1056
Stop using Brave Browser (www.spacebar.news)
submitted 1 year ago by whou@lemmy.ml to c/firefox@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 62 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

[Eich] 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.

Even though I do not agree at all with the donation and support - out of the things that influence me into choosing a browser, 15 year-old private donations of appointed CEOs is pretty low on that list.

And the whole BAT thing is opt-in and they're very transparent about it. I don't get why people get so triggered when the C word - crypto - is involved.

[-] Infiltrated_ad8271@kbin.social 35 points 1 year ago

I think the only relevant criticism I see is adding affiliate codes to urls (until they were caught).

The author also forgot the polemic of adding twitter and facebook trackers to the whitelist, and impersonating people in their ads. There are some interesting criticisms against brave, I don't understand why their detractors are obsessed with the CEO and crypto.

Exactly. They do a lot of things I don't like, which is why I don't use them. However, I do recommend them over Chrome if someone isn't willing to use Firefox (or Safari on iOS with an ad blocking extension).

That said, the ad replacement thing was an interesting idea, and if it got better click-through rate while preventing sites from stealing PII, they probably could've cut a profit sharing deal and users would've been better off vs the status quo. They could also have a "premium" option where they pay a certain amount for no ads, and that amount gets split with websites who would normally serve ads.

There are some good ideas there, but unfortunately the good ideas don't seem to have really worked out as intended. I still think they're better than Chrome, but things can change.

[-] notfromhere@lemmy.one -1 points 1 year ago

BAT can be distributed to publishers of content you go to based on percentage of visiting those sites. You can purchase BAT or subscribe to the ad program. Nobody in this thread knows even the basics of BAT, smh.

Yes, it's possible, but that's not how it works in reality.

I think it's a good idea, but with some missteps by Brave. They need to get sites on board before I can truly recommend them.

[-] notfromhere@lemmy.one -1 points 1 year ago

Well nobody is perfect, this thread is making that abundantly clear. If they were still doing all that shit years later everyone might have a point. Make mistakes and learn from it and move on is the only thing I can really ask of anyone. Brave is doing the right thing IMO. As to your comment about BAT, it’s the classic problem of what came first, the chicken or the egg? Not recommending it because it’s not being used so nobody’s recommending it lol.

I don't recommend it because there are better options. Firefox is privacy respecting, and since it still has an independent rendering and JavaScript engine, it's better for open web standards. On iOS, all browsers have the same rendering engine as per Apple's rules, so I recommend Safari with an ad blocker.

If Brave actually offered something tangibly better for the open web, I would recommend it. But it doesn't, so I recommend something that does.

However, if you need a chromium-based browser, I think Brave and Chromium are about on par, so I recommend both.

[-] notfromhere@lemmy.one 0 points 1 year ago

By default, pocket makes suggestions to you based on your browsing history and then the aggregate of that is sent to Mozilla. How is that privacy respecting again?

The aggregate of your interaction with sponsored content is sent to Mozilla (sponsored links you've seen, clicked on, and how many times you've clicked on them). Your browsing history is never sent, either in whole or aggregate. It also sends your region, country, state, and county, but not your IP or anything that could uniquely identify you.

Since you aren't being identified, nor can you likely be identified, it's privacy respecting. Other advertisers attempt to build a uniquely identifying profile on you where they grab as much information as they can. When compared, Pocket looks a lot better than every other advertiser.

Regardless, I'm not comfortable with Pocket, so I disable it. I can't disable advertisers tracking me.

[-] notfromhere@lemmy.one 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Searches: Firefox sends Mozilla what you type into the search bar and Mozilla may share that data with its partners.

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/privacy/firefox/

Here's the actual quote about search:

Firefox by default sends search queries to your search provider to help you discover common phrases other people have searched for and improve your search experience if your selected search provider supports search suggestions... Learn more, including how to disable this feature...

...

If you enable "Improve the Firefox Suggest Experience," we and our partners may also receive your search queries.

So it sends search queries to get search suggestions. I didn't see it mentioned one way or the other, but I'm assuming Firefox doesn't send any personally identifiable information with it, though the server probably can track you somewhat with your IP address.

Sending queries to partners is optional.

[-] notfromhere@lemmy.one 0 points 1 year ago

Wrong section but I misread it and its an opt in.

load more comments (21 replies)
this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2023
1056 points (85.0% liked)

Firefox

17303 readers
31 users here now

A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS