Waterfox pushes back against Mozilla's AI vision and advocates for privacy-first browsing
In a sharply‑worded post titled “No AI Here – A Response to Mozilla’s Next Chapter”, Waterfox lead Alex Kontos argues that browsers should stay true to their core mission, speed, privacy and user control, rather than become AI‑mediated gateways. He warns that embedding LLM assistants at the heart of Firefox risks turning a trusted tool into a black‑box service that users can’t audit, echoing past concerns. Kontos reminds readers that Waterfox has historically preserved features abandoned by Firefox, such as XUL extensions, and positions the fork as a sanctuary for users who value simplicity over speculative AI integration.
Only days earlier, Mozilla’s new CEO Anthony Enzor‑DeMeo announced a three‑year plan to evolve Firefox into a modern AI web browser. While the company promises that AI features will be toggleable, the announcement has already drawn fire from longtime Firefox fans who feel the move betrays the project’s original ethos of openness, privacy, and minimalism. The shift is framed as a revenue‑diversification effort amid a steady decline in Firefox’s market share, but critics worry it will alienate the very community that kept the browser alive all these years.
Kontos’ rebuttal does not reject AI outright; rather, he draws a line at un‑auditable implementations that could compromise privacy. He points to Waterfox’s track record of stripping unwanted components (telemetry, Pocket integration, sponsored content) and preserving legacy extensions as evidence that a lean, user‑first browser can still thrive. By positioning itself as the “patient march” alternative, Waterfox hopes to capture users disenchanted by Mozilla’s AI push, reinforcing the broader industry debate over whether AI should be an optional layer or a foundational feature in web browsers.
If Mozilla proceeds with its AI‑centric vision, the market may split into two camps: browsers that integrate AI as a core experience (Perplexity Comet, ChatGPT Atlas, Opera Neon, Dia…) and those that refuse AI integration (Vivaldi, Orion, Zen…) and double down on privacy‑first, lightweight designs. Waterfox’s outspoken stance highlights a growing demand for transparent, auditable software, suggesting that the coming months will see a clearer delineation of user preferences, and possibly a resurgence of niche forks catering to the “no AI” crowd.
- Web Browser
- Free
- Open Source
Related news
External links
- No AI* Here - A Response to Mozilla's Next ChapterWaterfox • Official source
-
Waterfox Opposes Mozilla's AI Integration in Firefox, Prioritizes PrivacyWebProNews
Comments
I've warned you before: Mozilla has sold its soul to GAFAM (1, 2, 3,) after their former CEO, Mitchell Baker, ran a bank in Silicon Valley (1, 2, 3,) which means:
Continued use of
Mozilla Firefox is their justification for more enshittification. Use a de-enshittified Firefox fork instead before the free web falls to Chrom* (GAFAM) (1, 2, 3.)
I'll continue to use a combo of LibreWolf (Firefox based) and Helium (Chromium based), both browsers that strip out all the unneeded crap, don't phone home, and allow for full and proper uBlock Origin implementation. I use regular Firefox on Android, but will now begin the process of finding a better alternative that also allows for full uBlock Origin implementation. Will try Fennec from F-Droid and see how it fairs.
IronFox is comparable to LibreWolf, and Waterfox's Android version has been solid in my experience (and can run uBlock Origin).
Mozilla needs more users:
Very smart move by Alex Kontos. Right now, browsers like Waterfox, Vivaldi, Zen... are promoting themselves by saying they will never implement AI in their browsers. What strikes me is that Librewolf and Mullvad are not very vocal about never implementing AI, even though they certainly do so. Waterfox currently seems like Firefox to me without any adjustments, on Android the browser even has the same trackers as Firefox: https://reports.exodus-privacy.eu.org/en/reports/net.waterfox.android.release/latest/ Most forks of Firefox, including Waterfox, are based on ESR, which means they receive security updates less quickly. Personally, I prefer security over privacy, but it is nice to see independent european software become bigger: Waterfox = UK, Vivaldi = Norway, Zen = Spain, Mullvad = Swedish, Librewolf = worldwide but includes many Europeans in their voluntary board and team.
Do any of the Firefox forks have the capabilities to take it further? Don't they all rely on Firefox updates?
Yes, to be sustainable, nearly all forks are based on ESR. What I mean is that forks like Librewolf and Mullvad are trying to differentiate themself from Firefox by having all privacy-settings enabled out of the box. If I open Waterfox, it just looks like Firefox. Now they will change that by not adding the AI-slop but the privacy-settings are still not enabled out of the box and that's my problem with Waterfox.
To add to your list Floorp = Japan
yeah, floorp is from Japan, meaning they don't particularly have the same sort of incentive (or obligation) as europeans to really focus on privacy, yet it seems to be a solid fork with not much weirdness going on, and it switched from using ESR updates to the main updates meaning it seems to be currently the only Firefox fork to do so (I don't remember if LibreWolf is also that)
Very good that there is a gecko-based browser that does main updates like Floorp. I think they're doing a great job and I would like to see others following if that can be sustainable for them.
To answer your question, Lu9, Librewolf uses ESR updates. What I also know is that they are a small group of contributors ( https://librewolf.net/#core-contributors ) while Waterfox is mainly maintained by just one guy: Alex Kontos (still a legend)
Note that Waterfox is no longer owned by the shady analytics company System1 since 2023, allowed it to be more privacy focused.
I won't vouch for it based only on its announcements, but at least the project tries to be transparent about its motives.
Do keep in mind asset diversification is a thing. It is common for analytic and advertising companies to also invest in privacy focused companies because they are trying to profit from a wider range of people so it does not always mean the privacy is fake just a reason for suspicion needing evidence of claims of privacy.
Will move to Waterfox if the Next Chapter Continues!