I’ve had my firefox settings/setup with multi-account containers, etc. dialed in for years. Never had any reason to change that. Librewolf is nice for people who don’t already have existing & configured installations of firefox to have it basically configured by default.
The “precise and specific actions” called for in that article, specifically for the purpose of combating speech that encourages violence, like homophobia or white supremacy:
Reveal who is paying for advertisements, how much they are paying and who is being targeted.
Commit to meaningful transparency of platform algorithms so we know how and what content is being amplified, to whom, and the associated impact.
Turn on by default the tools to amplify factual voices over disinformation.
Work with independent researchers to facilitate in-depth studies of the platforms’ impact on people and our societies, and what we can do to improve things.
Why can’t a browser company just be opinionated about making the best browser? Why does it have to have a shitty controversial opinion about social media? I don’t know why, but my trust in the org and therefore the browser itself is gone.
I don’t think being anti white supremacy and homophobia is shitty or controversial. Why would an Internet company write an article about something that affects the biggest sector of the Internet, social media? 🤔
“No they should stay in their lane and only talk about, I don’t know, CSS or something.” I don’t buy it.
Who said anything about white supremacy or homophobia?
Regardless, yes, they should refrain from controversial subjects that are not related to their business. And if they decide to make social media censorship their business in a direct way, also fuck em.
…the article you linked me? The topic of this discussion?
It shouldn’t be controversial to anyone. The suggestions given there are pretty mild. Regardless, justice is not the absence of conflict. Sorry the article made you upset but that doesn’t make it wrong.
I don’t give a damn about the article. I only stated my reasons why Firefox and Chrome are total deal breakers for me. Maybe there’s a better browser than all of them, but for now I’m happy with Brave.
And your opinion is your opinion, it isn’t universal. Stop thinking that it is.
The opinion:
“Homophobia and white supremacy are bad and should be combated”
It’s interesting that you think firefox is being “controversial” when their CEO writes a couple paragraphs about combating hate speech online, but brave isn’t when their CEO sends money to hate organizations. 🤔
If the user share of Firefox falls too low websites will stop supporting it (which is already happening), we will have given google the internet. Everything that is not Firefox is based on Chrome.
The CEO of Brave literally supports Censorship so hard that he wants to censor gay marriage out of existence - this actually affects people in real life. When you use Brave, you directly support that individual and their shitty politics.
Your idea of ethical is overwriting affiliate links from small journalism sites that clearly state they’re affiliate links and instead quietly replacing them with links that benefit a corporation that raised money off of crypto?
Bottom line is it is a good browser and faster than most if not all the others I have tried. Certainly faster than Firefox and Mullvad. If you don’t like the add’s turn them off. If you dont like the wallet and other stuff, dont use them. It is easy to ignore that stuff. Nothing in that article makes me want to stop using it.
You should always have three browsers, imho. I use Firefox, Tor, and Brave as my three. Firefox’s addon ecosystem is great, and I can use it easily on all the computers I touch. Brave helps me when I need “Chrome” for something to work, but the browser is fairly slick imho, plus exists as a financially independent competitor to Chrome, unlike Firefox. Lastly, Tor is for when using Tor through Brave or using it through transparent proxy isn’t enough, and I am worrying about fingerprinting as well.
You shouldn’t use Brave simply because it’s heavily infected with crypto shit and tries to monitorize your web browsing time by default. Not everything you do has to be a side hustle.
Sure you can “switch it off” but then why not use something else in the first place that’s focus isn’t trying to make money out of you. If Brave ever gained any decent market share the web would be an even shitter place than what Google is suggesting at the moment.
you seek the crypto miner in the brackground running and want ads injected even you have adblocker on? Use librewolf its a more privacy focused firefox
Have librewolf screwed users over? with replace ads, claiming referal links, ceo = sshle, secret cryptominer. And why would you NOT use the tor browser as it would reduce the possibility of that *ss ceo spying on u to 0.
