@yoasif

When the 'Firefox for Web Developers' account posted its request for feedback from the community, it quickly became clear that the person running it was not operating in a good-faith manner. First, there was the muddying and obfuscation of the terms 'opt-in' and 'opt-out'. There was the notion that AI would all 'opt-in', which, of course, this is not. A kill switch is explicitly opt-out, and that's something they refused to acknowledge.

It became immediately evident that the question they wanted to ask was not 'does the community want AI?' or 'Is AI good for the community?' It was 'how can we write a message about our inclusion of AI which bamboozles community members into supporting it?'

In that context, I daresay the engagement was a waste of time inasfar as the stated aims of the conversation went -- but it did, at least, provide some context and information about Mozilla's goals and intentions: to wit, to ignore the community save in how its users can benefit the continued funding of bullshit engines.

In the end, at least, the Hobson's Choice isn't quite as much of an insurmountable one as it appears on the surface. (When someone gives you only two options, they don't want you to look for a third.) There are forks for Firefox, quite good ones in fact, which keep the engine and don't bother with the AI. Waterfox is quite nice, for example.