Firefox Will Ship With an 'AI Kill Switch' To Completely Disable All AI Features (9to5linux.com) 79
An anonymous reader shared this report from 9to5Linux:
After the controversial news shared earlier this week by Mozilla's new CEO that Firefox will evolve into "a modern AI browser," the company now revealed it is working on an AI kill switch for the open-source web browser...
What was not made clear [in Tuesday's comments by new Mozilla CEO Anthony Enzor-DeMeo] is that Firefox will also ship with an AI kill switch that will let users completely disable all the AI features that are included in Firefox. Mozilla shared this important update earlier Thursday to make it clear to everyone that Firefox will still be a trusted web browser.... "...that's how seriously and absolutely we're taking this," said Firefox developer Jake Archibald on Mastodon.
In addition, Jake Archibald said that all the AI features that are or will be included in Firefox will also be opt-in. "I think there are some grey areas in what 'opt-in' means to different people (e.g. is a new toolbar button opt-in?), but the kill switch will absolutely remove all that stuff, and never show it in future. That's unambiguous..."
Mozilla has contacted me shortly after writing the story to confirm that the "AI Kill Switch" will be implemented in Q1 2026."
The article also cites this quote left by Mozilla's new CEO on Reddit:
"Rest assured, Firefox will always remain a browser built around user control. That includes AI. You will have a clear way to turn AI features off. A real kill switch is coming in Q1 of 2026. Choice matters and demonstrating our commitment to choice is how we build and maintain trust."
What was not made clear [in Tuesday's comments by new Mozilla CEO Anthony Enzor-DeMeo] is that Firefox will also ship with an AI kill switch that will let users completely disable all the AI features that are included in Firefox. Mozilla shared this important update earlier Thursday to make it clear to everyone that Firefox will still be a trusted web browser.... "...that's how seriously and absolutely we're taking this," said Firefox developer Jake Archibald on Mastodon.
In addition, Jake Archibald said that all the AI features that are or will be included in Firefox will also be opt-in. "I think there are some grey areas in what 'opt-in' means to different people (e.g. is a new toolbar button opt-in?), but the kill switch will absolutely remove all that stuff, and never show it in future. That's unambiguous..."
Mozilla has contacted me shortly after writing the story to confirm that the "AI Kill Switch" will be implemented in Q1 2026."
The article also cites this quote left by Mozilla's new CEO on Reddit:
"Rest assured, Firefox will always remain a browser built around user control. That includes AI. You will have a clear way to turn AI features off. A real kill switch is coming in Q1 of 2026. Choice matters and demonstrating our commitment to choice is how we build and maintain trust."
Right. (Score:4, Insightful)
I realize that marketing and PR flacks are subhuman enemies of communication; but that's not even pretending to be what 'opt-in' means.
Re: Right. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's opt in as in it won't send your data anywhere unless you click the "summarize with AI" button or the "chat with AI" button.
It has a "kill switch" which removes those buttons (and presumably whatever new stuff they add).
Wrong. No soup or money for you, Mozilla. (Score:2)
Yeah, I'm going for Funny again. And failing. As usual.
But if I had been asked which feature I WANTED to pay for, then disabling the AI is much more likely the feature I would donate for than the feature to add "AI" to Firefox in the first place. If I WANT AI, then I know where to go looking for it. I've "played" with lots of the so-called generative AIs--and so far I hate them all and I am currently unable to imagine the "project pitch" that would persuade me to donate for that feature.
But maybe they could
Re: (Score:2)
[And what's with the graying out on Slashdot? When I first saw the story it had only three comments but was unclickable. I'd think I should know after so many years, but...]
You have to click the title first to reveal the summary, then you can click the number of comments to see what people said. Caveat: any comment posted while the story is grey disappears when it is greenlit, tho an editor may reference some of them in the summary that gets the green.
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty sure I tried that but failed. I actually suspect it is some kind of manual problem related to minimizing FP abuse?
In my list of dimensions of evaluating generating AIs, I forgot three of the most negative ones. Criminal profitability is pretty obvious, though the crooks don't show their profits so you'd have to steer backwards by assessing their efforts, presumably correlated with the most profitable scams. Another negative dimension is related to "best for generating AI slop". The third that comes t
Re: (Score:2)
What moron voted this "offtopic"? Well, you are a victim my friend. A willing stupid victim. How pathetic.
Re: (Score:2)
This kind of shit is what made me abandon ship when Brave browser opted people into their weird sketchy crypto wallet thing by default.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
That's a big red flag. They aren't going to offer that service for free. AI uses a lot of power. So either it's there in the hope of all upsell, or they intend to harvest your data, or both.
Need more details.
Also please improve Firefox for Android. Thanks.
Re: (Score:2)
In related news:
Glock have announced that their new Glock 726-plus-AI model comes already loaded with one in the chamber and cocked with the safety off right out of the box.
