Let's not exchange crap behaviour. I think google would win hands down. Firefox at least has adblocking.

The classic 'those guys did something bad, so I am going to go with the guys who are absolute assholes doing several orders of magnitude more bad things now instead' response.

That usually means that whoever utters it was just looking for a sycophantic excuse to go with the bigger threat because it is more convenient to them (for now).

It's remarkable how often this happens, isn't it? One incident of someone not living up to standards is suddenly an opportunity to abandon standards and go with known bad actors. It's like people giving up on the MSM and immediately latching onto propaganda Youtubers instead.

People latch onto consistency and hypocrisy as their filters.

The problem is that anyone trying to actually be better is usually inconsistent and hypocritical at some level as in that "you criticize society, yet you participate in it" comic.

If you attempt to filter out all traces of hypocrisy from your trusted sources, you wind up listening to the absolute worst people.

The people trying to do better are usually the ones struggling with conflicts and inconsistencies.

Let's be real. People love their shiny big brands, and will find any tiny excuse to keep using them.

Not at all. Firefox is a trap to keep motivated people from banding together to create a real user-respecting alternative.

As a user at least I have an option to use ublock origin extension in Firefox. So I'm somewhat grateful I can still browse the net peacefully and safely.

No it doesn't. Unlike Brave, Firefox needs an extension to block ads just like Chrome.

Yes, though it has the most powerful and customizable adblocker available.