Orbit is an LLM addon/extension for Firefox that runs on the Mistral 7B model. It can summarize a given webpage, YouTube videos and so on. You can ask it questions about stuff that’s on the page. It is very privacy friendly and does not require any account to sign up.

I personally tried it, and found it to be incredibly useful! I think this is going to be one of my long term addons along with uBlock Origin, Decentraleyes and so on. I would highly recommend checking this out!

  • Cloudless ☼@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    137
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    2 months ago

    Most important part of the thread:

    In it’s beta stage, Orbit is currently not open-source. This doesn’t mean it will remain this way forever. If orbit gains traction and we have the resources and funding to support an Open-Source project, I’m sure things could change.

    Press X to doubt.

    • n2burns@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      69
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      2 months ago

      Has Mozilla done sometime to deserve this skepticism? They were founded on open-source and AFAIK have continued to support open-source. Mozilla is far from a perfect organization, but if this project was a success I think it would be out of character for them to keep it closed-source.

        • vinnymac@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          47
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Believe it or not but it requires resources to open source an internal product, especially one that may have been an experiment where some small team was able to convince leadership could become useful to the masses.

          React.js at Facebook is a good example of this. It took a lot of effort to externalize and open source React, and tbh the codebase is still kind of garbage when it comes to contributions from those unfamiliar with its intricacies.

          • toothbrush@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            17
            ·
            2 months ago

            but… you dont have to accept contributions? you can just make it open source and tidy it up at the same time?

            • vinnymac@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              15
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              In a different world maybe, but I can already see the headlines, “Mozilla open sources lackluster AI tool”. PR is unfortunately a thing, and once you miss that initial wave of interest, you’re unlikely to grab attention later without another marketing push. Mozilla is experienced in open sourcing software, so by now they’re pretty good at knowing when to do it and when not to. In other words, it says something that they chose not to do it in this case.

              • toothbrush@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                15
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                Yeah, it definitly tells me something, namely that I should not use the tool.

                Why would news publish articles about the code quality of the tool, instead of its functionality?

                Now they have negative press about its closed source nature, which is a calculated risk they took, just to open source it soon anyway? I doubt it.

            • Billiam@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              So risk someone else beating you to market? And they’ll either have the resources to make it superior, therefore making yours irrelevant, or they’ll make it inferior, which generates bad press for you?

      • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Eh, skepticism should be the default.

        But I agree with you, nothing they’ve done is inherently bad, though they’ve done some abysmally stupid things in the way they handle them.

        But I also really wish they’d stop fucking around with half-assed things like this and focus on core utilities.

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

          What core utilities does Firefox need that it doesn’t have? Honest question. I’ve been using it over a decade and never had it fail to do something I asked it to, and I’m a little out of the loop on the web browser development news cycle beyond the recent wave of Google Bad.

          • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 months ago

            Mozilla has firefox and thunderbird. They’re the two core utilities. The vpn attempt, the Mastodon server, that kind of stuff is fluff.

            I may be using the wrong terminology? It was an offhand comment and that’s the word that I picked out of my head, it might mean something different to a developer, I dunno.

            But Mozilla, if you ignore what Google pays them, is not exactly a high profit endeavour, and we don’t want it to be. So having what funds they have focused onto the things that matter is what I’d prefer they do. Mind you, if the vpn pulls enough in to generate funds rather than cost them, that’s great.

      • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Firefox is sustained (biggest funder) by google who needs artificial competitions to not be labeled a monopoly.

        Its still the best browser i can think off that isn’t chromium but i would recommend staying skeptical.

        • Tobberone@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Well, that’s been the basis for some other products. AMD and Intel comes to mind😊 They both have IP the other need and historically Intel has been the dominant one, but now the tables have turned somewhat.

      • zecg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        2 months ago

        Has Mozilla done sometime to deserve this skepticism?

        Yes, their “privacy friendly ad measurement” that’s opt out is a faux pas that I just can’t forgive. I used to donate to the fuckers.

