Nobody will have any interest if they are not open

Yeah agreed, especially for legal and healthcare models.

[edit] I'd go one step further too and say the training data should be explicitly requestable too so third parties can verify (freedom of information act styles).

Training data being discoverable is much more interesting than open weights. Also a PITA so nobody does it.

Not in the West, but they will be in China and the rest of the world.

bold claim with "the rest of the world". more like rest of the 3rd world

Such a racist point of view. Everywhere outside the Western world, I said, which is clear enough, but you had to add a racist undertone to downplay the rest of the world.

Most people don't even know what 3rd world means, and just use it as a pejorative for poor countries

Don't underestimate the bang for the buck benchmark. I sure would be interested in any model that performed 10x above open models for half the cost.

If you are not self-hosting on your hardware inside your network, why do you care whether the model is open or not?

This model would be self hostable quite easily (~$14k hardware investment) if it’s released as open weights, since the base model is GLM 5.3-Flash. If not, it’s completely DOA for legal use.

because vendors stop serving models and it is good to be able to choose to self host for any reason at any time

we can start out with the hosted version for evaluation and then self host for production and real customers

In theory if your provider raised rates you could switch providers with an open model. So price competition would be one reason.

Because I don't trust z.ai and their servers and APIs, but I do trust AWS Bedrock ZDR in-region inference.

EU is pushing browser settings instead of cookie banners. Maybe after 10+ years of trial and error consumers will actually get something viable.

Then again, the lobbying and resistance from Chrome must be unreal because it would be pretty huge blow for them to enable such setting.

Commission still wants to keep it for media companies and Council wants to keep it for everyone. Parliament's final stance is still unclear.

Both

I cannot find a setting to disable the gradient. It's very annoying indeed.

You can browse the Themes to try to find one you like better. But yeah it'd be nice if one of the default built-in themes was super plain. Closest they have available by default is a grayscale gradient ("Ash").

> Proton by Firefox

> A classic grey palette for a calm, focused feel.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-CA/firefox/addon/firefox-proto...

Here you go: add this to your userChrome.css file.

/disable gradient

/ 1. Remove the toolbar/tab bar gradient completely /

:root:not([theme-image-in-toolbox]) body,

:root[theme-image-in-toolbox] #navigator-toolbox {

    background-image: none !important;

}

/ 2. Strip Nova purple accent color/focus outlines from the URL & search bar */

:root {

    --toolbar-field-focus-background-color: var(--toolbar-field-background-color) !important;

}

.urlbar-input-container, #searchbar {

    --toolbar-field-border-color-focus: var(--toolbar-field-border-color) !important;

    box-shadow: none !important;

}

Bonus:

/* Hide Kit mascot illustrations from menus, dialogs, and in-app alerts */

.mascot-icon,

.panel-header-mascot,

[mascot="kit"],

.onboarding-mascot-container {

    display: none !important;

}

The gradient is part of the theme. Updated the post with how to roll back the UI changes for now. After rolling back, select an old theme.

Naive and outright dangerous advice, every release fixes important security issues.

Then separate UI updates from security updates. No need for them to be bundled. Gradients and insane padding pushing people to not update make them inherently less secure!

It's possible to stick to an ESR release to avoid feature updates in the past, but recently, Mozilla has started bundling feature updates into bugfixes.

e.g. https://www.firefox.com/en-US/firefox/152.0.4/releasenotes/

Didn't you see the example on the website? It can set-up a Python 3 environment. Duh!

From their own example "Setting up a Python 3 environment" is best it can do.

Well well how to turn tables..

> they believe no one else will act responsibly, so they must do it themselves, despite the risk.

I do not get it. So what if they get there "first"? OpenAI will get there in 3-6 months, China will get there in a year or less. As seen with Opus/Fable.

That is why it is not a "List of things you can have tomorrow" but a "Luxury list".

When you have time, health and no stress - that is the luxury OP is talking about.

You don't even need to make more money if you have all those things. If you know your health is insured and you are healthy, you have a decent place where you can feel safe and sleep until late mornings and you do not have to worry about how much food costs - you basically live like a king.

These are rhetorical tricks. Mate I see what you mean, but honestly, the article was just the usual useless old man's talk. I'm glad he is posting on the internet, but it was a useless post.

Jobs will be a luxury soon, if they aren't already. Sure, dead-end jobs aren't a luxury, but they're basically life support - or rather to say existence support.

I live in a country with single-payer healthcare, which some Americans dream so much. If I don't have a job, I'm pretty much screwed - I won't have health insurance. I'm glad I'm healthy, not stupid and not lazy, but single-payer doesn't help that much with life luxuries as you think. To have a place to sleep and not have to worry you need a job - and unless you inherited that place you'll have to work hard for years without the luxuries the old chap talks about anyway. Those are just old man's useless ramblings. I'm sorry, but they are.