I used Brave for a few years but recently switched to LibreFox. I really enjoyed Brave as a browser but couldn’t handle all the sketchy shit that seems to keep coming up
I really enjoy the chromium grouping of tabs. So much so that’s it’s almost a deciding factor for which browser I choose. I hope Firefox adds that feature soon, so the switch back feels easier
I really enjoy the chromium grouping of tabs. So much so that’s it’s almost a deciding factor for which browser I choose. I hope Firefox adds that feature soon, so the switch back feels easier
The only reason I haven’t switched to Firefox from Chrome fully is because for some reason Firefox for Android still doesn’t have tabs for large screen devices. Mozilla says it’s not a priority. 🤷
If you think the things brave has done are bad, go read through the list of things microsoft has done. You really don’t want them to ever have a browser again, and certainly don’t want to personally use it.
If that’s your only gripe with it, you can still access them by using one of the simple web servers available running inside Termux, that will also allow you to avoid CORS related problems, in fact it is the currently suggested method on MDN
It was because of ‘security’, which was never explained. And it doesn’t make much sense when other browsers can and do alow it. I’ll see if I can dig up some historical links if I remember tomorrow.
Last time I checked,there was still no acknowledgement of it and appeared to be no intention of ever addressing it. The fact that they’re now telling people to run a webserver suggests that nothing has changed ☹️
Unrelated, but why is it that so many kbin users seem to keep a dedicated reducing account? Relatively frequently, an account that reduces a post or comment has no recent posts or comments but heavy initial usage a ~month ago as jpgr above. It’s weird.
I downvoted because it was a lazy comment not providing further elaboration. If anything, the fact that such a comment is highly upvoted shows that this community is not mature yet.
That I'm not engaging in online discussion doesn't automatically mean this is a bot or "dedicated reducing" account. Please restrain yourself from judging strangers on the internet.
In a space dominated by people endlessly sharing opinions and articles and memes, it’s just extremely peculiar to find accounts like yours so frequently downvoting while absent other activities even if it’s relatively mundane. Take, for instance, the upvotes on nothingwise’s comment where 1/5 are blank accounts. The novelty of the information sets off alarm bells, so I apologize if I was mistaken. I’m not trying to start a witch-hunt or JAQ off so I’ll leave it at that.
It’s not really bad per se, it’s the default on most Android devices these days. The problem is that almost all modern browsers are Chromium-based which give Google a lot of power to implement changes (see manifest v3 & web DRM). Personally, I’m trying to slowly reduce my usage of Google products. I’m using Firefox on desktop and a mix of DDG+Fennec on my phone.
In a way yes. You’re giving Google (via an increased browser market share) the power to decide the direction of the web. Their interests as a corporate organization are not aligned with yours, so they will make decisions to your detriment if they have to.
I’ve switched on Desktop a year ago. Also with Android. But Firefox on Android has an odd bug that I cannot get rid of. Pages are really slow to load on initial render. I’ve noticed it gets stuck on the SSL cert verification step, sometimes around 5 to 10 seconds before it starts painting the page.
I’ve tried disabling all add-ons, logging out of Firefox sync, disabling the built in HTTPS everywhere, and literally any custom settings I’ve added. But I can’t get past this issue and seemingly no one else has it.
I’ve never encountered this, which makes me realise I’ve been running Firefox beta for ages (with zero issues). Perhaps try that just in case it helps?
Same issue here! I thought I was alone. It annoys me to no end and weirder still, issue doesn’t present itself with Firefox for Windows running behind the same IP.
Firefox Focus also doesn’t seem to present the issue. Just the primary Firefox browser for Android. And honestly, often enough that it’s nearly unusable.
Yup got the same thing. Annoying as hell. The loading bar always goes to like quarter of the way and stays there for a couple of seconds and the continues. After that it’s fine, but it is always the first page you load after closing Firefox.
You’re not alone, I’ve been using Firefox on Android for two years now, and I’ve had this problem from the beginning. The first time I launch Firefox and load a page it stops a quarter of the progression bar for ten seconds, and then loads fine. Once pas that everything works perfectly. It’s very annoying and I don’t know why this happens.
I am using Brave on iOS mainly because of its superb YouTube support - It has a built in ad block, can download videos offline and play minimized. Is there any way I can achieve this with any other browser? I would switch immediately.
The fact that they have (at least for now) foregone implementing Manifest v3 should be reason enough to use Firefox. Turn their telemetry off and use ublock origin, call it a day well spent.