        • zkfcfbzr@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          That feature (more) they’ve been getting all that negative press over for the past two days is an absolutely gigantic non-issue. Like most anti-Mozilla stories end up being.

          The whole thing is an experimental feature intended to replace the current privacy nightmare that is cross-site tracking cookies. As-implemented it’s a way for advertisers to figure out things like “How many people who went to our site and purchased this product saw this ad we placed on another site?”, but done in such a way that neither the website with the ad, nor the website with the product, nor Mozilla itself knows what any one specific user was doing.

          There are definitely things that can be said about this feature, like “Fuck ad companies, it should be off by default” (my personal take). But the feature itself has virtually no privacy consequences whatsoever for anybody, and Mozilla is at least trying to build a system that would legitimately improve the privacy situation on the internet created by companies like Google.

        • Blisterexe@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          It does not affect you if you use an adblocker, this feature is meant to allow websites to have ad analytics without tracking.

          • zecg@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            User JohnFen on ycombinator’s hacker news said it nicely and I’m lazy, so:

            PPA means that my browser is doing the spying instead of a third party directly. That’s certainly a privacy improvement, but I don’t consider it sufficient.

            “Sufficiently private” is a subjective call. I don’t want to be spied on. Whether or not there are technological “privacy preserving” features baked into it doesn’t alter that fundamental fact.

            All that said, this isn’t a bad enough move to get me to stop using Firefox, as long as I can keep it disabled. It does mean that I have to view Firefox with suspicion, though. I can’t consider the browser to be my “user agent” anymore.

            • Blisterexe@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              Well, since you copy-pasted, i will likewise share my favorite take on thr situation.

              After reading about the actual feature (more), this seems like an absolutely gigantic non-issue. Like most anti-Mozilla stories end up being.

              The whole thing is an experimental feature intended to replace the current privacy nightmare that is cross-site tracking cookies.

              As-implemented it’s a way for advertisers to figure out things like “How many people who went to our site and purchased this product saw this ad we placed on another site?”, but done in such a way that neither the website with the ad, nor the website with the product, nor Mozilla itself knows what any one specific user was doing.

              The only thing I looked for but could not find an answer on one way or the other is if Mozilla is making any sort of profit from this system. I would guess no but actually have no idea.

              There are definitely things that can be said about this feature, like “Fuck ad companies, it should be off by default” (my personal take), or “It’s a pointless feature that’s doomed to failure because it’ll never provide ad companies with information as valuable as tracking cookies, so it’ll never succeed in its goal to replace tracking cookies” (also my take). But the feature itself has virtually no privacy consequences whatsoever for anybody.

              I’m absolutely convinced there’s a coordinated anti-Firefox astroturfing campaign going on lately.

      • dantheclamman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        They said they’d open source Pocket and they didn’t. In fact, they’ve simply allowed it to rot and just removed features. So here I think the skepticism is warranted.

  • treadful@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    It is very privacy friendly […]

    What makes you believe that? The most information I could find about this is that it doesn’t “save your session data.” The Orbit privacy policy also seems a bit bare, and I can’t decide if that’s a good thing or not.

    Either way, you’re still sending data to a third party service to process. Might be worth it for some people.

  • reddig33@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’m just glad it’s an add on/extension. A lot of the crap baked into browsers these days is just bloat nobody wants or uses.

  • macattack@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    Probably not for me as I’m not interested in a summarizing tool, but I’m not against AI in general.

    OAN, I think over time, the community will see that AI was a bubble, but in the same way that the internet was a bubble back in the day.

    • UraniumBlazer@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      OAN, I think over time, the community will see that AI was a bubble, but in the same way that the internet was a bubble back in the day.

      Surprised to see this opinion on Lemmy haha. Yep, totally agree with ya here!

      • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Everyone wants a Her style personal assistant — as in one that is personal-context aware, can simplify, and generally enrich their lives (not for emotional support) — but if most people knew how unintelligent AI is, how spectacularly it fails, and how dangerous it is to integrate it into information systems and (especially) give it any ability to act … Literally nobody would want to give it access to all their data, or use it beyond an advisory role.

