Proposals for Incorporating Machine Learning in Mozilla Firefox

Friday June 18th, 2004

Blake Ross writes: "I will be doing research this summer at Stanford with Professor Andrew Ng about how we can incorporate machine learning into Firefox. We're looking for ideas that will make Firefox 2.0 blow every other browser out of the water. People who come up with the best 3-5 ideas win Gmail accounts, and if we implement your idea you'll be acknowledged in both our paper and in Firefox credits. Your idea will also be appreciated by the millions of people who use Firefox :-). We'll also entertain Thunderbird proposals."

#83 Re: Re: Nuke Anything + Bayesian Filter

by phaasz <>

Wednesday June 23rd, 2004 8:42 PM

You are replying to this message

I *really* like the implementation suggestions. I would argue that there should be no set of priors, because false positives mean different things to different people. Your default set of priors might be annoying to an avid porn hunter, for example :) Import/Export is essential. I don't think we should just limit ourselves to images, however, as per my previous post. You could achieve all suggested in your comment with a more generic scheme that allows blocking of any resource (eg swf, html, etc) whether it be embedded in a page or not.

Slightly off topic but I concur that regardless of which idea(s) are chosen, they should be implemented as extensions because this effects a "survival of the fittest" environment in which the best extensions will reign supreme, and because users are allowed to construct the browser of their dreams. An argument against this, of course, is that take-up by the non-technically savvy could suffer if one needs to manually install most of the things that make Firefox the best browser (current handling of Java and Flash in particular are inexcusable - at a minimum, a linked xpi should do all of the work). Having a "starter kit" download bundled with a set of the most popular extensions according to (which can then be chosen between at installation time) seems like a good compromise here.