I think the objection here is unrelated to the love or hate of LLMs. It's about the viability of this particular proposed open web API.

I personally use LLMs for coding assistance, and some home automation stuff, but I do not think this particular API is good for the web.

Meaning you do not want text generation in the web API at all, or you think the prompt API needs to be different? And if so can you give one sentence on how it should change?

https://github.com/runvnc/tersenet

If you glance at that then you may see that I am for the idea of leaner alternatives to the current web platform.

But in the context of the existing web API which has just about everything and the whole kitchen sink in it (hundreds of sub-APIs), I do not think it will really help anyone at this point just just stop adding features, especially major ones.

The web is basically an overlay operating system and has been for many years.

> Meaning you do not want text generation in the web API at all, or you think the prompt API needs to be different?

Not OP but I think you are misunderstanding the interaction as a whole here. The Chromium team made a proposal, then the Chromium team asked the Firefox team for a position on the proposal. Whether or not the Firefox team or anyone on the Firefox team has any goals around AI or whatever, this response was simply "We do not like this proposal for these reasons..."

How to fix those issues really isn't the Firefox team's job and also wasn't part of the question asked by the Chromium team.

You didn't read my comment carefully enough. It was not about AI in general. It was about the text generation API. And it is perfectly reasonable to ask if he wants to reject the feature entirely or if he can give a one sentence overview of how it might be fixed.

There are a lot of people reading his position. One or two additional clarifying sentences to spell it out for people skimming is not such an unreasonable ask.

> There are a lot of people reading his position. One or two additional clarifying sentences to spell it out for people skimming is not such an unreasonable ask.

I do think it is a bit unwarranted, actually. This isn't a press release, it's a technical discussion somewhat deep into a technical process that's open for archival purposes. His audience is not people skimming through, it's the Chromium team and other members of the standards body.

You're sort of overhearing a conversation and injecting yourself into it.

And so are you injecting yourself and objecting to me even discussing on HN.

And this is not really a technical issue. It's a worldview issue no matter how much you or others try to pretend it's a technical problem or that I am violating etiquette or something.

> And this is not really a technical issue. It's a worldview issue no matter how much you or others try to pretend it's a technical problem or that I am violating etiquette or something.

I'm actually so curious what you think is going on here