• Daniel@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    TL;DR: The article claims that the Brave web browser is bad and should not be used.

    The author points out that Brendan Eich, the creator of JavaScript, co-founder (and ex-CEO) of Mozilla, and founder of Brave, donated 1,000 USD in support of a proposition to ban same-sex marriage. Along with making the claim that Brave’s goal is not to act as an ad-blocker, but instead to build and grow their own advertisement network, and he also believes that the network has several flaws:

    • Brave Ads paysout in a form of cryptocurrency, called BAT (🦇).
    • As BAT is a cryptocurrency there is high volatility.
    • BAT can not be redeemed for fiat (“actual”) money directly from within the Brave Wallet.
    • The author also believes that “it [the network] has largely failed” but that it “has generated a lot of revenue for Brave,” via the ICO (Initial Coin Offering; IPO for crypto).

    In addition to these key points the author also:

    • Claims that Brave prompted FTX, before the scandal.
    • Cites the The Brave Marketer Podcast where ex-CMO of Crypto.com Steven Kalifowitz shares an ambitious goal of being a “‘brand like Coke and Netflix.’” The author then mentions that:
      • In 2023 there was a report from The Financial Times that Crypto.com traded against their customers.
      • In 2022 the company try to hide the severity of its layoffs.
    • Mentions Brave’s integration with Gemini, and how the crypto exchange is under investigation for lying about FDIC insurance.
    • Mentions a partnership with the the 3XP Web3 Gaming Expo where they sponsored the Esports Arena and rewarded contestants with the BAT token.
    • Claims that Brave added affiliate/referral codes to URLs, such as “binance.us.”

    Finally, the author lists Firefox and Vivaldi as alternatives to Brave, and ends the article with “Brave Browser is irredeemable, and you should not use it under any circumstances.”

    I am human, please let me know if I’ve made a mistake.

    Edit: Fixed bat emoji and typo.

    • doublepepperoni [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      The author points out that Brendan Eich, the creator of JavaScript, co-founder (and ex-CEO) of Mozilla, and founder of Brave, donated 1,000 USD in support of a proposition to ban same-sex marriage.

      My impression was Brave got started after he got hoofed out of Mozilla or left on his own accord after the backlash for showing his ass to be a homophobe. Redditor types were of course very angry about this blatant disregard for frozen peaches and jumped onto his new venture in droves

    • viking@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      As BAT is a cryptocurrency there is high volatilability (I don’t know if I spelled that right :/ ).

      Volatility :-)

    • PopcornTin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      If he’s bad, shouldn’t everything he touches be bad? Why web site that uses JavaScript should be just as bad. Any browser based on Mozilla should be bad. Why is it just Brave that’s bad for what he did in 2008?

      • Captain Beyond@linkage.ds8.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        As I understand it, the argument isn’t so much “if you use a thing made by a bad person, you are a bad person by association” but rather that using a commercial product made by a bad person, who spends his money on bad causes, is directly helping him spend more money on said bad causes. Since he has never apologized or shown any indication that he has become a better person, not wanting to monetarily support him is a valid reason to not use his product.

      • escapesamsara@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s really hard for the creator of Javascript to make money off of javascript, and it’s unlikely he has any financial interest in the Mozilla corporation anymore since they’re a nonprofit and thus don’t have share holders. However, he directly profits off of Brave.

  • drathvedro@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Please stop reposting this crap every fucking day. What’s up with you and this exact article in particular anyway? Are you getting paid or something?

    • whou@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      well, I just came across the article on Mastodon and wanted to share it. I mean jeez, imagine sharing and wanting to discuss interesting topics just for fun?

      and I posted the article on !technology@beehaw.org and then cross-posted it here, because I thought it was also an interesting community to discuss it. I saw a bunch of people cross-posting it elsewhere, so if you’re seeing it a bunch of times then it’s probably because those communities probably also have something in common with the article. I personally think every community have different people and different discussions to have, so I don’t see it as particularly bad.

