@someonetellmetosleep@queer.party I don't know that that is actually true, to be honest.

Sure, they are not *actively and willfully* destroying the internet, but whether by intention or otherwise, they have certainly been acting as controlled opposition - never genuinely threatening the dominance of Google (who *are* destroying the open internet), but being high-profile and *just* useful enough that it discourages and inhibits more radical efforts, because "we have Mozilla already!".

I would argue that they have certainly been *contributing to* the destruction of the open internet, by being such a poor steward of the task of "safeguarding openness" while constantly claiming to be taking the responsibility upon them in their public-facing marketing.

Or to put it differently: Firefox going under is going to have serious consequences for a lot of people, and this sucks and mitigations are needed for this. But I am not sad about *the organization itself* going under, because I am much more interested in what could exist once Mozilla is no longer sucking all the oxygen out of the room.