this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2025
534 points (94.5% liked)

Technology

77084 readers
3659 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
534
Mozilla’s Betrayal of Open Source: Google’s Gemini AI is Overwriting Volunteer Work on Support Mozilla (www.quippd.com)
submitted 3 days ago by yoasif@fedia.io to c/technology@lemmy.world
103 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Invertedouroboros@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I don't necessarily disagree on the complexity point, but I don't think breaking up the functionality of a web browser fixes the issue.

Web browsers are one of those basic tools everyone who uses a computer relies upon. Breaking that up would not only lead to user frustration, I think it'd introduce brand new territories bad actors like Google could monopolize. Now that unified "web browsers" exist it's incredibly difficult to ask users to stop using them. It turns from "download this program" to "download these four or five separate programs and follow this guide to learn how to daisy chain them together into a browser equivalent.". That's a reasonable ask for some people. Hell, it's a reasonable ask for me frankly. But your average user isn't going to have the time nor the patience to attempt to make that solution work.

[–] tabular@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

Hopefully interoperability of seperate apps as 'part of a web browser experince' can be improved to help all users. However, the less technologically inclinded will have to step up and do something if they want to avoid growing frustrations from an endlessly, enshitifying browser experience.

Having a "do one thing" software design doesn't avoid all issues of anti-competition practices, nor does it prevent anti-features. For that I'd look towards software freedom licenses (as opposed to proprietary software).

We already have software that does some seprate parts of web browsers and comes with the OS; video players, text readers and protocol specific apps. The question is, are advanced users using alternatives like Gemini protocal? Hopefully activity will lead to others entering the new communities.