Post

In response to our objection to the Prompt API, some folks replied "well, fix it. Propose something better". This is something we end up doing a lot at Firefox…

…some of this is just part of participating in web platform design, but in some cases it's a little unbalanced. Given the same resources, I think we'd be in a better place if Chrome was working on fewer features, but fully-baking them. I don't think it's on Mozilla to fix every half-baked proposal.

8 reposts105 likes

Genuine question: are you happy with the role that the web plays on mobile devices today in comparison to native apps? If not, is it possible that the industry shift to AI might be an iPhone-level moment and put the web on the same position on desktop too (say, if openclaw and MCP takes on?)?

I thought about my usage of AI. It's: - Coding - Audio cleanup - Speech to text - Searching/research - Translation Most of these are cloud. The local models are custom for the task. None are using the OS's generic model. But… on devices that do have an OS model, why isn't the Prompt API using it?

The Mozilla objections are not to the API. The API is pretty boring and looks like what any LLM has looked like for over half a decade. The opposition is to there being an LLM at all. The objection is to Google shipping an LLM, that too many people would target that LLM. This isn't resolvable!

When I said resolvable, I was referring to the long held, unspoken expectation that Chrome/Google just do things and expect it to become a standard. Usually without consultation, or actual community dialogue. TLDR, I don’t think I misunderstood what was being objected to

standards are standards due to being deterministic (hence the word standard), and while some approaches (like translation) can be coerced into that standard, llms seem far too chaotic for me to imagine there is a way to integrate them, the prompt api is probably better as a library rather than

the API for using them is standard! making each site download it's own model and webgpu it sounds terrible for users, anti-user-agency. non-starter. the desires within us to pave the world & suppress dynamism is spiritually disgusting & bereft. that's not what standards are for. enable not control

a web standard, a push towards better webgl shaders and improving onnx support (and specifically onnx-gpu based support) likely here would lead to better outcomes since it would make it possible for devs to load up arbitrary models into the web and control the chaotic nature themselves.

The web is a good 15 years behind native platforms. "Going slow" is just a recipe to become even farther behind, and failing users in the process. I remember the B2G days, and Mozilla's position was not to go slow then. I missing that Mozilla.

Windows ML is a native local AI inferencing framework based on ONNX runtime (it’s more about letting devs ship an app and then the framework makes that run well on whatever hardware and models you have so not exactly the same but native is getting these kind of features)

I use AI for: - Coding assistance - Audio cleanup - Speech to text - Searching/research - Translation Most of these are cloud. The local models are custom for the task. None are using the OS's model.