TL;DR: The article claims that the Brave web browser is bad and should not be used.
The author points out that Brendan Eich, the creator of JavaScript, co-founder (and ex-CEO) of Mozilla, and founder of Brave, donated 1,000 USD in support of a proposition to ban same-sex marriage. Along with making the claim that Brave’s goal is not to act as an ad-blocker, but instead to build and grow their own advertisement network, and he also believes that the network has several flaws:
Brave Ads paysout in a form of cryptocurrency, called BAT (🦇).
As BAT is a cryptocurrency there is high volatility.
BAT can not be redeemed for fiat (“actual”) money directly from within the Brave Wallet.
The author also believes that “it [the network] has largely failed” but that it “has generated a lot of revenue for Brave,” via the ICO (Initial Coin Offering; IPO for crypto).
In addition to these key points the author also:
Claims that Brave prompted FTX, before the scandal.
Cites the The Brave Marketer Podcast where ex-CMO of Crypto.com Steven Kalifowitz shares an ambitious goal of being a “‘brand like Coke and Netflix.’” The author then mentions that:
In 2023 there was a report from The Financial Times that Crypto.com traded against their customers.
In 2022 the company try to hide the severity of its layoffs.
Mentions Brave’s integration with Gemini, and how the crypto exchange is under investigation for lying about FDIC insurance.
Mentions a partnership with the the 3XP Web3 Gaming Expo where they sponsored the Esports Arena and rewarded contestants with the BAT token.
Claims that Brave added affiliate/referral codes to URLs, such as “binance.us.”
Finally, the author lists Firefox and Vivaldi as alternatives to Brave, and ends the article with “Brave Browser is irredeemable, and you should not use it under any circumstances.”
I am human, please let me know if I’ve made a mistake.
Brave is still bad. With their “incidents” they had. Brave is chromium = Google controlled in a way. Brave is a coorperation, yes a PROFIT seeking company. Mozilla does nit promote google, it uses duckduckgo as its default search engine. There are forks from Firefox too that hardens the browser and the develop/ceo is not a complete *ss. The referal link “scam” was real, they injected it in Amazon links…
Screw Brave go search for a real alternative to google.
Oh yeah i forgot i used librewolf too much XD. Brave Search creeps on you. Privacy Policy is unreadable and unreachable. Tbh. if you want a privacy protecting search engine. Use Searx(ng).
Brave is way worse using Chromium. That is the point. Its dependent on google 100%. I dont know Fitefox? What is it? Is it a rare fox? Brave injects ads (targeted ads) into your websites. Injects referal urls into their results. The CEO is a corrupt bad person. They implemented in their earlier stages a hidden crypto miner. Recommending Extensions? Are you sure that chrome doesnt do it too?
Doesn’t iOS only use webkit based browsers? I would imagine the reason you can get ad blocking through brave is some kind of deal they have with google. Which probably means they’re just giving them all the data google would collect normally.
Firefox on iOS doesn’t have ad blocking because apple took support away in webkit. The only way brave could be doing it is by being white listed by the company serving the ad to you somehow.
Both Mac and iOS have issues with VPN usage too but that’s unrelated to webkit.
Yes Apple forces everyone through webkit and won’t allow third-party blockers. Brave on iOS was forked from Firefox anyway, and iirc uses the same API to block ads as Firefox Focus. Google is most definitely not involved, particularly because both block YouTube ads (and is my primary reason for using Brave anyway).
I’m not sure what you’re referencing in regard to VPN usage; I have had zero problems with mine.
Hopefully the Digital Markets Act in EU will put an end to iOS’s browser monopoly. When that happens Firefox might be looking to port their Android browser to iOS which supports addons like uBlock but nothing is for certain right now.
I know it isn’t hope you’re looking for, but it’s the best I can do with my current knowledge.
I appreciate that but my response was more intended to chastise the guy blanket labeling people cultists and idiots for no good reason because they hate a browser someone else uses.
