• aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    To be honest the best chromium based browser I’ve used (when I’m forced to use a chromium based browser) is the Samsung internet one. It has a dark mode that actually works and protects my vampire eyes lol.

    Never used brave because I heard all of the scammy ad network and crypto stuff years ago, immediately put me off it. Now learning that the creator probably hates me, it’s just another reason not to touch it.

    • FlappyBubble@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Unfortunately that Samsung flavour of chrome is hopekessly outdated. Always a few releases behind and shouldn’t be used for security reasons.

  • Daniel@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    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.

    Edit: Fixed bat emoji and typo.

    • doublepepperoni [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      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

    • PopcornTin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      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?

      • Captain Beyond@linkage.ds8.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        As I understand it, the argument isn’t so much “if you use a thing made by a bad person, you are a bad person by association” but rather that using a commercial product made by a bad person, who spends his money on bad causes, is directly helping him spend more money on said bad causes. Since he has never apologized or shown any indication that he has become a better person, not wanting to monetarily support him is a valid reason to not use his product.

      • escapesamsara@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        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.

  • IHeartBadCode@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    Brave Software, the company behind the browser of the same name, was founded by Brendan Eich. He’s best known as the creator of JavaScript from his days at Netscape Communications

    Say no more fam.

  • drathvedro@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Please stop reposting this crap every fucking day. What’s up with you and this exact article in particular anyway? Are you getting paid or something?

  • CaptainBasculin@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    The fact is i don’t care about these things. All it matters is that Brave uses Chromium, therefore I’ll never touch it.

    • Neutron Star@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      plus they have Google Advert ID Permission in Android. Tell me who is more creep. Crypto-things can be disabled within a few clicks, While mozilla’s trash can be disabled using a bunch of configuration in about:config

  • FIST_FILLET@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    did not know about the founder’s past, cheers for this. whenever i’m forced to open a chromium browser for something from now on, i’ll be using vivaldi.

  • Fuckass [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    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

  • KickMe@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    Mozilla wants to censor and cancel people, harder. And Google is the king of censorship.

    I’m going to stick with Brave.

    • raven [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Are you talking about the ex-CEO who got BTFO for being homophobic? Because that was based and cool, actually.

  • DriftingDeep@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    Genuine question: I use brave currently. I really heavily on multiple profiles (work, side-business, personal) that are easy to switch between or have active all at the same time in separate windows.

    I tried firefox, but in my experience, the method for changing “profiles” was unintuitive and cumbersome. Was I just doing it wrong, or does Firefox not have that same kind of feature?

    I really wanna use Firefox, but that’s a deal-breaker.

      • DriftingDeep@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        That’s why I need the separate profiles. Some work add-ons I don’t care to have on personal, and vice versa. I like totally segmented preferences.

        Edit: I get it now. It’s worth the overlapping add ons. This should do it.

  • A2PKXG@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    I disagree with the article. It appears to make two points, both don’t convice me.

    The first one is about a political donation made by the founder 15 years ago to the tune of 1000 USD. It was against gay marriage. While I somewhat support gay marriage, I find it totally acceptable to be opposed to it. It depends on what marriage means, and people don’t agree on that. For some people it just means a strong bond, stronger than a normal relationship. With this definition, gay marriage isn’t an issue.

    But to other people marriage is an envelope that’s supposed to foster reproduction and family building. With this definition gay marriage isn’t exactly straightforward. Neither should it be for people with fertility problems and women over 50 in general. Are convervatives also against that? I guess they should. Whatever. I started off thinking I could defend the stance, now i don’t think i did. Either way, ditch a browser over this nonsense?

    And if Tim Berners Lee spews some BS, will you stop using the Internet? Or if your country elects a stupid president, will you boycott the country and leave temporatily?

    The other issue is what Brave does with ads. While I agree it is imperfect, I think in general the approach is among the better ones around.

      • A2PKXG@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        Deutsch
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        I’m pro gay marriage, and merely attempted to reconstruct the opposing logic, and apparently failed halfway through.

        Now, whats homophobic about this? The fact that in general to people of the same sex won’t reproduce? That seems about as outrageous as the thought that obesity is a medical condition.

  • KTVX94@lemmy.myserv.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    Rehashed article, reposted on Lemmy. How about people stop telling others what browser to use and not to use?

    • FortifiedAttack [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      "I just want to browse for god’s sake grillman "

      If you don’t want to be informed, fine. Nobody’s forcing you to use a different browser either.

  • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    I don’t see any of this as legitimate reasons to stop using Brave.

    • yes the CEO donated $1k some 10 years ago to anti-LGBT stuff, and that’s bad, but kinda small fries in the totality of factors.

    • ads. Firefox has ads and trackers just like Brave. You can disable them on either.

    • you can also disable crypto.

    • hijacking affiliate codes is unethical and should be stopped but don’t actually affect me in any way.

    What else ya got?

    • phej@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      The “anti-LGBT stuff” is enough imo. It may be “small fries”, but I’d rather not support someone (or their company) when they clearly don’t support me.

    • lieuwex@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      hijacking affiliate codes is unethical and should be stopped but don’t actually affect me in any way.

      I mean, alright. But you could say “I don’t care” about any infraction of freedom and/or trust. I trust software to not modify my intent, any software that does so without asking can not be trusted in any way.

    • dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      hijacking affiliate codes is unethical and should be stopped but don’t actually affect me in any way.

      It does affect you because it would have meant that you couldn’t claim cashback offers from sites like TopCashback and Rakuten, as the cashback site’s affiliate code would have been replaced with Brave’s.

    • bankimu@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      CEO donating to what’s cause is ideology that should be separated from you assessment of the product.

      I don’t care about this, sounds like another Hogwarts fiasco.

    • qprimed@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      from the article…

      Ultimately, Brave Browser is the apparatus of an advertising company, a bloated and complicated experience for the average user, and the pet project of the person kicked out of Mozilla for continuing to defend harmful political donations. If you want a privacy-focused web browser, use Firefox or Vivaldi. If you want to support your favorite content creators and publishers, turn on advertisements or support them through the methods they already support (Patreon, Ko-Fi, and so on). Brave Browser is irredeemable, and you should not use it under any circumstances.

      I don’t use brave and I am not interested in using it, so YMMV.

      • Grownbravy [they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        because it’s shit

        All those i figured

        and the pet project of the person kicked out of Mozilla for continuing to defend harmful political donations

        This one is interesting to me because it begins to explains why it has the same terrible clipart lions head logo as a bunch of deadend political parties, groups, and candidates. It seems pretty obvious now