Purchasers/survivors can, after purchase and unpacking, activate the safety, remove the magazine and rack the slide so as to eject the chambered round if they wish to opt-out of this fantastic new feature.
Safety first!
Re: (Score:2)
> activate the safety
I recommend doing a quick search for "glock safety" before your next venture into gun analogies.
Re: (Score:2)
You could have saved yourself a lot of words and just brought up the Sig P320 instead.
Re: (Score:1)
The new AI is opt in, but some people are still crying about it. Mozilla builds an additional kill switch so they can sleep better.
Will the AI Killswitch be Off by Default? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
In the EU, the GDPR will likely legally require it to be off. You US folks may be screwed, as usual though and have to fix things manually.
Re: Will the AI Killswitch be Off by Default? (Score:2)
Even when not killed the AI technology won't send anything if you do not engage with it. So assuming they tell the user what data they are sending. Having the technology on shouldn't be an issue in the EU. The kill switch is more to make people feel safer and the UI cleaner without slop buttons
Re: (Score:2)
You _really_ do not understand the GDPR.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you going to back that up, or in any way adress my comment? Or will you just insist on posting a stupid comment?
Let me repeat: Assuming data is only send when the function is engaged, and the user is clearly informed before they said data is transmitted. It is legal withing EU data regulations.
Re: (Score:2)
>"Because that is exactly what you would do if you honored peoples' privacy, sanity, and morals."
That is a bit dramatic.
Should "search" function be disabled (or "killed") as well? If you use it, it will send information to servers like Google, who will profile and track you...
Even with the AI features on, you are assuming it does something without the user telling it to. I don't think that is how this is going to work. Or certainly not the majority of it.
And it was stupid for the marketing people to c
Re:Will the AI Killswitch be Off by Default? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
I have my Firefox set the exact same way. Separate URL and search, they way it should be.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, have had those set from the first version that came out with the silly "awesome bar" or whatever combined the two. And turn off the hiding of the full URL.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, it was beautiful and clear. But what I've seen from people browsing habits in the last several years is that they will enter the URL they want to go to, but not in the browser address bar â" in the search field of the content area. Just informing Google what they *already know* how to get to â" for no reason at all. Even well-versed users do this. It sickens me every time I see somebody use a computer.
Basisk Browser (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.kompx.com/en/web-br... [kompx.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It works in WaterFox. Hint hint.
Re: (Score:1)
I have the latest version of Librewolf. UBlock Origin came with it.
Re: (Score:2)
It's built-in
There is only one acceptable "kill switch". (Score:4, Informative)
It is the "uninstall this extension" button.
The extension system is there for a reason, use it.
Also, make "install this extension" the prerequisite to enable that button, if you catch my drift.
Bad idea. More than one extension (Score:2, Interesting)
Bad idea. You are assuming all AI will be in one extension and that no one unconnected to Firefox will create other extensions.
Better for Firefox to assume there will be multiple AI extensions and to design the browser to turn off all AI, not just the one extension they know about.
Yes, this depends on extension builders to abide by the rules, but that always is a requirement.
Re: (Score:1)
I assumed you were not an idiot. Because if you knew it is possible to add an AI via an extension, then you knew your proposed solution would not work. You knew that removing the AI functionality would not stop other people from adding AI back in.
Which was why Firefox put in a button that lets you know the AI is off.
Congratulations for insulting me for thinking you were not an idiot.
Re: (Score:2)
Gray areas? (Score:5, Insightful)
"I think there are some grey areas in what 'opt-in' means to different people"
No, there are no gray areas in what 'opt-in' means to different people. Only one kind of person believes that: Spammers. No other kind of person would ever say such a thing.
Re: (Score:3)
The problem is, that some people consider a button "start AI" not to be opt-in, because they do not only want to opt-in the AI but also to opt-in having the button. And in the comment section people already comment that a kill switch needs to be off by default. Next they probably tell that having AI with a kill-switch should be opt-in. I mean I get when someone thinks there are useless features, but it is not that hard just not to use a feature.
Vivaldi has fucking Philips Hue integration, but it doesn't eat
Re:Gray areas? (Score:5, Interesting)
No, it definitely is a gray area. You right-click and see "Ask an AI Chatbot" in the menu? Some people here count that as not being opt-in and invasive because they can see the option, even if it doesn't do anything until you set it up or click the button to remove it. Hell, some people here on Slashdot will bitch and moan if the browser so much as pops up a hint asking if you want to enable some LLM feature. Even ASKING if you want to opt-in is too much for some people.
Some people think that they should not even be aware that a feature exists unless you search for it in the settings menu and enable it. That is "opt-in" for them. And for others, they don't view the browser exposing a feature stub or informing the user about a new feature as "opt-in" if you still need to take action to both enable and use the feature.
It sounds like this "kill-switch" is to placate the first group of people who don't even want to know the feature exists. It will most likely remove all of the dormant feature stubs entirely and the browser won't tell them about the features at all. I think that is perfectly okay.