If you’re inclined to, use Librewolf with ublock, NoScript, decentraleyes, and chameleon.
Copy the bypasspaywalls sites into ublock, add a redirect extension to avoid all the idiot megacorps, and use duckduckgo lite and learn to use shebangs for very fast web searching.
Yeah it’s not perfect out of the box but after turning off telemetry and adding some add-ons like ublock origin and such it’s one of the best short of going full on tor/mullvad. And still less fanaticism than brave lol
Every now and then, you’ll see some journalist uncovering the great revelation that Mozilla is doing unthinkable things, but I have never these stories actually being relevant, if you do more research on the topic.
Mozilla uses Google Safebrowsing! → Yes, but they have technical measures in place to limit user identification (on top of Google stating that they do not use Google Safebrowsing data for tracking): …geek.nz/…/how-safe-browsing-works-in-firefox/
And telemetry by itself is not evil either. It depends entirely on what data is actually being sent. You can look at what Mozilla sends by typing “about:telemetry” into the URL bar. In my opinion, that is perfectly fine.
Ultimately, though, they enjoy so much trust, because they have no profit motive. The Mozilla Foundation is legally a non-profit and the Mozilla Corporation is a 100% subsidiary of the Foundation, so cannot pay out profits to anyone either.
Any ‘evil’ shit they do to make money, they do it to pay wages and to invest further into Firefox & their other projects.
You can criticize that the CEO takes a salary she can’t possibly spend (yet is below industry-standard, to my knowledge). And you can argue whether they should be taking so much money from Google rather than other sources.
But all in all, that still leaves them far above companies who need to exploit users as much as justifiable, to make the maximum amount of profit.
They like to play the “user and privacy friendly” company. Meanwhile they are hemoraging users, and laying off staff needed to actually build a great browser.
Mozilla ceo pay increase + layoffs in 2020:
In 2018 she received a total of $2,458,350 in compensation from Mozilla, which represents a 400% payrise since 2008. On the same period, Firefox marketshare was down 85%. When asked about her salary she stated “I learned that my pay was about an 80% discount to market. Meaning that competitive roles elsewhere were paying about 5 times as much. That’s too big a discount to ask people and their families to commit to.”
In 2020, after returning to the position of CEO, her salary had risen to over $3 million. In the same year the Mozilla Corporation laid off approximately 250 employees due to shrinking revenues. Baker blamed this on the Coronavirus pandemic.
On mac? Love safari? But also want good adblock? Use Orion! It’s safari, but with support for chrome and Firefox extensions! Fuck yeah!
I always loved safari, and always got weird looks for it as a web developer (but after a month or two they love me for it because I always find non-chrome bugs because those peasants only use chrome), but that browser is so damn good guys… on mac, that is. Not sure if it even exists yet for linux/win.
Thanks for the tip! Do you know any similar solution like this for iOS? I’m struggling to find a fully featured browser with decent ad-blocking capacity.
It changes many default Firefox preferences in about:config to be as private as possible. The main selling point is resist fingerprinting (RFP). I highly suggest reading the wiki. It can break some websites, but you can configure it to fit your needs.
OpenWRT router with DNS over HTTPS for the whole network. Come for the easy adblock, stay for the updated router distribution and the best anti-buffer bloat features in any Router software.
White list firewall. Because this is the real reason everyone has a right to ad block. Ads are hidden links to other websites. It’s like walking through a gauntlet of pick pockets bribing the credit card company just to make it to the checkout at your local grocery store, or some asshole you invite into your home that goes to the bathroom, opens a window, and lets a dozen random people in your home if they pay a dollar for the access. The entire system is based on stalking people. It is criminal.
Why was appointing Eich as CEO so controversial? It’s because he donated $1,000 in support of California’s Proposition 8 in 2008, which was a proposed amendment to California’s state constitution to ban same-sex marriage.
I want to try a thought experiment. Imagine that you observe this comment in reaction to the above:
I just don’t get why the author is so pissed about their political contributions. Guess what, people who are involved in big business are usually right-wing and support right-wing organizations. Shocking. Who could have known. I don’t even want to imagine how the author comes to the conclusion that this is some big conspiracy but I think we all know what political spectrum that guy belongs to.
What I just wrote is a mirror-image version of the top rated comment on that article from a few days ago about the Mozilla foundation funding left-wing organizations. Do you agree with one of those statements and not the other? If so, why?
It is one-sided to say that someone involved in Brave should only be “allowed” to do so if he doesn’t support anything conservative. Just as would be one-sided and wrong to say that Mozilla shouldn’t be “allowed” to support left-wing organizations. Flipping it around, and looking at the reaction when it’s the other way around, is an easy way to analyze your own internal reactions on it.