    • iByteABit [he/him]@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t usually judge by looks, but you can just tell that Brendan Eich is an insecure fragile person with many mental problems.

      I don’t know what’s worse: The whole anti same-sex marriage deal or inventing Javascript.

      Probably Javascript…

      • GreenMario@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh he’s THAT guy?!

        Fuck that guy. He basically is the reason popups was so damn widespread.

      • roflo1@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t know what’s worse: The whole anti same-sex marriage deal or inventing Javascript.

        Probably Javascript…

        Heh. Made me smile.

        Here, have an upvote! ;)

    • whou@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      oh sorry! forgot about it adding a description. will do next time.

  • CaptainBasculin@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The fact is i don’t care about these things. All it matters is that Brave uses Chromium, therefore I’ll never touch it.

    • Neutron Star@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      plus they have Google Advert ID Permission in Android. Tell me who is more creep. Crypto-things can be disabled within a few clicks, While mozilla’s trash can be disabled using a bunch of configuration in about:config

    • bankimu@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah. But if I ever want or need a Chromium browser, it may be the one.

  • IHeartBadCode@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    1 year ago

    Brave Software, the company behind the browser of the same name, was founded by Brendan Eich. He’s best known as the creator of JavaScript from his days at Netscape Communications

    Say no more fam.

  • FIST_FILLET@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    did not know about the founder’s past, cheers for this. whenever i’m forced to open a chromium browser for something from now on, i’ll be using vivaldi.

    • dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Is Vivaldi good? I’ve heard it’s like the old Opera, which I used to love (I used Opera from 2003 until around when they switched to Chromium, 2012ish)

      • root_beer@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I used to use it and I liked it quite a bit, I even replaced my gmail accounts with vivaldi.net accounts, though I may migrate to proton sometime. I use Firefox exclusively but if I needed to use a chromium-based browser, that’s the one I’d use. I’m not a power user by any stretch so my opinion probably has less weight than those of others on here, but that’s my two cents anyway.

      • FIST_FILLET@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        i like vivaldi a lot :) mostly because of its UI and extremely easy in-depth customization. in my opinion it is the greatest-looking web browser (if you don’t factor in all the css fiddling you can do in a text editor with firefox, of course. but even then i don’t recall seeing any custom firefox user style that looked better than vivaldi to me).

        the reason why i switched away from vivaldi and back to firefox after ~2 years of straight usage was that vivaldi had a weird performance bug for me where if i had too many tabs open for too many days in a row (laptop, no shutdown), it would randomly start freezing and i’d have to restart it. but when it was running on a fresh start, it was amazing. also the more ethical choice of using a non-chromium browser was part of the reason

        • VonReposti@feddit.dk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          it would randomly start freezing and i’d have to restart it. but when it was running on a fresh start, it was amazing

          Weird, that’s the exact problem I had on my old desktop and have on my laptop with Firefox. Both were 8gigs of memory and I figured out that the freezing coincided with memory being depleted. My new desktop has, funnily enough, no problems with its 32gigs of memory. I need to purchase a new ram block for my laptop…

      • swagstudios@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        yeah I switched to Vivaldi from Firefox after a few years. was just sick of the incompatibility issues

    • redfellow@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      No, this article is pretty much idealistic rant aimed at hating the ceo. The product is fine.

      Edit: the ads and crypto are opt in. I’d like to see if anyone ranting here about them has actually used Brave and went so far as to opt in to things they don’t want

      • lieuwex@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        The affiliate link hijacking was not opt-in. How could anything remotely like this be accepted in a privacy focused browser?

        When Firefox had the mr robot extension incident everybody was (righfuly so) mad, but that was way less damaging than altering users’ intent.

        • braveone@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Can someone explain how Brave siphoning some money from Amazon specifically impacts privacy? Does the affiliate get a list of accounts that bought something? Names? Addresses? Or does some money just show up in their account?

          What information does Amazon get? That the person clicking is using Brave? They already know that from the user agent.

