Brave CEO rants about "lefties," "glowies," George Soros
-
Haha, that's quite alright. I knew I wasn't going to win a popularity contest here, I just enjoy Brave for what it does and I wish uBlock Origin was just as good
-
The original op took some things out of context, Ford, last I checked, was not a bastion of the left. He names big donors.
Then he describes how that money trickles down; and the last I checked the not so polite description is more accurate than not.
I don’t mind people bashing bad guys here; and I’m sure this fellow has spent years raiding your hackles. But some people like me, it’s just embarrassing to read
-
You said it "sounds accurate" then complained about people's criticism of it. You didn't actually give any detail about what's accurate about it or try to explain it in terms that aren't "rude".
So my reading comprehension is fine, it's just your ability to actually explain what it is you agree with (in terms that aren't "rude") is lacking.
-
For those looking for alternatives, there are a number Firefox forks such as Mullvad and Librewolf and then there's Chromium and it's various forks (just avoid Edge and, now, sadly, Brave)
-
try Vivaldi.
-
Ok:
- list of donors that are not all left
- parent organizations that get money from above
- mozilla gets money from parents
Op latches onto one donor; pulls some other stuff out , and the crowd goes wild
-
What is a "real coin"? Like a dime?
-
Okay, but what's the bad part here? That's just a very generic overview of how donating works.
-
People always say things like that as if that some kind of argument in its favor.
Being stabbed is better than being shot, but I wouldn't consider either them to be particularly good for your health.
-
Pretty sure there's at least one quote of Davis himself using the n-word to refer to federal agents before describing how bright they glow..
-
The bad part is four things:
- the op either deliberately or legitimately did not understand what was being said
- the vast majority of the comments just read what the op wrote and not what was said
- having this many comments out of whack with this many upvotes gives ammunition to the bigots
- this is a tech forum ??
-
The whole point of fake coins is to trade them for real coins.
-
Between this, Proton and Firefox's change of terms, most of the advice I've seen on tech that protects your privacy seems like it's going the way of the dino.
-
"Afterglow" - That's a term I've been searching for, for the past 4-1/2 years now. I've been trying trying to describe the day after a mushroom trip. Thanks.
-
the vast majority of the comments just read what the op wrote and not what was said
What part of my post isn't something he said
-
This put it in the lefties-only-no-righty-Irish-need-apply revolving-door personnel sector of NGOs
Ok, so you say the donors are not all left, so why would a politically diverse set of donors result in Mozilla having "lefties-only" hiring practices? Reading comprehension requires some critical thinking.
It seems Brendan Eich doesn't understand that it's a politcal diverse group that donated to Mozilla (as you do), given the next sentence. Someone with strong reading comprehension would understand logic of, but I'll explain it to you. His statement is saying that Mozilla became a politically biased organization because of influence from those that donated to it.
Though your strong reading comprehension may have resulted in you having a different interpretation of "lefties-only-no-righty-Irish-need-apply" to mean... well maybe explain what that means to us poor illiterate people that don't possess your intellectual prowess, LOL.
Also do you care to comment on your interpretation on the "glowies" remark? What does that word mean to you? What is Brendan Eich saying there? Something you agree with I guess.