(Generally, I’m in agreement with the idea that you shouldn’t use Brave because of all these other shady things; just this one part jumped out at me as one thing that’s not like the others.)
Very good observation. The issue being, the way I see it, he supported a generally accepted hateful conservative rhetoric. Most left wing organizations do not promote hateful rhetorics.
Supporting politicians you like and supporting basic human rights being taken away on the basis of completely arbitrary factors outside one’s control are two very different things.
You’re not going to want to hear this, but this logic (i.e. “But MY side is the RIGHT one, so it’s different”) is exactly why the right wing thinks Trump shouldn’t go to prison and it’s okay when they cheat in elections.
I do agree with you that the left wing is the right side of history. That doesn’t mean someone who’s on the other side suddenly shouldn’t be an executive of anything.
What does it matter? They just make up whatever they want. It doesn’t matter what anyone else says or does.
A CEO needs to use logic and reason, and being into Trump shows an utter lack of both, and id argue a similar mindset. Anyone in a position like is probably doing similar things.
It’s not even about sides. There is no left wing party in the USA - the Democrats are a right wing party. The problem with the GOP is not that they are right wing, it’s that they are extremists. A lot of their “policies” are not policies, they are crimes against humanity. 'People who are demographic X shouldn’t have the basic human right of Y" is not an opinion, a policy or justifiable in any way.
And boycotting people as Eich is first and foremost an act of self-preservation.
Eich is, evidently, a hateful cunt who invests into destroying the human rights of random people. By exposing your e-mail, bank accounts, your communications and your identity to him (by using his browser), you are inviting him to violate your rights as well.
By using Brave’s shit, you giwe Eich money. Thot same money he later uses to fund the atrocities he and his peers commit. Thus, by using Brave’s shit, you are not only complacent in these crimes, but actively participating.
Less relevant, but still, by using a Chromium-based browser, you help inflate Google’s oppressive market share in the browser space, letting them push shit like Mv3 or WEI. If Brave actually cared about making a private and secure browser and fighting Google’s monopoly, they’d base off Gecko or, better yet, build their own engine.
Your first point is predicated on a false equivalence. The very real problems Democrats have are not in the same league as the very real problems Republicans have. That Republicans and their supporters have chosen to manufacture outrage based on lies and hysteria does not put them on the same plane as being outraged at the loss of reproductive rights for women and the deaths already caused from that, the attacks on voting rights, the trans and drag show boogeyman that is going to lead to deaths if it hasn't already, and etc and etc and etc.
Your second point is arguing against what exactly? People are talking about things they don't like about the CEO of a company. Some of those people are going to choose not to support that company as is their right. WTF business is it of yours aside from your freedom to make a different decision? That CEO doesn't need your help, and doesn't give a shit about you. Why would you be here finger wagging at people about it? If the claims were false that would be one thing, but even you don't seem to be claiming they are.
Let the truth out and let people make up their own minds. If centrism is your thing (and it seems it is) I can't imagine a more neutral position than that.
When did I say anything about the Democrats? I agree with you that the Democrats are a conservative party, and the Republicans are a fascist party. I don’t think we were saying anything at all about the Democrats or the Republicans, and I don’t think it’s controversial that favoring gay marriage is a left-wing position and opposing it is a right-wing position.
Your second point is arguing against what exactly? People are talking about things they don’t like about the CEO of a company. Some of those people are going to choose not to support that company as is their right. WTF business is it of yours aside from your freedom to make a different decision?
Let the truth out and let people make up their own minds.
100% agreed. Do you feel the same way about “Firefox Money: Investigating the bizarre finances of Mozilla”?
If centrism is your thing (and it seems it is)
Incorrect. I used to be registered with the US Green Party before they shit the bed, if that gives you any idea.
Do you feel the same way about “Firefox Money: Investigating the bizarre finances of Mozilla”?
Absolutely. It's why I'm not in related threads telling people who are bothered by it that they shouldn't be.
I don’t think we were saying anything at all about the Democrats or the Republicans, and I don’t think it’s controversial that favoring gay marriage is a left-wing position and opposing it is a right-wing position.
My issue is here:
(i.e. “But MY side is the RIGHT one, so it’s different”) is exactly why the right wing thinks Trump shouldn’t go to prison and it’s okay when they cheat in elections.
Even if for some reason you want to limit the scope to a generic "Left" and "Right" even after invoking Trump, you're still creating a false equivalence.
