I said:

> If Firefox in its current form can't exist without Google's support, then ...

If Firefox only exists by the grace of Google, then Firefox cannot be an effective barrier to Google's dominion. If it's truly wholly dependent on Google, then it can only stand up to Google for as long as Google wills it.

I'm not saying Firefox is wholly dependent, I'm just saying that if it is, then it's already useless as a barrier to Google's ambitions and we'd be better off stripped of the illusion that it's part of the solution. If Google is prevented from paying for continued search dominance, then we either learn that Firefox was never dependent on that revenue, or we learn that Firefox as presently constituted was never going to be able to stop Chrome and we need to make major changes.

The implication of GP was that the Mozilla foundation couldn’t survive without the financial support of google. If that’s true, they’re a vassal of google because google can now effectively wield its financial dominance to veto any change they don’t like. For example, support our new Secure Enclave or we’ll pull financial support and crush your support on websites at the same time.

Really this is already an incredibly bad look in the sense of Firefox kinda being “controlled opposition” to the chrome dominance of the web, a dummy competitor literally funded by google to avoid accusations of monopoly. See, there’s Firefox! And safari, who we just levered out of the market by getting the EU to force sideloading.