no i dont trust brave. i did never understand why people would choose brave over firefox+ublockorigen
Popular tech (a la pop sci or pop psych). Brave uses the right techy sounding buzzwords to appeal to the pseudo power user.
Because chromium-based browsers are better in some regards (extensions, good folder support on android). Habit also matter 🙂
That’s in your head. I cannot think of anything Firefox won’t do for me. And if I came across something I needed chromium for, I would open it that one time. My privacy is worth that tiniest bit of effort.
As an independent computer consultant full time, I operate heavily through my browser for a good 60% of my work.
The ability to send tabs to my phone or desktop at will is enough for me. Firefox always.
For me, there are a few plugins that don’t exist on Firefox, which I need. The plugin environment isn’t nearly as robust or kept up-to-date as chromium-based browsers.
I’d be interested to hear which plugins you are referring to as my experience with Firefox has been much the opposite. I often find the plug-in selection lacking when required to use a Chromium based browser.
Mainly Dragon Medical One
Tabs folders on Android is a big reason to use Brave instead of Firefox. Tab management is way better. Not some habit. Straight facts. But Firefox has different benefits. F.E. multiple search engines to use in search bar.
Tab folders became such a nuisance for me on Chrome Mobile I started using Firefox. I keep only 5-6 tabs open at a time, webpages opening in the same tab group thing was just too confusing for my very lean tab management mind. Now my 5 tabs really had “9 tabs”.
Firefox tab management is way simpler. It can be good for some people. But sometimes I miss good tab management support in Firefox.
@FarLine99 @orbituary that’s just Google Chrome tab management. You can get the same thing from Cromite, and it’s not even owned by an ad company!
Yup. Cromite is also a very good option. Good to see legacy of Bromite is not lost.
Chromium browsers could one day be forced to adopt Google Chrome’s updates to maintain their licenses. This could mean that Chrome’s war against ad-block could spread even to Brave. That gives Google too much control over the internet for any one company.
It definetly can happen. Using Firefox is very important this days. Definetly. So do I. Giving all control about WEB to Google is too bad idea. But it is reality we see.
extensions
you mean how Brave doesn’t let you install any on mobile, while Firefox does?
Firefox Android extension support is a killer feature. Use it extensively. I was talking about some extensions that are not available on desktop Firefox compared to chromium browsers.
Can I ask which extensions on chromium browsers that you use that aren’t on Firefox. For me, I’ve found every extension I ever needed on Firefox.
For me, everything is OK. But I heard people that needed very specific extensions for work/hobby/productivity that are not available in Firefox. So Brave will be just better on desktop then 🙂
Chromium based browsers tend to have less issues. I have to use some government websites that have features that won’t work on firefox
I switched back to Firefox, but the one issue I’m having is the gesture add-ons. They just don’t work near as well as the ones in Chrome ☹️
At the time I switched, the built-in blocker worked on a site I regularly used while Firefox+ublock did not (I think it would just prevent things from working or cause infinite ad-loops). If I wasn’t looking for an alternative adblocker, would probably have never bothered switching. There’s also the “get pocket change from using our browser” thing. Some may have been speculating on the value of BATs?
why don’t you read mozilla’s privacy policy and compare it brave’s
I would have choses firefox if it had the support for tab grouping, something chromium browsers do really well and something I need for my workflow.
No
This is the way
/thread
it’s involved in crypto. That’s a permanent red flag for me.
Yep.
Crypto is nothing but a scam that the lowest common denominators are constantly fooled into thinking its their get rich quick method, only to be shocked when they lose all their money.
Anyone involved in crypto is a scam.
anyone pushing crypto is either a scammer or a brainless moron.
Any company or group sneakily putting crypto in their shit deserves to be burned to the ground, metaphorically speaking, and the ashes pissed in .
I agree, but it’s a shame that crypto has garnered this reputation as a get rich quick scheme. It reaally had the potential to upend digital currency and end our reliance on banks.
Currency only has value when people think it has value. And at this point, the current state of bitcoin, the largest crypto, isn’t very great.
Monero is a good contender for digital currency, as it has privacy set on default and it follows the spirit of the bitcoin whitepaper than bitcoin ever did, imo. Its value is stable, and more privacy companies are accepting it as a valid currency for their services (mullvad, for example)
Crypto has garnered that reputation, because thats all it is. Since its inception. Its never been anything but… Anyone who thinks otherwise were just people who fell for the scam.