As you acknowledge, we can point to the factual basis for the concerns the Left has about the actions of the Right. The right has misinformation, disinformation, and willful ignorance as the basis for their outrage. "Both sides" thinking they are right doesn't boil down to the same thing when one side actually is demonstrably wrong.
You’re not going to want to hear this, but this logic (i.e. “But MY side is the RIGHT one, so it’s different”) is exactly why the right wing thinks Trump shouldn’t go to prison and it’s okay when they cheat in elections.
I do agree with you that the left wing is the right side of history. That doesn’t mean someone who’s on the other side suddenly shouldn’t be an executive of anything.
Yeah, it’s one-sided. Prop 8 was stupid and CA rightfully rejected that shit later.
It’s good to be one-sided against stupid shit that is a crime against humanity. Gay marriage is now legal federally. Same as interracial marriage. Nazis got beat the fuck up in WW2. Slavery is over. Deal with it.
California actually never has rejected it and it's still in our constitution. We may get the chance to do so in 2024. The only reason it's not law right now is federal courts ruling it unconstitutional and the supreme court finding the challengers didn't have standing. A new Supreme Court decision that reverses that ruling would make it law again.
Bro, if you can't tell why people are happy about progressive policies that support the right to love each other, and upset about regressive conservative antics that attempt to shame them and wrong them just for being themselves by telling them that they are "other" and not allowed to participate in society by getting married just because you personally think it's "icky" or against YOUR religion, then I honestly don't know what to tell ya. And I blame you for that run-on sentence mess, thanks a lot.
Thank you. I’m tired of these people who think there are sides of equal good or equal bad. There a group of religious fascists that want to control all our lives and then there are the rest of us that sometimes begrudgingly are lumped together because we aren’t wacko nut jobs. Fact is there are very few liberal leaning organizations that I would care if a developer or ceo was apart of because they don’t threaten me for disagreeing.
Your argument has no merit because one side of the political aisle is actively endorsing a piece of shit draft-dodging criminal and encouraging states to strip the rights of a minority population as well as the bodily autonomy of women, and the other side wants to charge you more money on taxes to support social programs and help people. (I own many guns and live in a red state btw, I have a bias.)
Why don't you take a guess on which side is being disingenuous?
You’re not going to want to hear this, but this logic (i.e. “But MY side is the RIGHT one, so it’s different”) is exactly why the right wing thinks Trump shouldn’t go to prison and it’s okay when they cheat in elections.
I do agree with you that the left wing is the right side of history. That doesn’t mean someone who’s on the other side suddenly shouldn’t be an executive of anything.
Yes, I agree with you 100%. That’s a moral and ethical judgement though. It’s a moral and ethical judgement I agree with, but it’s still a statement of someone’s individual morals.
Put it another way – how about if I rephrased it to:
Christian values are human values and no one who can’t respect Christian values should ever be put in charge of an organization full of humans.
Or:
Islamic values are human values and no one who can’t respect Muslim values should ever be put in charger of an organization full of humans.
Would you still agree with that? There are millions and millions of Muslims who believe every bit as deeply in their way of looking at the world as you believe deeply that gay marriage needs to be enshrined in law. Should they be writing articles about how the CEO of some organization gave $1,000 to an organization with anti-Islamic values and so you shouldn’t use that organization’s web browser?
There were slave owners who believed they were morally right too, and your argument says they should have been left alone. We’re smart enough to know they were wrong and that your Christians and Muslims are wrong. We should be writing articles and making choices accordingly.
My argument doesn’t say they should have been “left alone” though. I’m just saying everyone should have a voice and a right to believe what they believe.
Basically, I believe in the old-school left: The ACLU defending the KKK’s right to have rallies, “I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death” etc. As far as I can see, having the election and the debate in the public sphere about whether gay marriage should be allowed is a good thing. I just don’t think it’s a good thing once it goes into the territory of saying, you’re not allowed to say that, because we’re smart enough to know that you’re wrong. If you say the wrong thing, I’ll try to take your job. If you contribute to the wrong side of the issue, I’ll try to take your job.
I mean, I do get what you’re saying – if someone used to support slavery, and we’re using that as an argument for why now after the war they shouldn’t run a newspaper (or why I shouldn’t buy that newspaper), is that okay? If you put it that way to me, it sounds fine, so on that count maybe I agree with you. How about this, do you think the KKK should be allowed to hold rallies, if racism is what they believe?
