Stop Using Brave Browser
spacebar.news
spacebar.news
I'm a bit shocked that this article even made it to HN's front page.
(However, I do appreciate the technical and business model explanations later in the article about Brave.)
> because he silently donated to causes seeking to strip rights from minority groups instead of directly harassing them, the outrage was unjustified. Okay, Brendan.
Davenport wrote only 4 sentences on the topic (two of which I quoted), plus the section title, and the topic is never mentioned again. The quote from Eich is longer than what Davenport wrote.
How do you get "proclaimed evil for that" from that? I thought it seemed even-handed.
How would you answer the question "Why was appointing Eich as CEO [of Mozilla Corporation] so controversial?"
The title of the section, "the hateful browser", tells you the appropriate lense through which to view the entirety of the content. The reader is primed to assume bad faith everywhere.
He reenforces the view with his commentary, the disbelieving and sarcastic "okay Brendan" which further primes the reader into a bad faith view of his accomplishments and life.
It's not a rebuttal that directly addresses any of Mr Eich's points. If we assume good faith on the part of Eich's quote, then an entirely different approach to the points is warranted.
You see where I'm going right? Just because someone feels hatred doesn't mean that the person who hates is evil. Nor that the browser is evil.
The disbelieving "okay Brendan" occurs after giving a direct rebuttal to Eich's second point.
It highlights how the argument "the donation does not in itself constitute evidence of animosity" is incomplete, because the action does not stop at the donation.
Eich knows this, hence using the phrase "in itself" to, as you write, '[tell] you the appropriate lense through which to view the entirety of the content'.
As Davenport (correctly, IMO) characterizes it: "he silently donated to causes seeking to strip rights from minority groups instead of directly harassing them".
Or, as Lehrer characterizes the von Braun defense: "Once the rockets are up / Who cares where they come down? / That's not my department".
Again, how would answer the question "Why was appointing Eich as CEO [of Mozilla Corporation] so controversial?"
The author lists a number of crypto features, some of which failed and some turned out inconsequential. I don't see how this should have any effect on the users who use Brave for other features like adblocking or tabs sidepanel.
I wouldn’t support the business of someone who was a former KKK member, or who even merely donated money to strip black people of the right to vote or marry white people or something like that.
It’s just… against my best interest to give them money when in the past they used that money against me.
In this case, he has neither apologized nor publicly pledged retracted support from his previous cause.
For some, self flagellation on top of what you ask won't be enough
I have zero problems with Brave; I don't use the crypto bit (not for me) and I still use uBlock Origin with it as Brave + uBO seems to do the best job at blocking garbage that I've seen so far.
- In-browser adblocking, which is not dependent on the changes in extension API or extension policies.
- Reader view, which is comparable to that in Safari.
- Sidepanel with tabs.
I also liked the idea of distributing the payment to the websites that I'm visiting, and I'm sad that this didn't pan out.
Tangentially, I also like Brave Search, which is comparable to Google in quality, doesn't have ads and has nice AI summarization.
also faster than chrome on my M1 nowadays and ... no google. one more user against blink-monopoly in rendering the internet here.
So to sum up, Brave is doing the same thing as Google except that they never figured out how to effectively serve ads to users, so they actually protect users from ads.
Stop using Brave browser. Seriously.
The author describes Brave's "marketing as a privacy-preserving web browser."
This is not the same as "blocked ads". The author even wrote "From the start, Brave Software had a different idea than just blocking ads outright."
If it is supposed to be a privacy-preserving web browser, then #4 should not have happened. If the developers can't tell that a new feature like that will destroy privacy, then how do you trust Brave to recognize privacy-breaking capabilities elsewhere?
If it is not developing a privacy-preserving web browser then what is the goal of the company? It comes acrosss like a Google wannabe with an odd fascination with cryptocurrency.
To sum up: "If you want a privacy-focused web browser, use Firefox or Vivaldi. If you want to support your favorite content creators and publishers, turn on advertisements or support them through the methods they already support (Patreon, Ko-Fi, and so on)."
OTOH, if you like cryptocurrency, or want to send your ad dollars to company other than Google, then it sounds like Brave is appropriate.
May be someone can recommend something with uBlock working?
I keep other browsers for frontend developments testing only.
https://www.androidauthority.com/brave-vs-firefox-3314241/
I thought that perhaps with uBlock Origin Firefox could use less RAM, but searching on that only found results were uBlock Origin sometimes used huge amounts of memory (hopefully fixed by now).
I'm not dismissing the tests in the article but it's just not relevant to my real world usage.
People didn't like Germans during WW1, so they threw away Beethoven's music. How dumb is that?
The Nazis invented missiles during WW2, so we should perhaps throw away all of our Space technology? How dumb is that?
Some guy that's not very nice writes a good browser, so perhaps we should throw that browser away? How dumb is that?
The company behind is is scummy with its cryptocurrency.
Chrome's criticisms mainly take place in development spaces; its push for technologies that are only supported by itself, and now its attempts at curtailing adblockers (because Google's primary revenue model is ads).
Until they ban adblockers for good…
[1] uBlock Origin, Video Speed Controller, YouTube SponsorBlock.