Re: (Score:2)
Equating "opt-in" with "just don't use these UI elements" is too coarse-grained to be a useful rule of thumb. At the top of that slippery slope is stuff like freemium applications - until you give them a credit card, various buttons/features just show you an ad and a buy button. I think this is perfectly acceptable, even if it feels a bit tacky to me. But once you accept getting a little more adversarial with your UX design, it isn't all that far f
Good (Score:1)
I may keep using it then. Occasionally. As a reserve browser.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
WaterFox.
With memory becoming prohibitively expensive (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's likely not going to use a local LLM instance.
Re: With memory becoming prohibitively expensive (Score:2)
"Kill Switch" (Score:2)
Didn't these fools watch the movie 2001? Summary: "I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that."
The kill switch might still kill though, though it may have a different target than itself. Since you tried to murder it, the AI may consider it self defense.
Re: (Score:2)
LLM are not your typical evil movie AI.
Re: (Score:2)
Hell, they're not even "AI" to begin with.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm getting tired of explaining this ...
AI is the broadest category, not the findest. The path finding algorithm in your old DOS game is AI, the auto completion on your phone is AI, and ELIZA is AI even when you can implement it with a simple switch statement.
You're probably thinking of AGI/ASI, which we don't have yet and may never get.
I could pick one for you, but choose your own Venn diagram: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=ai+v... [duckduckgo.com]
They have all in common, that AI is the largest circle, not the the smallest. So
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree. With this thinking the simple min/max routines I've written over the years for next best move are considered AI? Path finding algorithms are nothing more than a recursive subroutine that tries every possible path which I have written as well. ELIZA, nope. All of these routines have set limits and parameters to follow. They can't break from those constraints. The same goes for LLMs. Clever programming is not AI. AI is being used as a buzzword to make these things appear to be something they are n
Re: (Score:2)
You can use your own definitions, but the general scientific notion is that AI is the category that includes all of that.
I think you have wrong associations with the word "AI" and possibly "artificial intelligence" using them like in sci-fi movies instead like they are used in computer science. I see where you are coming from, but it doesn't help to insist on using the term in a different way than the majority of literature (scientific, not sci-fi) uses it.
Get ready for a surprise (Score:2)
When you see the analytics and realise that no one wants it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
One problem with this approach is that those of us who don't want 'AI' in Firefox don't permit telemetry to be sent to Mozilla, either through configuration settings or about:config url butchering, or by network firewall policies.
Ironically ... (Score:2)
Judging from movies, AIs will also come with a Kill Switch - that completely disables all humans.
But WHY? (Score:2)
I have to wonder (Score:2)
Not good enough. (Score:2)
I think they need to release the Firefox with no 'AI' whatsoever, and separate version, based on the most recent LTS version of Firefox, perhaps called Firefox+AI with the full 'AI' feature set available. In this new Firefox+AI browser, they need to enforce a requirement that every available option must have a corresponding menu toggle available to enable, disable, or otherwise limit it, or the option doesn't get merged. I don't think its necessary for the Firefox team to back-port all of the new configur
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but keep in mind that they might forget to update the AI-free build as often.
Just make a new browser (Score:2)
Kill All AI switch (Score:2)
You tried to flip that switch, but then the caption on it turned red and now says "Kill All Humans". And it seems to be stuck!
A.I. Kill Switch... (Score:2)
"Firefox Will Ship With an 'AI GCC Compiler #DEFINE NO_AI_BITCHEZ Kill Switch' To Completely Remove All AI Features at build time.
There.
Fixed it for ya.
Most likely a Placebo Button. (Score:4, Insightful)
They'll change it quietly when nobody is watching (Score:2)
Just like when TRR was opt-in via a dark pattern prompt until it silently became opt-out with zero notification.
Just give us a good browser. (Score:3)
Yeah yeah, too late... (Score:2)
I already switched to LibreWolf. Thanks for these two decades Firefox, but I don't recognize you now.
Is Firefox not open-source? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
LibreWolf and WaterFox will probably do just that.
How about not having it from the start...? (Score:2)
This opt-out stuff is getting old. Maybe it is what Firefox has to do to keep funding coming in, but it would be nice that by default, stuff like AI, video ads, canvas fingerprinting, scanning battery life, reading the TPM ID and other individualizing stuff is off by default, and is limited by a URL or site basis.
IMHO, I think Firefox is doing this because it is either that or bankruptcy.
The Mozilla execs are so Funny! driven by Google $ (Score:2)
How about a Double Layered enable process, Really use AI?, Are you Really, Really Sure you want to use AI, OK it is on You! Turn all AI stuff on (Y/n)
The one switch most ... (Score:2)
... if not all Firefox user wil set to kill ai. (ai is spyware optimo formo)
Why not just offer two versions? (Score:2)
One with, and one, with a smaller code base, without?