Hacker News Reader

Comment by wyclif | Hacker News Reader

It's time. People can complain that "oh it's based on Chromium" but I don't think that's the hill to die on right now.

What makes Brave a better choice than Firefox? While it claims to be privacy-focused, it's developed by a VC-funded company, not a non-profit foundation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brave_(web_browser)#Controvers...

Mozilla now sells data, while Brave does not?

Brave sells ads and discloses aggregate-level data to advertisers, and has a history of trust-undermining transgressions mentioned upthread:

>installs VPN without asking, overriding links to insert referral codes, collecting donations for YouTubers without YouTubers even knowing about it, etc, etc

Does Mozilla sell your data, or did they remove language saying they won't?

Do you really think Brave won't, when it comes time to pay the piper?

Site isolation is one: Firefox doesn't sandbox websites from each other on non-Windows platforms, and even on Windows its sandboxing solution is just worse than Chromium's. They're doing work on implementing sandboxing more widely, mind, but still have a long road ahead of them to get to parity.

Firefox has had site isolation since 2021: https://blog.mozilla.org/security/2021/05/18/introducing-sit...

Yes, on desktop. Mobile Firefox still has none, though that should change within this year or the next.

For the simple reason of not using Gecko

I would think the logic runs exactly the opposite way. Browser diversification would make not using chromium the good thing, rather than not using gecko.

What's wrong with Gecko?

I think many people's issue with Brave is that it's a cryptocurrency grift, not that it's a Chromium reskin.

Don't most Brave users have all the crypto functionality turned off or opted out?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com