Why I recommend against Brave.
-
It’s one thing to differentiate between a company and the staff who work for it. But I think you have to be pretty thick to gleefully patronize a company whose founder and CEO you detest. If you want to compartmentalize to such an extreme, that’s your business, but don’t argue it to me as if it makes any objective sense to ignore who you are enriching by your purchasing power.
Companies are like Soylent green, after all: they’re made of people.
The CEO isn't the company, they're just the ones at the helm. The CEO's personal opinions don't really impact my decision of whether to patronize their store, provided they keep their personal opinions out of the business. If a CEO aligns with me but their products suck, cool, but I'll avoid the store. If a CEO is opposite to me and their products rock, I'll probably buy from them. If a company abuses its employees or actively tries to interfere w/ democracy (more than their competitors), then I'll avoid their products. I think it's important to send the right message to the right person/group.
I disagree with Brendan Eich, but he seems to keep his personal politics out of his business. I can dislike him while being okay with his business, and I don't think that's an insane thing to do at all.
who you are enriching
At the end of the day, a ton of distasteful people get wealthy regardless of what I do. It's also true that they get a very small percentage of the money a company takes in, it just so happens that a small piece of a very large pie is still a ton of money.
At the end of the day, it's absolutely a personal choice which products and organizations to support. I personally see more value in supporting ideas (e.g. privacy) than tearing things down just because an unsavory character is affiliated with it. In other words, I prefer to avoid throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
-
designed by people who see no problems with...
Do you have a source for those beliefs, or are you just assuming that someone vaguely supporting Trump has that perspective?
I honestly don't care what the devs believe, as long as they don't intentionally put in vulnerabilities.
this is not the software I want to entrust literally all data of all my finances and important personal details on.
Same, which is why I use and recommend Firefox and derivatives.
My point is that if your requirement is a chromium-hard based browser, you can do a lot worse than Brave.
You cannot support current administration and at the same time be pro freedom, privacy and even pro common sense. These things are mutually exclusive, unless you're lying or insanely stupid bot.
Very simple.
-
I'm mining bat.
To someone non technical you sound like you are introducing yourself like a DC villain.
-
I present: The intellectual prowess of bigots.
-
This week I'm going to try out ungoogled Chromium and Vivaldi. I know Vivaldi is partially closed source, but I'm not actually in the camp that thinks all closed source is bad.
-
I know that I am overly paranoid but they do the weird user ID thing. It it opt in ask they said in their privacy policy.
When you install Vivaldi browser (“Vivaldi”), each installation profile is assigned a unique user ID that is stored on your device. Vivaldi will send a message using HTTPS directly to our servers located in Iceland every 24 hours containing this ID, version, cpu architecture, screen resolution and time since last message.We anonymize the IP address of Vivaldi users by removing the last octet of the IP address from your Vivaldi client then we store the resolved approximate location after using a local geoip lookupAt least to my knowledge brave do not do anything like this.
-
If you are keen on personal privacy, you might have come across Brave Browser. Brave is a Chromium-based browser that promises to deliver privacy with built-in ad-blocking and content-blocking protection. It also offers several quality-of-life features and services, like a VPN and Tor access. I mean, it's even listed on the reputable PrivacyTools website. Why am I telling you to steer clear of this browser, then?
-
You cannot support current administration and at the same time be pro freedom, privacy and even pro common sense. These things are mutually exclusive, unless you're lying or insanely stupid bot.
Very simple.
I guess that depends on what you mean by "support." You can support certain things the administration does while attacking others. I dislike most of what Trump has done, but I happen to like a few things Trump has done as well. It's totally rational to say what you do and don't like about a given administration. I voted for Biden, for example, and I was happy that he largely stayed out of my news feed and actually pulled us out of Afghanistan, but I'm not particularly happy about much of the rest of his presidency (still don't regret my vote though).
I don't know how far Eich's "support" goes, you'd have to ask him that. All I know is that he isn't a fan of same-sex marriage at the government level. Maybe he's a single issue voter, or maybe it's something else. I don't know, I haven't seen much about his political preferences.
