The main issue is user choice. If I want to run an extension, no matter how malicious, on my machine, I should be able to do it. This applies for my phone too,

The main issue is user choice. If I want to run an extension, no matter how malicious, on my machine, I should be able to do it. This applies for my phone too, which is a capable computer for all practical purposes. Apple has normalized the "we know better" approach, and has enjoyed great success doing it. Google is simply following that same philosophy. They know better than you, what's good for you and what's bad. We need a fully independent browser, open-source, and built on modern technology. That way, users who care about this can get what they want. And users who trust Google to get it right, can use chrome or one of its derivatives. Firefox has (had?) that potential, but for whatever reason Mozilla seems unable to execute effectively. The result is that Firefox has become a follower, doing the same things Chrome is doing. Thus defeating the original motivation for users looking for an alternative. Brave looks promising, but given that they build on top of chromium, I am not sure how long they can resist fundamental changes in the codebase. Or whether they even intend to provide the needed alternative. All in all I feel this represents a sorry state of browsers, and consumer software in general.