Its nothing but a MLM for idiot techies who think they are smart, but would totally pick up a USB drive in the parking lot and plug it into a critical system to find out whats on it.
I don’t think monero is a scam. It’s barely listed on any exchanges cuz it’s been banned for it’s privacy tech and the team behind it is really dedicated to one thing: privacy, they even helped fixed tor network
The red flag is that they quietly added crypto and made it opt-out by default. They have a history of shady things like this over the years, such as using ad referral links. Immediately after they get caught, they go on a marketing campaign and drown out the controversy with an influx of new users.
They basically act like it would only take a small sack of money to get them to sell all their users down the river.
the red flag for me is that they have anything to do with cryptocurrencies at all. Anything else is superfluous details.
I view anything to do with cryptocurrency as a scam. Which, I have found, is the safest bet to make.
It’s incredibly volatile as an investment, so yes avoiding it would be safest.
Cryptomining as a feature in software is most definitely a scam.
I’ve heard they store your cookies on the block chain, or something.
- krnl386 ( @krnl386@lemmy.ca ) 3•2 years ago
They implement profile syncing (bookmarks, cookies, history, etc) using blockchain. AFAIK the data is encrypted with your private key which is derived from a mnemonic phrase, so it’s probably ZK.
if only I can access it anyway, why the hell does it need to be on a blockchain in the first place? I still don’t want everyone to have a copy of it even if it is encrypted. Nobody else should ever need it. I’d rather just sync that data between my own devices, and not everyone else’s
- krnl386 ( @krnl386@lemmy.ca ) 1•2 years ago
Fair enough. Are there extensions for Chromium/Firefox that do multi-device sync properly (e.g. strictly peer to peer)?
Absolutely not. Brave is a bloated mess with feature creep and stealing advertisements. It’s ran by a right wing nut job that got fired from Mozilla after publicly stating he hated gay marriage. And the greatest sin of them all: it’s chromium.
No idea why people consider them private over Firefox. Literally just install uBlock Origin on Firefox and you’ll have a way better experience.
Do you have a source for the founder claims? I’m no fan of Brave but that’s an intense back story if true
It was like super publicized news, it’s not very hard to find lol. I duckduckgo’d it for you https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/mozilla-under-fire-inside-the-9-day-reign-of-fallen-ceo-brendan-eich/
Thank you for the link! I realize it’s very much a
LMGTFYsituation, but I prefer to have the person making the claim provide the source because it puts us on equal ground of having the same source of information. From the article it’s clear that I could have looked up any right-wing article and found information to the contrary and we’d be in different contexts.Now, that being said, for anyone else coming to the thread, I recommend you read the whole article. But the TL;DR is that Eich was made CEO of Mozilla in 2014, which caused increased optics on his $1,000 contribution to Proposition 8, a California initiative to ban gay marriage in the state. Because of this, and because of his failure to diffuse the situation, he was removed as CEO shortly after. He was offered a high-ranking position at the company but declined.
So, I would say he definitely has (had?) some close-minded views on gay marriage, however, he never publicly stated anything, but instead made a public donation that was “found out” by investigation, not because he outwardly publicized it. In fact, the article (and apparently Eich and his employees) makes it clear that he never let the viewpoint affect him professionally. But, it did make many of his co-workers uncomfortable and feel unwelcome in the Mozilla community, especially having someone hold those opinions so high up in the corporate chain.
I just wanted to make sure the context was all straight here. I don’t agree with his close-minded views, I’m glad he was removed as CEO, and it’s another reason that I don’t want to use the Brave browser (assuming his views haven’t changed). But, I just want to make sure I had the whole picture
Lol why are you making this a political beliefs things. There are so many things in this post I disagree with but I got better things to do with my time.
You made it political, not me? I’m responding to you not using Brave at least in part due to the founder’s political beliefs
Gay marriage isn’t a political view
But in the US it unfortunately is. The right has made it a political “stance” while it’s just a matter of human rights. It shouldn’t be political, but it is and it pisses me off
@Notnotmike pretty well-known! also OKCupid started warning Mozilla users about it based on HTTP headers which was an interesting form of protest https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-26868536
I read about that in the article the other commenter posted! The article also mentioned that, once he was removed as CEO, some right-wing websites, namely something called “RedState”, just outright blocked FireFox users in a counter-protest.
