You'll be several revisions' worth of security patches behind. For an application that is usually one's main means of accessing the rest of the internet, that would be a deal-breaker for me.
It's a trade off.
I assume (and hope) Firefox will eventually get their act together so I can go back to using it, but if not at least I don't have to jump ship to chrome.
This will grow increasingly challenging if the code bases diverge in order to keep old school add-ons working given that waterfox has virtually no man power.
In case of infection, restore from image.
edit: replaced spyware with control.
There are other actively maintained browsers with plenty of eyes on them and manpower behind them, many with vibrant plugin ecosystems, just use one of those.
I don't understand what "getting their act together" means here, when you're posting it on an announcement that the problem has already been fixed. Should Firefox proactively remove all security features that risk ever posing some modicum of inconvenience to users? Because that would be... all of them.
Essentially, I am arguing that Firefox should let you create your own signing key pair (which would be valid only on that single Firefox installation) and sign any add-on using it.
It's a large enough hoop that most users would not jump over it, not least because they would not know what they're doing, but it would be there for those who need it and relinquish the central point of failure that is the AMO.
The current situation is basically the Secure Boot fiasco all over again.
>2019
>not running your own ad network blocking DNS
Why even bother?