Technology

This is bulshit, i dont decide will i use a browser depending on who works on it, but depending on the browser itself.

So insted of looking at browser itself this dude sugests we should look at people that work on it and asume the browser is bad if someone working on it is bad which is blindfolded deciding and its nonsense.

So if you have malicios intent and dont have to say anything bad about the browser itself concretly and tehnical because if you lie there, many people that know how it is will say no it doesnt work that way here how it is than you just trash people that are working on it whic is wery hard to veryfi is it trye or not. And probably it isnt..

So when we discus open source software there is no need to talk about writers of the code much because we can discus the code itself and tell concretly if something is bad. Exactly which line and why its bad.

Anything else is just made up and malicios.

duckduckgo

Random* ;(

The problem with the author is the idea of lumping together some good reasons to avoid Brave and some really bad reasons. The idea that the company behind brave depends on ads for revenue is good reasoning, the fact that they have a volatile cryptocurrency to use as payment is another. But when you mention that the founder is a bigot, or that he was associated with Peter Theil, or that they CONSIDERED a shady ad practice are not really reasons to avoid the product.

In the end, you want to have some competition in the browser market (that means not using the same base browser with a skin and some features). I would recommend Firefox over Brave for that reason alone.

Following his reasoning, the author should also avoid JavaScript at all cost then. Good luck with that!

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.

What's up with all these Firefox elitists in the comment section?

The points in this article have nothing to do with the actual browser. For the record I use Firefox, librewolf, and brave

Some sites are broken with a Firefox base.

• the founder is controversial. so what? Does the product render pages with pretty good fingerprint blocking? Yes

• crypto exchanges are under scrutiny and brave uses crypto. so what? does the product render pages with decent cross tracking isolation? Yes

• their crypto has little value and was a failed experiment so what? Does the browser remove ads? Yes

If you're going to write about how something sucks, talk about it with substance, point out code that does XYZ to confirm negative statements.

The crypto is crypto. that’s how crypto.

The asshole at the top, well that’s a new discovery for me.

"The Brave web browser has carved out a niche over the past few years as an alternative to Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, and other mainstream web browsers." Excellent article my only criticism is that firefox is not a mainstream browser lol. Im saying this as a proud firefox user.

It just works the best. Ad-blocking is unrivalled. I've tried Firefox+extensions, Duduck Go browser etc, but none match Brave's ad-blocking capabilities on mobile and desktop.

And I'm all on board with the dream of users receiving a return on their attention. Yes the quantity is small now, but that's because it's just starting out.

I really enjoy brave on desktop and mobile. Other mobile browsers turn every internet interaction into chaos with all the popups and ads (even let’s you use YouTube in the background with its playlist feature on mobile). I read the article and I didn’t understand why the product itself was bad? CEO did some stuff that the writer (and me) doesn’t agree with, doesn’t make it a crappy product though?

Brave is great and i will continue to use it.

What's the deal with the founder ? If my browser is good I couldn't care less if it's made by Hitler himself.