• zecg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    29
    ·
    5 months ago

    Pretty please, fuck off with the AI. It’s really not something I need from a browser, don’t inflate your download size for a screen reader, just MAKE IT OPTIONAL in every way.

    • robber@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      47
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      I totally agree regarding making it optional, but I have to say the idea of auto generating alt texts sounds like a really useful application of AI - no one really likes to do that manually yet a significant number of beautiful people rely on it.

      • mormund@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        I do agree with your point about auto-generated captions being better than no captions. But isn’t it bad to insert them automatically on creation? If we use these models to caption images shouldn’t it be done by the screen reader instead? That way people can benefit from future advancements of the tech and customize the captioning system for themselves. With the current system there is no way to tell if you got a crappy AI caption that you may want to replace with a better auto-generated caption or a human written caption.

        • Monument@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          So - I don’t think Firefox would be generating captions for PDFs on PDF creation.

          But of the major ways that PDF’s do get created - converted from text editors or design software, I know that Microsoft Word automatically suggests captions when the document creator adds an image (but does not automatically apply captions), and I believe that some design software does, as well.

          I think that, functionally, both suggesting captions at time of document creation, or at time of document read are prone to the same issues - that the software may not be smart enough to properly identify the object, and if it is, that it is not necessarily smart enough to explain it in context.
          By way of example, a screenshot of a computer program will have the automatic suggestion of “A graphical user interface” (or similar), but depending on the context and usage, it could be “A virus installer disguised as ___ video game installer.” Or “The ___ video game installer.” Between the document creator and the creation software or screen reader, only the document creator would really know the context for the image.

          Which is all to say that I think that Mozilla has the right idea with auto-tagging, but it will always fail on context. The only way to actually address the issue is to deal with it within the document creation software.
          But I wouldn’t be opposed to ML on those that can auto-suggest things or even critique how content authors write their descriptions.

    • crusty@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      I’m looking forward to a local ai-powered translator so I don’t have to send data to google or bing

    • Microw@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Afaik nearly every feature/product Mozilla has shipped with Firefox in the past has been optional. So surely these will be as well.

    • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      You sound like you have no disabilities that make it hard for you to use the Internet. Good for you.

      If AI can add usability features that help people use the Internet easier then that’s a good thing. You don’t need to use it. Why complain about software being capable of helping others?