“We wanted to remind people that the totalitarian impulse of the Mozilla corporation is real,” said right-wing site RedState on April 8 after blocking access by Firefox users.
LibreWolf is better.
LibreFox is LibreWolf now btw
You are right 👍
Its entire business model is a protection racket wrapped in a crypto scam, so no, I don’t trust it!
It also doesn’t help that that it’s run by the incompetent dipshit who inflicted JavaScript on the world and who later got kicked out of Mozilla for being a bad person. Furthermore, being based on Chromium instead of Firefox is an unforgivable sin by itself. Really, from my perspective there’s basically nothing in its favor at all.
Firefox architecture makes remarkably difficult to spin a browser based in its rendering engine.
I can forgive the JavaScript think taking into account the specification was made in 3 days and that the suits made “looking like Java” a requirement.
Everything else is true.
Tor.
At least half of those are patched Firefoxes, without telemetry and improved privacy.
Brave, Vivaldi, Edge etc are way more different from chromium than any of those from Firefox.
The thing is Firefox components are more tightly coupled. blink and v8 are easier to wrap in your own browser than gecko and SpiderMonkey.
Mozilla has been refactoring for ages improving the modularity of Firefox, but it may be already to late.
- krnl386 ( @krnl386@lemmy.ca ) 2•2 years ago
I’d take waterfox off that list. AFAIK it’s dev sold out.
@krnl386 and then un sold out. This was just a non comprehensive list of Firefox adjacent browsers that exist anyway, not good ones
- krnl386 ( @krnl386@lemmy.ca ) 2•2 years ago
Did not know that… thanks!
I can forgive the JavaScript think taking into account the specification was made in 3 days and that the suits made “looking like Java” a requirement.
Given that the backup plan was to embed Scheme or Python, it would’ve been better for Eich to fail.
Python in the browsers seems like the only outcome worst than JavaScript in the browser.
It sends shivers down my spine.
You mean the crypto-bro browser funded by billionaire Peter Thiel, who runs the corporate intelligence agency Palantir, which contracts with the Department of Defense to spy on Americans?
Uh, no.
According to Brave’s CEO, that’s not really true though: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25840586
Can you provide contradictory evidence? I tried to no avail. I would stop using Brave if it turns out that Thiel is having a bigger stake in Brave than I knew so far.
I think the annoymousjoker summed it up nicely, but let me add that anytime you have venture capital funds investing millions into your product, it means they think it’s going to make them a lot of money. Since you’re not paying for Brave, you need to ask yourself how are they returning on that investment? And the answer to that is that anytime a corporation offers a service for free, it’s because the product they’re making money off of isn’t the service, the product is you and your data.
Never trust a web browser sold to you with crypto incentives.
Firefox is foss, transparent and it has more than enough add-ons to make brave pointless.
but RAM and page loading speed
Oh no!
(no one cares)
Also FF has great loading times. Never noticed a problem with speed or Ram in the last decade
Especially since quantum threading individual tabs, I’ve never really had an issue with Firefox performance.
Individual site performance and things like DNS over https and ddos mitigation add more latency than anything I’ll notice from the browser level. And I’m happy to wait an extra second if it means having more control of my data and my privacy.
Never trust anything sold to you with crypto incentives honestly.
Games, software, no matter what.
Firefox is the only browser I trust.
And I don’t trust them, but from all other options they seem the ones that I will accept.
Honest question: what do you have against Mozilla/firefox?
They’re a company, and a company is a collection of people driven by financial motives. You shouldn’t trust any company implicitly.
Mozilla has made a lot of bad decisions recently(laying off 50% of staff a couple years ago), they gave up on their XR browser, and numerous performance issues on Mac. I love what Mozilla stands for, but the management has degraded quite a bit in the last 10 years. The only thing I use these days from Mozilla is Thunderbird but even that is showing its age.
Lesser of two evils
That approach gets you evil solutions.
I welcome any alternatives to the current situation, but unfortunately that’s where we are right now.
The only solution would be a massive effort that requires decades of engineering hours and a few million dollars.
.
“Do you trust [company name] ? -No.”
- Whiskey Pickle ( @whiskeypickle@lemmy.ml ) English28•2 years ago
CEO is a massive bigot. no way
👌🙂
No.
