this post was submitted on 24 Mar 2025
861 points (95.3% liked)

Technology

68244 readers
4245 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
861
Why I recommend against Brave. (thelibre.news)
submitted 1 week ago by Tea@programming.dev to c/technology@lemmy.world
314 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

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 are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works -3 points 1 week ago

He has nothing to gain from funding such a campaign.

He obviously believes that same sex marriage shouldn't be performed by the government. If you want to know why, ask him, not me.

That said, I don't see this as "betrayal," it was a private donation. The only reason we're talking about it is because someone dug through his donation history (donations to such orgs are public record) and made a big deal about it. AFAIK, there were no accusations of him treating LGBT people unfairly, only opposition to his donation.

It’s bad enough that they even got the idea,

I'd like to see an explanation beyond, "yeah, we screwed up." Who signed off on it, and what was their justification?

Your proposed solution sounds fine, though.

Thanks. The idea is that the browser has a vested interest in protecting the privacy of it's users, so finding a workable solution for both the user and the website should provide some funding for the browser.

But yes, either the browser should block ads so nobody gets revenue or work something out where everyone wins. Profiting off someone else's content without permission will always be wrong.

Maybe if there weren’t any alternatives, but there are plenty.

Do you have a better suggestion for a chromium-based browser that's FOSS and has effective ad blocking and tracking protection?

I use Firefox (or fork) most of the time, but I need to test on a chromium browser and need a backup for the odd website that fails on Firefox.

Brave sticks out as the obvious solution here.

Other CEO’s typically at least keep quiet about politics

He tried to. He never advertised his political beliefs, donations, etc. Someone just found out and blasted him for it. For an org that supposedly cares about privacy, that's pretty alarming!

But under no circumstances will I defend those who downplay or justify Brave’s, and especially Eich’s, actions.

Nor will I. But I will separate my criticism of them.

I'm 100% happy to jump on board an Eich's political positions hate train, and I probably share the resentment. But I will not jump on a Brave hate train just because Eich is associated with it. I'm happy to blast Brave over technical mistakes it makes (I avoided it for a long time until BAT was deemphasized), but I won't transfer that frustration into a personal attack on Eich. They can and should be treated separately.