This isn’t about what Eich used to believe. This is about a law that he helped pass and still supports. I wouldn’t give my money to somebody who helped pass a law to bring back slavery and still supports it. We know that this is wrong.
Eich and the KKK can continue to advocate for the wrong side. We should continue to argue against them and not give them our support.
“While evil triumphs and your rigid pacifism crumbles into bloodstained dust, the only victory afforded to you is that you stuck true to your guns.” At some point, action has to be taken. Nixon set the stage nearly an average lifetime ago and they’re still introducing new props and lighting adjustments. No, the folks preaching irredeemable crimes shouldn’t be executives of anything.
The two sides are not morally equal. Prop 8 was an awful, bigoted stain on California’s history and he was unrepentant. I am glad he no longer is at Firefox. And Brave is a sketchy company that makes clear it was a good decision to give him the boot. I can support companies with moral stances I agree with and not support companies that do bad things.
The fact that you would consider your counterfactual a mirror image is itself problematic.
In the case of the Foundation, it supports exactly what it purports to support. They’re like the EFF and other civil rights organizations. If you consider the EFF left wing, I think that says a bit more about where you stand.
The original article was outrage-bate blog spam, with random Capitalized Words and the prolific use of “scare quotes.” It doesn’t even say anything. No charges of misinformation. No citation of law. Just “They have a Billion Dollars!!” kinds of sentences.
On the other hand, the CEO of a company - particularly a small company - lends his personality to the company. It often makes sense to co-identify them, given that the CEO has an incredible amount of influence.
So if you are saying that libertarian software project : libertarian institutions :: conservative ideas : homophobic legislation, I guess you’re just really endorsing the position of judging the company by the politicians and politics it supports. If you see prop 8 as being as fundamental to the conservative position as internet freedom is to an organization specifically dedicated to preserving internet freedom, all I can say is that I hope more people start to see it that way.
At one point they were scummy enough to automatically add their referral codes to any Amazon link you see. Lots of people today still mindlessly recommend Brave, and that’s what’s wrong in general with the “but the UX is so nice” mentality.
You weren’t tracked, logged, or had your data exploited or anything. All that happened was Brave got an affiliate bonus.
You seem to not know how affiliate links work. The products shopped are tracked & logged per user, and can be analyzed by the affiliate partner as to what their users were buying, i.e. data can be exploited.
I don't know a lot, so maybe you know more than me. The tracking and logging is via cookies, right?
The same cookies that brave automatically blocks?
Again, maybe they do some tracking via some other method that I don't know about; I'm not an expert. But it seems to me that Brave was essentially scamming those companies by using their referral codes but denying them any useful data. Great for brave, sucks for the companies, shouldn't matter to us.
How exactly does one accidentally insert affiliate data on links? At some point someone wrote that code, which is malicious in itself, even if the activation was accidental.
At one point they were scummy enough to automatically add their referral codes to any Amazon link you see.
To be clear, that means Brave is ① invading their users’ privacy, and ② stealing money from web publishers.
The point of referral codes is to reward web publishers for referring users to a product; leading to the user buying a product that they otherwise wouldn’t.
Your browser isn’t introducing you to a product. For it to insert referral codes for the browser vendor’s benefit is stealing money.
Brave is the only browser I know that can play youtube videos in the background on mobile. Please tell me another browser that can do that. The UX is just really good.
I was using Chrome as a secondary because unfortunately “designed for Chrome” is a thing now, and got sick of Google’s bullshit and thought I was doing better by going to Brave. Unfortunately, it quickly became clear that Brave has its own large ethical holes.
Chromium has metric shit tons of work done that seems to perform great. What I would love to see is for Mozilla to fork Chromium, staff it with enough people to maintain it, add/remove the features they feel are appropriate/inappropriate, and thus reuse the tons of free work Google and others have already done. As a software engineer, I don’t buy the argument that it’s easier to correctly implement every new web feature anew than maintaining a fork. Every large org that ships anything based on Android for example maintains a fork of an even bigger codebase. It’s not as complicated as people make it out to be. It’s not a new problem and there are strategies to manage it. If Mozilla does this, they’ll be able to play an active role in steering by far the biggest rendering engine’s direction, instead of playing opposition with no stake in it. Now downvote away! 😄
The more market share chrome based browsers have, the easier it is for google to inflict their agenda for the internet on everyone. If firefox didnt exist, every web developer would be optimizing their sites only for chrome, and responding quickly to any change google wants to make.
