> For example, any new tech introduced that can be used for browser fingerprinting and user tracking (e.g. canvas, webgl, webrtc, etc) is enabled to every single site by default, just like chrome.
Who would use Firefox if all those things who are disabled? Probably about as many people who still use Slackware. At which point, what exactly would be the point? The web is at least safer place to be with Firefox in its current state than with Chrome and Edge having 99% dominance.
Maybe people who use extensions that disable all that and let them enable those per-site they trust?
If it were truly open source, we would, gasp, have the best of both worlds by making the UI sane and what the end user wants. Not what a few in the inner circle thinks possible in their limited life experience.
Mozilla killed more projects trying to fix firefox than i care to count. icecat i think was the last one. fenned-by-fdroid was killed and resurrected a couple times, last people i know that contributed left when user.js was disabled after a PR from a google engineer was merged "to make fennec better follow android security team recommendations" or something on those lines.
Who would use Firefox if all those things who are disabled? Probably about as many people who still use Slackware. At which point, what exactly would be the point? The web is at least safer place to be with Firefox in its current state than with Chrome and Edge having 99% dominance.