’t one of them.
What i’m saying is, there are many interpretations of open source.
So, neither is Linux?
Depends on the distro and whether you want your wireless card to work or not
Wanna show me the free version of Vivaldi?
Here you go. Like Linux, where “everything but drivers” is open source, everything but the UI is open source.
So what is that, a build of Chromium with no Vivaldi features? What is the point exactly? I can download Chromium by itself already. I’ll even get edit history, unlike the big tarball that Vivaldi gives me.