It really doesn’t matter what Firefox’es codebase is though. To a web developer it’s a black box. It may as well be COBOL. So long as enough people use it and it behaves differently to a web developer than Google’s Chromium or Chrome, the goal you mentioned is achieved. This is why I don’t buy this argument.
I’ve tried Firefox several times but always end up back on chromium due to compatibility; a lot of sites don’t play well with anything but chrome anymore and this is very much something intentionally caused by Google, who have basically taken a page out of Microsoft’s playbook but with a much more mature product that is going to be substantially harder to replace then IE was
I am using Brave mainly because of its superb YouTube support - It has a built in ad block, can download videos offline and play minimized. Is there any way I can achieve this with any other browser? I would switch immediately.
When I initially decided to drop Chrome, I moved to Brave because - as a chromium-based browser - it supported the same set of extensions I’d grown accustomed to.
That being said, the crypto stuff weirded me out enough that, once I’d weaned myself off the extensions, I switched to Firefox.
What extensions does chrome have which are useful that Firefox doesn’t?
My only recurring issue with Firefox, which may have been fixed I dunno, is it for some reason it “isn’t officially supported” or whatever exact wording to use hardware security keys (like yubikey, which I use on every account that allows it). It’s only certain websites that don’t want to work though. Like google, Microsoft and many others were fine but I think paypal didn’t want to work properly but it does work on Edge, Chrome, probably Brave. Overall annoying as fuck at times but I deal with it to be out of Google’s-world
If you put aside the crypto crap, Brave is an okay browser. Sometimes I use it for web development. But I don’t like the direction the company is heading towards.
Most of the time I use Firefox with Extensions and Librewolf for everything. Firefox has been my go-to for years and I sure hope it stays that way.
I agree it’s less wrong, but it still is. It is damaging the compatibility of the web if people stop testing on other browsers because of low market share
urghhhhh but firefox just doesn’t perform as well. i tried, i really did. i found a 15 year old (!!) bug affecting svg drawing performance that was fucking up a page i was working on, i’m not imagining it.
I’m not sure if it’s the same one but i just found a similar bug with a five year old comment saying i guess we’re not fixing it anytime soon… bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=483868
I do have it installed and check in occasionally but it feels like a downgrade when i try to use it as a daily driver.
is there any way to get a functional de-googled chromium build with settings sync across devices?
The sentiment feels on point however, that this users experience with Firefox has been poor and issues flagged have not resolved in an eternity. I've definitely felt similar exhaustion with other systems.
Exactly. Present me an alternative that isn’t just better in principle, but as good or better in actual fact. I don’t like that Google is up in my asshole, but you know what? their shit works and issues get addressed.
I’m gonna go ahead and assume that every person on here talking about this problem is an arch Linux user like me (btw) because if you’re griping about chrome from a Windows OS that’s some kind of hilarious hypocrisy.
it’s not that niche - svg is a common format and it was difficult to work around. my point was more that the issue was known and just unlikely to ever be fixed, which makes me concerned about other issues I’m not experiencing today but might tomorrow.
I have used it as a daily driver on PC and phone for years. It works great for me. There are compatibility issues that force me on Edge sometimes, but I try to keep those as short as possible.
The main one is my timesheet software which only works via legacy IE webapp (seriously). The other is Google Meet, which doesn’t have full features in Firefox. So I’m forced to open that one in a Chrome tab
I use Firefox on PC and I'm happy with it there. But on my phone Firefox isn't great. Scrolling and zooming is pretty choppy, not excessively but it shouldn't be choppy at all.
Edit: after posting this I tried using Firefox again for a while. I take back the "excessively" part. It is distractingly slow, there's no reason for it to be that bad
Why was appointing Eich as CEO so controversial? It's because he donated $1,000 in support of California's Proposition 8 in 2008, which was a proposed amendment to California's state constitution to ban same-sex marriage.
That has nothing to do with the software. And that's a tiny donation. I'm not going to stop using an excellent tool because one of the guys in charge is a bigot. If that were the case, I wouldn't be able to eat, drink, breathe, make a phone call, or do anything really. There's a lot of people out there. Some of them are bigots. We should work to reduce their influence but we can't boycott literally everything. Every alternative to Brave has at least one bigot involved in it, I guarantee it.
Brave’s replacement for ads doesn’t reward users in a meaningful amount
Not enough > 0, which is what you get without adblock. And I'm fine with occasional non-targeted and unobtrusive ads to help fund a service I use.
Brave’s BAT was built around the cryptocurrency ecosystem
Who gives a shit except crypto bros? And who gives a shit about crypto bros anyway?