My point is that we shouldn't jump down someone's throat and start assuming a whole host of things based on very limited evidence.
-
I guess that depends on what you mean by "support." You can support certain things the administration does while attacking others. I dislike most of what Trump has done, but I happen to like a few things Trump has done as well. It's totally rational to say what you do and don't like about a given administration. I voted for Biden, for example, and I was happy that he largely stayed out of my news feed and actually pulled us out of Afghanistan, but I'm not particularly happy about much of the rest of his presidency (still don't regret my vote though).
I don't know how far Eich's "support" goes, you'd have to ask him that. All I know is that he isn't a fan of same-sex marriage at the government level. Maybe he's a single issue voter, or maybe it's something else. I don't know, I haven't seen much about his political preferences.
My point is that we shouldn't jump down someone's throat and start assuming a whole host of things based on very limited evidence.
The shit repubs are pulling, defending and double standarding is insane enough to not trust them as a whole for any rational person used to a functioning government.
Period.
You are doing the classic "hitler did some good things too" argument. Big picture doesn't give a fuck. Any single issue voter, rational person or a non-piece of treasonous shit would distance themselves from repubs and try again with a sane political party.
Anyone still not condemning republicans is untrustworthy and an enemy of democracy and freedom. Easy as -
The shit repubs are pulling, defending and double standarding is insane enough to not trust them as a whole for any rational person used to a functioning government.
Period.
You are doing the classic "hitler did some good things too" argument. Big picture doesn't give a fuck. Any single issue voter, rational person or a non-piece of treasonous shit would distance themselves from repubs and try again with a sane political party.
Anyone still not condemning republicans is untrustworthy and an enemy of democracy and freedom. Easy asYou are doing the classic “hitler did some good things too” argument
I'm really not. Hitler was a very different situation than Trump, and if you think they're directly comparable, you need to take a break from the internet.
Yeah Trump sucks, and he's dangerous (but mostly in an inept sort of way). I get it. But I think it's highly unlikely that he tries to take dictatorial control of the US in any meaningful capacity.
There are some reasonable Republicans who don't like the nonsense Trump is doing. In fact, I'd be surprised if most Republicans aren't a fan of him flagrantly ignoring the law. Don't lump them all into the same set of problems, that's just going to put roughly half of the US against you. Instead of that, you could find some common ground and get a significant number to be on your side. Why fan this stupid culture war nonsense more than necessary?
Call out bad policy, acknowledge good policy, and demand accountability for lawbreaking.
Brendan Eich isn't some secret Project 2025 mastermind, he's just a dude that thinks privacy on the web is important and thinks his company has an interesting approach to solving that problem. Yeah, he has at least one bad political view, but that doesn't mean everything he touches is automatically terrible.
-
You are doing the classic “hitler did some good things too” argument
I'm really not. Hitler was a very different situation than Trump, and if you think they're directly comparable, you need to take a break from the internet.
Yeah Trump sucks, and he's dangerous (but mostly in an inept sort of way). I get it. But I think it's highly unlikely that he tries to take dictatorial control of the US in any meaningful capacity.
There are some reasonable Republicans who don't like the nonsense Trump is doing. In fact, I'd be surprised if most Republicans aren't a fan of him flagrantly ignoring the law. Don't lump them all into the same set of problems, that's just going to put roughly half of the US against you. Instead of that, you could find some common ground and get a significant number to be on your side. Why fan this stupid culture war nonsense more than necessary?
Call out bad policy, acknowledge good policy, and demand accountability for lawbreaking.
Brendan Eich isn't some secret Project 2025 mastermind, he's just a dude that thinks privacy on the web is important and thinks his company has an interesting approach to solving that problem. Yeah, he has at least one bad political view, but that doesn't mean everything he touches is automatically terrible.
If you can't see trump becoming a dictator after he has said he would multible times and after a failed fucking coup, everything you said is wrong and or malicious.
Thanks for outing yourself. -
If you can't see trump becoming a dictator after he has said he would multible times and after a failed fucking coup, everything you said is wrong and or malicious.
