That'd be funny. An insurance where if you want to make a claim, you just get met with a Grok-bot that'll do the airbnb-style fucking to you (ignore the complaints, minimize them, be as stupid and slow as possible, and offer 10% of the refund that the complainant will frustratedly take as "at least it's something").
Ah, the problem here is you presumably aren't a corporation and therefore likely didn't consider contributing monetarily to the prosecutor's campaign funds. This is how you get your interests considered by the state.
Look at what Chrome Enterprise can do: whitelist/blacklist extensions and add-ons, force-install extensions, centralized history logging, configurable data loss prevention (e.g., red alert when someone uploads "confidential-financials-2026Q4.xlsx" to Claude), SSO configuration, and endpoint verification just off the top of my head.
Having an offering in this space would be one of the most sensible decisions the Mozilla Foundation has made in recent history.
Maybe I'm missing what you're getting at with the point about centralized logging and some of the DLP but I'm not sure why we would be okay with breaking a browser's trust in that way, DLP and proxy gateways have been pretty standardized for a while. At least with Chrome, it makes sense if you're a Google shop and have access to a lot more tie-ins. Maybe that's the point.
As I've mentioned elsewhere, the delta is control over login/logout, much easier/low friction deployment of policies, live policy changes, centralized security related logging, additional features like built-in DLP, corporate VPN/proxy, device posture checks, profile encryption, forced update/restart, guaranteed support, etc etc.
You also get the ability to deploy all browser infrastructure on-premise, to effectively decouple yourselves from us and get sync data, telemetry, and so on all stored on-prem, serve updates from your own servers, etc. This is something that wasn't really practical before.
I'm not sure why we would be okay with breaking a browser's trust in that way
I'm not sure what you mean here. If we accept that this is something a lot of Enterprise deployments require, wouldn't you prefer to have things like DLP, VPN and security logging be built-in in the browser, rather than being provided by third-party products that intercept or hook the browser traffic somehow?
A Go binary with CGO=0 and all templates/documents embedded gives you a better overall tooling and deployment experience. Put it in a scratch container for complete isolation.
Don't kill people because the voices in your head tell you to do it; don't kill people because a computer program tells you to do it. It doesn't have agency; you do.
Adding safety controls on LLMs makes about as much sense as adding safety controls on TempleOS because the random messages are getting too prophetic. It's as if all the leaders and captains of industry have devolved into some primitive, weak-scifi shamanism.
This whole "discussion" about "AI safety" is about giving them more runway to avoid delivering quantifiable value to investors for a little longer while they "figure things out." The great consensus from the valley is that everyone needs internal (and therefore bullshit) controls. Trust us now! But nothing with real teeth that would require a costly regulatory and compliance framework.
reply