I’d prefer them over Chrome, jus slightly, but thank the gods for Firefox.
God bless Firefox. Definitely. I use Brave as a second browser sometimes. But my main browser is Firefox (Fennec) with uBlock Origin and Skip Redirect.
Definitely not. The whole “allow some ads to earn rewards” thing doesn’t sit right with me. The only adblockers that do that are in bed with the ad companies. Firefox with UBlock Origin and NoScript + Strict security settings is all you need.
- krnl386 ( @krnl386@lemmy.ca ) 6•2 years ago
You can turns that off… also those ads are text notifications that are shown at predetermined (by the user) time intervals.
Good job on missing my point entirely. Turning off a setting that shouldn’t exist in the first place doesn’t solve anything.
- krnl386 ( @krnl386@lemmy.ca ) 1•2 years ago
I like choice. I use Librewolf with Adnauseam for sites that are in the super sketchy category, and Brave for everything else.
Using Noscript is safe, sure, but I’m not into 1992 web browsing, except at nerdout parties where we try using an old 486 laptop running Windows 95 and Netscape 4.01 to browse today’s web.
My point is that there are reasonable steps and compromises one can take to protect their privacy somewhat. Achieving Snowden level protection is cool, but not my cup of tea; too much of a compromise and loss of functionality, sorry. Sure, you can drop a nuke (like NoScript) in retaliation, but that’s overkill and will break most modern sites out there.
Brave, on the other hand, is based on uBlock Origin with actively maintained filters. It’s also 100% compatible with custom filters too. It’s also nicely deGoogled out of the box, so that’s definitely a bonus.
NoScript is obsolete with uBlock
what about cross site scripting?
How is NoScript obsoleted by uBlock?
The features of NoScript are also present in uBlock. Reducing extensions reduces attack surface and possible fingerprinting, though if your threat model requires resistant fingerprinting against advanced scripts use tor.
Brave as a whole? Brendan Eich is the next Elon Musk. Not in wealth, mind you, but dude’s got the antics, is all I’m saying. (Not a good look. Look just what’s going on with Reddit.) Also, a dipshit of EPIC proportions.
Brave Browser? Hell no. The whole marketing point is “oh, it’s a web browser, but with ad blocker”. …installing uBlock Origin is a 2 minute job on Firefox and even on Edge. Have literally walked elderly people through the process. (It got even weirder when they talked about replacing ads with approved ones. I don’t know if they still do that.)
I do draw the line on the whole BAT nonsense. “Oh, you can use cryptocurrencies to support your fave content creators? Even if they didn’t opt in to the program in the first place, and you still make it seem like the donations go to them? And then say ‘oh yeah the donations will eventually go to them IF they sign up for the program’ oh FUCK YOU you’re just deceiving fans aren’t you.”
Brendan Eich is the next Elon Musk
Say what you will of Elon Musk, at least he didn’t inflict Javascript upon the world.
I don’t know about this take. I’m not sure how serious you are about it, but imagine a web without Javascript. Perhaps we’d all be using proprietary abominations such as Java or Flash today, not knowing what would’ve been possible with a more open, albeit somewhat clunky, programming language that’s supported by every browser.
Just because something is slightly less atrocious than something else doesn’t make it good.
My view: Brave browser is a pretty useless Chrome reskin with crypto ads attached. Brave search is a pretty new and exciting alternative to Google.
The crypto bit alone makes the browser super-sketchy. By now, I think everybody has realized crypto is a giant scam.
It has very good ad blocker / fingerprinting protection out of the box. Pretty useful! Brave Search is definetly exciting with it’s own index, pretty good results and AI summarizer.
- krnl386 ( @krnl386@lemmy.ca ) 4•2 years ago
I am sure those who bought bitcoin relatively early and are sitting on $100K+ worth of bitcoin disagree…
You’re got going to magically turn into one of these people by using Brave btw.
- krnl386 ( @krnl386@lemmy.ca ) 2•2 years ago
I am one of those people.
The circus is that way.
I can never trust them again after they got caught injection their own affiliate codes in URLs
When people complained, they removed it and apologized.
Is it that much worse than this?
At least Firefox wasn’t nefarious even if it was a dumb idea.
How is it nefarious?
I think Brave redirecting URL’s to affiliate links would fit under the umbrella of being nefarious.
Ok… But why?
I’m not sure I understand what you are trying to ask?