Brave was also caught up in a privacy scandal in 2020, when it was revealed that the browser was adding affiliate codes to some URLs typed into the address bar.
Are these affiliate codes tracking you? No? Who gives a shit? It's more money for Brave, same webpage for you.
That should have been enough to swear off Brave as a privacy-centric browser forever, considering the entire point of affiliate links is to collect data about the user and traffic source. For example, when you click an Amazon affiliate link in a web article, the publisher can see the exact products you purchase in the timeframe the tracking cookie remains active
Brave blocks cookies by default. Unless they specifically made an exception in their own browser for these codes, then this carefully-worded paragraph is just bullshit.
Much like the rest of this article. Bunch of poo-flinging. "Brave is involved in crypto, here's all the bad things crypto has done, that's why you shouldn't use Brave". Stupid guilt by association and a lot of hot air. Bringing a smoke machine to make people think there's fire.
There's a lot of effort going into making Brave seem like a bad browser and I don't know why.
A lot of people on Lemmy don’t like bigots, they don’t like crypto, they don’t like scammy tracking and they don’t like dishonesty. So I’m gonna fling that poo and point it out for as many people as possible, in case they don’t know.
A lot of people on lemmy don't care about bigots, crypto, or anything else until something they dislike because it's not en vogue is doing it.
Some dude at Firefox donates $1000 against prop 8? I sleep
Some dude at Brave donates $1000 against prop 8? REAL SHIT
I'm not trying to get into the "everyone is equally bad" thing here, but with projects as large as these if you dig into the history of everyone involved you WILL find some distasteful shit, it's just statistics.
There's a lot of "Brave bad" going around the Fediverse, and people trying to find reasons to support that emotional belief, and stuff like that annoys me.
Yeah but Mozilla isn't tainted by it? Come on, that's ridiculous. He's not building some anti-gay code into the software, the homepage of Brave (or Firefox) isn't "lol fuck the woke".
Dig into any company, or any CEO, you'll find something to get angry about. People are people. Products are products. Open source products especially so.
That’s literally why Eich was made to resign as Mozilla CEO: his anti-LGBTQ+ history is poison for one hell of a lot of web engineers.
Internet engineering, as a field, has always been rather queer.
“There is some sort of perverse pleasure in knowing that it’s basically impossible to send a piece of hate mail through the Internet without its being touched by a gay program. That’s kind of funny.” — Eric Allman, author of sendmail
Use Firefox (or Mull or Fennec- both are forks) on Android. I have Bromite too for times Firefox is being fucky.
On iOS unfortunately due to Apple’s (soon to be lifted) browser restrictions, the default Safari browser is basically as good as any other since Apple forces other browsers to basically just be reskins of Safari (forces webkit usage). I do recommend Firefox Focus if you want stronger, Brave-like adblocking without using Brave obviously. Focus seems to block close to the same level as ublock origin + Firefox on a desktop. It’s barebones by design though, so not ideal for everyone. I know Google/Mozilla are working on non-webkit Apple App Store approved browsers for next year when that law goes into effect (might not be available officially for NA users, not sure how that is gonna play out yet. Hopefully EU sues Apple for $100B for doing that if they do.) Hopefully that means official actual gecko based Firefox is coming fucking finally. Firefox with ublock is all I ever asked for. I’d even take Safari with actual ublock but unfortunately Apple is Apple, the annoying little fuckers.
F-Droid:
F-Droid is a robot with a passion for Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) on the Android platform. On this site you’ll find a repository of FOSS apps, along with an Android client to perform installations and updates, news, reviews, and other features covering all things Android and software-freedom related. f-droid.org/en/about/
Let’s say I just dislike them as an org/com and I don’t like the shit they have made FF into. After being a FF since the beginning (it still was Phoenix, back then). Nowadays FF sole selling point is the existence of uBlock Origin (which isn’t even a Mozilla product) and the Chromium-dominance fear-mongering. Every other browsers just works better, faster, has a better U (I refuse to waste my time untucking it using Class) and is more suited to my workflow. Moreover, I sincerely think that Mozilla is at best useless, at worst just a cash grab and a shady org. The fact that the CEO paycheck almost matches all the donations they receive (from clueless people thinking that they’re funding FF development) and that it keeps growing despite FF the decreasing market share should be more than enough for everyone to reconsider Mozilla’s ethics:
Plus, frankly speaking, I’m fed up of being schooled by YouTube-addictes with a Gmail account and that buy crap on Amazon that my browser choice is “wrong” because potato.
