Thought about making a poll but I think I'd rather just open discussion with this:
Do you think it is acceptable to use software made by someone you think is a bad person if the software better protects your privacy and security (assuming you want as much privacy as possible)?
I love Firefox, but I want to have a good Chromium backup for the sites where Firefox doesn't work (also developing websites is important to test on multiple browsers) but I don't want to be stuck with vanilla chrome. I've also read from many sources that Brave is the best Chromium browser for privacy. However, I've spoken before about how I do not want to support their homophobic CEO, Brandon Eich, who was fired as CEO of Firefox for his campaign donations before starting Brave. He clearly cares a lot about user privacy, but at the same time, I don't want to support someone who openly donated funds to anti-LGBT legislation.
Which is more important? My moral objections or my privacy? This is why I tend to use Firefox anyway, as Mozilla is more trustworthy imo. But for cases like sites that don't work with Firefox or using PWAs (which Firefox removed on desktop) that I would really like to be able to use, I'm not sure what I think.
I don't like Brave at all, let alone the CEO. Their way of promotion is somewhat...suspicious?
Vivaldi also stresses on privacy as its Opera's former CEO and its origin is from Scandinavia, which also emphasizes on moral values. And it is Chromium-based and powerful too. On Linux I use both Firefox and Vivaldi which suit 99% of my use case
Add comment