        • Pyotr@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Perhaps I’m a luddite - but I unequivocally do not want an assistant like that. I dislike even the basic commands of google assistant. I can do the tasks better and faster than than the assistant can.

          • doctortofu@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Amen to that. I’m not a busy CEO of four companies, I don’t need or want an assistant, digital or otherwise. I want to read through articles and watch videos, I can scroll/fast-forward through myself if I feel like it. And while we’re at it, I don’t really need or want personalized anything - just give me ALL the search results and I’ll sort through them myself. Luddite? Maybe, but I literally cannot think of a case where this would be useful or helpful to me…

  • tb_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    The general tone in this thread seems so very different from when “Mozilla is working on AI” was first announced

  • FaceDeer@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    Ooh, I just tried it out and I can tell I’m going to love it - if not this specific plugin (the UI needs some work) then this general concept of a plugin.

    I just popped over to Youtube and went to a ten-minute video of something or other, clicked the “summarize transcript” button, and within a few seconds I had a paragraph-long summary of what the whole video was about. There have been sooo many Youtube videos over the years that I’ve reluctantly watched with a constant “get to the point, man!” Frustration. Now I’ll know if it’s worth it.

    • TheRedSpade@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Hm…could be useful for those times you want to read a guide but can only find one in video form

      • FaceDeer@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Indeed. And after generating the summary, there’s a chat field below that where you can ask the AI to elaborate on particular subjects. This is really nice.

    • Xan Surnamehere@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      Do you have the SponsorBlock add-on installed? Most videos have user-submitted sections that it lets your skip. Also, a highlighted part.

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

      Huh, I’ll have to check it out then. This will be especially useful for Louis Rossmann videos because he rambles and repeats himself a lot.

    • UraniumBlazer@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      RIGHT?!!! IT’S SO FKIN AMAZING

      This is especially going to be useful for me as a student. It’s just feels like browser 2.0 at this point haha

    • UraniumBlazer@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      Don’t want to install and maintain 10gigs of cuda stuff on my PC. Next, my mum won’t know how to do that. Her laptop is a potato. This add-on makes all of this way easier.

      • photonic_sorcerer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        2 months ago

        You don’t need CUDA, it’s actually pretty easy. You can run the Mistral 7B model this add-on is based on using GPT4All. It doesn’t require much, if any, technical knowledge.

        • UraniumBlazer@lemm.eeOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          HOLY HELL THAT’S COOL. It can do so much too!!!

          I locally installed some small LLM model more than a year ago. It took up like 25 gigs or something along with all CUDA libraries n stuff. It was alright, but I figured that cloud based solutions were the best for my use case, as they were better and for free.

          I had no idea that open sourced AI progressed so much in the last year. Amazing stuff!

          • Hawk@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            It depends how you run it etc. You may have not been using a quantized model.

            • UraniumBlazer@lemm.eeOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              I was using the quantized version :(

              But again, do remember that this was when the first open sourced AI models had just begun to come out. Stuff from Open Assistant for example. I don’t even remember the name of the model that I was running (it was just too weird and funny lol). I just remember it being HUGE, quite dumb and making my device sweat lol.

      • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        You’re not generating models at this point. You don’t need that kind of hardware to run these.

    • Railcar8095@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 months ago

      Considering how google is making chrome worse every day, they could do only security updates and still be the best browser.

    • Railcar8095@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago
      1. I don’t think this is the proper channel for feedback.
      2. Rude
      3. Fuck you. This is an optional extension for those who want to try. Do you want the final version of a piece of free software? Then you can go lie in a ditch because hopefully it will continue to evolved for years. It’s astonishing the entitlement of some people.
      4. Good local LLM that can run on most hardware is a very interesting project. Usually you need at least a GPU to get it to run. The fact that is only summarizing might be because it this.