@xgranade@wandering.shop
Comment from cgranade that quotes a message saying "Personally, I don't feel a browser should be political."

Then their own message: "If it's alright, I want to quickly respond to this. I don't mean to distract the thread too much from being an issue about the AI sidebar introduced upstream with 130.0, but I think it's relevant to the issue to be clear about what it means to be 'political'.

In particular, a browser is political almost by definition - decisions about web standards affect who has and does not have power on the web, which is pretty intensely political. Even more so, the decision to be privacy focused is absolutely a political stance, especially with the way privacy violations are used to hurt everyone from pregnant people seeking abortions (to wit, Facebook turning over chats about abortion or advertisers building up profiles based on inferred pregnancy) to queer kids looking for information without outing themselves to homophobic or transphobic parents. Journalists depend on privacy to investigate corrupt officials, exploitative corporations, or other powerful institutions. Those are all intensely political aspects.

That is, I don't think it's a reasonable goal to avoid politics, so much as to ensure that whatever the political implications are of a development decision, that they are intentional and align with the values of the project as a whole.

My understanding about the politics *implicit* in the previous decisions made by the LibreWolf project lead me to believe that a feature designed to erode user privacy, devalue creative labor, and to consolidate power behind a few API gateways is likely not a feature in keeping with the chosen politics of the project. I could be wrong, in which case I'm happy to disagree and find an alternative browser that is more in line with the politics that I and people I care about depend on for our safety."