Thanks for outing yourself.If you can’t see trump becoming a dictator
He's like 80yo. He's not going to. There's a better chance that he has a heart attack.
And yeah, countries watch US politics closely, and they're very unhappy with Trump's stupid tariffs. His strategy seems to be to jack up tariffs to devalue the dollar a bit to make exports more attractive longer-term. He doesn't want to annex Canada (though Canadians won't hesitate to blow that up since there's an election coming up next month), he doesn't want to annex Greenland (but he probably wants some land for bases), and he doesn't want much to do with anything south of the border. He wants to create lots of blue-collar jobs, because blue-collar workers for some reason have been shifting toward the Republican Party, and it's his job to make the Republican Party more attractive.
I think the whole strategy is dangerous and stupid from an economics standpoint, but I don't see it as fascist. It's certainly isolationist and nationalist though, but I see zero indication that he's interested in nationalizing anything. Maybe I'm wrong, but what I see is a lot of people who are mad because Trump doesn't listen to them, so they spout alarmist nonsense.
That said, what Musk is doing is absolutely dangerous on another level entirely. He's putting sensitive data into a format that could be fairly easily attacked by state actors. There's a good reason we have data separated, and it's not to intentionally make government ineffective, it's largely following the principle of least privilege, and Musk is demolishing that. It's incredibly dangerous, and I'm surprised he hasn't gotten more pushback on it.
You can believe what you want, of course, but my read is that Trump is pursuing stupid economic policy in a crazy attempt to be remembered long-term as the guy that "fixed" the US economy, not trying to become a dictator. He wants to be remembered.
-
Brave has great anti-fingerprinting measures I just wish I could get that without installing crypto malware on my pc
All the crypto stuff is opt-in.
-
Literally bigots, Russian trolls are defending it like they are on Reddit.
-
Brave has great anti-fingerprinting measures I just wish I could get that without installing crypto malware on my pc
Mullvad Browser comes with fingerprint blocking mechanisms of Tor Browser, without connecting to tor. I recommend it.
-
I'm not trying to win any argument, I'm trying to have a discussion. It seems to me that you're not interested in that, so I'll leave some links to relevant logical fallacies in a hope that someone going this far down the thread will make up their own mind using reason instead of emotion.
- Poisoning the Well - i.e. Eich's products must be bad because they believe something bad, or something like that
- Association Fallacy - Eich believes something bad, therefore his corporation and products must be bad
- Argumentum_ad_populum (bandwagoning)
The link in the post above me is also great, I highly recommend reading it, especially the following from the person who wrote about it:
Popper underlines the importance of rational argument, drawing attention to the fact that many intolerant philosophies reject rational argument and thus prevent calls for tolerance from being received on equal terms.
To be clear, I am not arguing that Eich's intolerant beliefs be tolerated, I'm arguing that they're irrelevant to the discussion about Brave browser (i.e. the Association Fallacy). By all means, protest against intolerance, be loud, and above all, completely discredit it through rational argument, and I'll join you in that. But don't become the thing you claim to hate by refusing rational argument. Articulate why his personal actions matter at all to the products his company makes, and why those can't be evaluated on their own merits.
It's not an association fallacy or poisoning the well if those things are actually being done, which has already been covered in the previous comments. Goggles is another current example of that.
You can go on and have your last word now, I'm done with your bad faith argument. I think there's enough evidence in this comment thread by now for others to see you're being disingenuous.
-
There's always Ungoogled Chromium. If you do want to suggest Brave to people, please tell them about these downsides as well.
Ofc I will try my best to tell people about up/down side of a product. When it come to ungoogled chromium do they still support manifest v2? If yes then it will be also a great choice for desktop.
-
I present: The intellectual prowess of bigots.
Yes, because using a web browser is bigotry
It's cool if you don't like it but at least have legitimate reasons for not liking it. -
Am I misunderstanding something? That's what I would expect to see from any search engine when you search for "vaccines" and "news from the right".
Yes, the feature is working exactly as intended, and therein lies the problem.
