It is not something that works regardless if we configure or activate it or not. It may broaden the AI use for people that find that useful? Yes. Would that end being dependency on a particular provider? Maybe on how we use it. At some point a lot of those decisions were taken in the past by most of the rest, like using search engines or a narrow/builtin set of browsers or desktop/mobile OSs. If using AIs is a concern then the ship has sailed long ago for many bigger things already.
Will it report me if I try to discuss "The anarchist's cookbook" with it? Will it try to convince me the "Protocols of the sages of Sion" is real? Will it encourage me to follow the example of the main character in "Lolita"? Will it cast in a bad light any gay or transsexual character because the megacorp behind it is forced to toe the anti-woke line of the US government in order to keep its lucrative military and anti-immigration contracts?
Your point about censorship, however, I fully agree with.
Humans are more than biased word predictors.
Not to say that there's no use case (I'd be interested to try a LLM-aided notetaking tool), just that adding a chat box is hardly a feature.
With the whole "no local models?! mega corp censorship!" complaint sidestepped from day 1, and now that it's not even shown on the UI, what will AI opponents complain about?!
gardenerik•6h ago
rkomorn•6h ago
I have no interest in any of the AI features that have been added to the UIs of Meta products (WhatsApp, and Messenger), yet still see prompts for them and modified UIs to try and get me to engage with Meta AI.
Same goes with Gemini poking its head into various spots in the UIs of the Google products I use.
There are now UI spots I can accidentally tap/click and get dropped into a chat with an AI in various things I use on a daily basis.
There are also more "calls to action" for AI features, more "hey do you wanna try AI here?" prompts, etc.
It's not just the addition of AI features, it's all the modern, transparent desperation-for-metrics-to-go-up UX bits that come with it.
And yes, some of these things were around before this wave of AI launches, but a- that doesn't make it better, and b- all the AI features are seemingly the same across apps, so now we have bunches of apps all pushing the same "feature" at us.
gardenerik•6h ago
In this case, Calibre does not seem to introduce any said annoyances (probably because it is FOSS, so no pressure for adoption), but people are upset anyways.
There are many features I don't use in various software, but it never made me complain that a new icon/menu entry appeared.
rkomorn•6h ago
It's one thing when a feature gets added to an app.
It's another thing when it happens in a context where every app is doing it (or something similar), and you see it in every facet of your tech life.
netsharc•2h ago
WhatsApp should release their most searched terms on AI, I bet it would correlate with most common names among WhatsApp users...
mold_aid•3h ago
You make LLMs sound like a stalker, or your mom's abusive live-in boyfriend
afavour•2h ago
Any new feature should face a very simple cost/benefit analysis. The average user currently can’t do that with AI. I think AI in some form is inevitable. But what we see today (hey, here’s a completely free feature we added!) is unsustainable both economically and environmentally.
adastra22•2h ago
TechSquidTV•1h ago
afavour•1h ago
gardenerik•1h ago
The choice is yours. If you want local models, you can do that.
troyvit•1h ago
nottorp•2h ago
Perhaps to the detriment of some compatibility features that got sent to the back burner.
throwawa14223•1h ago
mcphage•1h ago
jlarocco•1h ago
squigz•1h ago
Having it built-in allows Calibre to add context to the prompt automagically.
danielscrubs•1h ago
Most devs want to put AI on their CV so they have strong personal incentives to circumvent what is best for their users.
Would you like to have LLM connections to Google from your OSS torrent client?
We can see the painting on the wall, but still not like it.
on_the_train•34m ago