The system-wide AdGuard app handles most things well enough, and Brave does its thing on YouTube ads without issue.
Firefox Focus will also take care of YouTube ads (if anyone else stumbles down this rabbit hole), but it’s too heavy-handed for me because I actually stay logged into my account and use my history.
My Pi-hole install also handles all but YouTube if I’m at home, so there’s that.
With how much revenue comes from those deals, we might say it’s practically financed by Google. FF is more Google than Chromium-based Brave if you follow the money.
The author points out that Brendan Eich, the creator of JavaScript, co-founder (and ex-CEO) of Mozilla, and founder of Brave, donated 1,000 USD in support of a proposition to ban same-sex marriage.
My impression was Brave got started after he got hoofed out of Mozilla or left on his own accord after the backlash for showing his ass to be a homophobe. Redditor types were of course very angry about this blatant disregard for frozen peaches and jumped onto his new venture in droves
If he’s bad, shouldn’t everything he touches be bad? Why web site that uses JavaScript should be just as bad. Any browser based on Mozilla should be bad. Why is it just Brave that’s bad for what he did in 2008?
It’s really hard for the creator of Javascript to make money off of javascript, and it’s unlikely he has any financial interest in the Mozilla corporation anymore since they’re a nonprofit and thus don’t have share holders. However, he directly profits off of Brave.
The article presents almost no techical reason for Brave being bad, with the affiliate links thing being the worst offender. Don’t like the crypto stuff? Turn it off. “CEO bad” doesn’t mean much, there’re very few leaders with clean hands, if any, and the product itself works well. It’s not like Firefox doesn’t have its fair share of issues both as a product and as a company/ “foundation”
Brave is terrible. But while not entirely relevant, so is DuckDuckGo. These mfs have enough money to appear in superbowl commercials lol. How can anyone trust their privacy claims when their shit is in the US and I don’t believe they’ve been audited. I suppose it’s good to find alternative results, but for privacy? Come on
I made the switch last month from Brave for years, back to firefox. Brave is easy more effective at blocking tablets and ads, even with ublock/adblock. You can install it and just start using a cleaner web, and it’s really easy to customize gow much of an effect the sanitization is. I defended a lot of what Brave did in the early days, because what I was hearing from developers is that they were trying to monetize it in anyway possible that maintained the privacy of the user, and I understand that ethos.
It’s the years and years of missteps that finally got to me. I started to feel like I had to keep up on what they were doing to make sure nothing slipped through, and that’s not trust.
I still think they have the best ad blocking tech, it beats my pihole, it beats Firefox with extensions. It’s fast, and it displays websites reliably.
But, we do need to consider the roads we pave and the tools we use. Brenden Eich has not apologized for his donation, but at the time he did write a blog post about supporting LGBT initiatives at Mozilla and he had support from people that he worked with. He resigned because at the time there was nothing you could do to assuage an internet hate mob but resign. There is information around stating that three board members left because of his appointment, but only one actually said that,
But, we do need to consider the roads we pave and the tools we use
This is the part that every “lol just turn off the crypto crap, no problem!” responses don’t understand. There are short-term issues, and there are long-term issues. Disabling undesired stuff fixes the short-term issue. Letting Brave build up their market share, at the expense of user-first options, creates long-term problems.
Why would people switch to a browser in brave that tries to sell you some crypto currency and has its own ad network? Even if you want to use a chromium based browser because of issues with Firefox, there’s much better available out there.
They haven’t been trying to sell me anything and setting up their own ad system independent from Google is a good thing, esp. when it’s transparent and optional. Brave has its problems but force-feeding users with ads or crypto isn’t one of them.
FYI every browser on iOS has to use webkit under the hood as per crapple’s diktat, it’s just a fork of safari like PC brave is a fork of chromium, eve Firefox on iOS uses webkit AFAIK
Add comment