That said, I’ll put my grain of sand to make Mozilla and their shitty circle jerk community (even more) irrelevant, whenever I can. I profoundly regret having been part of that community for almost 20 years.
This is going be my last comment in this useless thread. I’m not interested in debating a d I’ll ignore further replies. I have just answered your question.
But I think it’s the best of the bunch still. Google is absolutely evil, Brave is using Chromium as a base, so Firefox is the only browser with it’s own engine.
It means they are not affected by the shit Google pulls, at least not stuff they put in their engine. Of course Web Environment Integrity is hostile to the entire planet, but that’s Google in a nutshell.
Just to play devils advocate, while I do agree that there are some shady stuff happening, if the browser remains open source that wouldn’t be a problem right? These “features” while present can be disabled by the end user, either within the settings menu or by adjusting in the configs page.
The ceo is a bigoted asshole, Brave is chromium, it was initially funded by Peter Thiel and they’re literally just trying to make their own adsense network.
The self-proclaimed privacy focused browser is tracking your browsing and want to serve you personalized ads, and I think they want to use that tracking data for AI training as well, meaning other people can potentially access it.
And lets not forget about their crypto currency that you can earn by turning on special ads. Which they seemingly unironically called it “Basic Attent Tokens”…
TL;DR: The company is basically a sham company trying to usher in a dystopia. Where you’ll get paid for staring at ads, while having all your data stolen and sold back to you.
Same. I use furefox for everything* at work, despite everything being heavily integrated with teams, sharepoint, et.al.
*: The only thing that doesn’t work with firefox is this inhouse web service that hasn’t been updated since 2017. It’s about to be replaced anyway, so nobody bothered to fix/update it.
Simple one-to-one calling is disabled saying it’s only available on Chrome. I’m pretty sure it’s recent since I had calls a few months back on Firefox. I’m also sure that it’s not some group policy since I’m on Ubuntu without any sort of ActiveDirectory so it’s a pure browser issue. Also, they force the old UI in Firefox due to some reason. Typical BS from Microsoft.
If you confront Microsoft with this, then they will say they don’t have enough resources to test “thousands” of browsers which is why they have restricted their efforts to Chromium only, while making billions of dollars in profits each year.
I’ve tried it today and yeah, 1-to-1 calls magically/unsurprisingly start working. In fact, the whole UI gets a facelift and lots of new features.
If I had to guess, I’d say Microsoft keeps around a version of their UI, which hasn’t been maintained in over a year, and serves that to anyone initiating communication with a user-agent string they don’t like.
If that’s true, that’s a massive security vulnerability. Admittedly, also unsurprising for Microsoft. @xavier666
I am using Brave on iOS mainly because of its superb YouTube support - It has a built in ad block, can download videos offline and play minimized. Is there any way I can achieve this with any other browser? I would switch immediately.
In the settings under “custom add-on list”. You might need to enter dev mode, which you do by tapping the Firefox logo in the about menu 5 times (you get a toast with your progress).
After that you enter the userID ND the collection name in the popup and confirm.
I use Firefox on desktop but on Android i use Brave for one single reason: it lets me open links in the full browser rather than a webview. Or whatever that tech is called. I hate that stuff. It drives me absolutely bonkers. Like, you might think that’s irrational and/or that i have some kind of anger management problem but i promise you it is way beyond that. I’m fucking actually feral about this. This one thing determines which browser i use. If i couldn’t find one with it i would have to start uninstalling apps that don’t let me force full external browsers.
Firefox used to allow you to force this setting but at some point stopped. I don’t know why. Give it back, please. (Along with full desktop extensions…)
Anyway if anyone knows how to change this i would be happy.
Firefox used to have a setting for this. They removed it at some point. That’s not a direction i can support in a browser. Whether that’s a “me” issue or a “Firefox” issue is irrelevant. Brave gives me what i want, Firefox does not. Period.
What issue do you have with not automatically opening a link externally? Some apps have a setting in-app for whether or not to use an external browser.
Some apps do have that setting and that is nice! One possibility is getting to a point where i can ditch the ones that don’t. Unfortunately, the ones that don’t seem to be pretty big ones :(
Easy: I don’t chose my products based on political alignments of the manufacturer. Do you ask your baker for their political views before buying bread? Do you ask your barber? Why should I suddenly care when it comes to software?
I do. I do not put an Alexa in my house as that company can not be trusted. I do not buy food from certain companies as they can not trusted. I do not install software on my system from companies that can not be trusted, have a shitty track record. I vote with my wallet.
Add comment