          • Ilgaz@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Some OSS developers, independent review/news sites get affiliate money to stay afloat. Amazon requires them to state this clearly. Brave didn’t declare it and probably stole (replace) innocent referrals. This is level 100 spyware/malware tactic.

            • braveone@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m not saying it was ethical or good.

              I’m asking how it specifically impacts privacy.

              Every response I’ve gotten is a non privacy response, which leads me to suspect it’s a stealing from others issue not a privacy issue.

            • braveone@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Sure but that sounds like liberty and autonomy, not privacy.

              I asked specifically how it infringes on privacy. Seems like the wrong word to use.

  • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    To be honest the best chromium based browser I’ve used (when I’m forced to use a chromium based browser) is the Samsung internet one. It has a dark mode that actually works and protects my vampire eyes lol.

    Never used brave because I heard all of the scammy ad network and crypto stuff years ago, immediately put me off it. Now learning that the creator probably hates me, it’s just another reason not to touch it.

  • jabberati@social.anoxinon.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    @whou Don’t forget the time they made it possible to ‘donate’ to creators, but when creators weren’t signed up with their program #Brave would just keep the donation. So users would think they have donated for example to Tom Scott, but in reality he never received anything. Overall just a scummy company.

  • kazerniel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    it was a similar article that made me switch from Brave to Ungoogled Chromium a few weeks ago, as a backup browser for the handful of sites that don’t work in Firefox.

      • kazerniel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Tbh the homophobia was just the last straw on the hill of crypto nonsense they piled on the browser over the years. I’ve been increasingly uncomfortable with Brave the more “fluff” they added, so going back to bare Ungoogled Chromium has been pretty good.

  • Ginkko117@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I use Brave as a second browser (mainly to separate different activities) and did not have any issues with it apart from dragging tabs between monitors (it creates an additional empty tab sometimes when doing this). Turned off all unnecessary stuff right when I first launched it and that’s it. No bloat, no issues, just works. Didn’t know about this CEO controversy but seeing as it was a long time ago, don’t think it’s a valid reason to not use Brave. And both logo and name are cool.
    It’s a solid option which we don’t really have a lot of in open source space

    • ruk_n_rul@monyet.cc
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      mainly to separate different activities

      Firefox has profiles AND container tabs for exactly this though.

        • ruk_n_rul@monyet.cc
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m talking about the browser user profiles, where your user data (bookmarks, passwords, extensions) is stored.

          Firefox puts them into profiles so that you can change between those sets, as if you’re a different user, without changing user accounts at the OS level.

          This isn’t about online accounts.

            • ruk_n_rul@monyet.cc
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yep, Mozilla doesn’t tie your Firefox settings to your Mozilla account. It does require it for syncing between devices though.

              Glad to get people to understand Firefox better. Hope my comment didn’t come out as too crass or anything 😅

  • DriftingDeep@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Genuine question: I use brave currently. I really heavily on multiple profiles (work, side-business, personal) that are easy to switch between or have active all at the same time in separate windows.

    I tried firefox, but in my experience, the method for changing “profiles” was unintuitive and cumbersome. Was I just doing it wrong, or does Firefox not have that same kind of feature?

    I really wanna use Firefox, but that’s a deal-breaker.

      • DriftingDeep@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        That’s why I need the separate profiles. Some work add-ons I don’t care to have on personal, and vice versa. I like totally segmented preferences.

        Edit: I get it now. It’s worth the overlapping add ons. This should do it.

    • facow [he/him, any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ve never had a problem with them and I really like the Facebook container feature for when I have to use Messenger to contact friends

  • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I don’t see any of this as legitimate reasons to stop using Brave.

    • yes the CEO donated $1k some 10 years ago to anti-LGBT stuff, and that’s bad, but kinda small fries in the totality of factors.

    • ads. Firefox has ads and trackers just like Brave. You can disable them on either.

    • you can also disable crypto.

    • hijacking affiliate codes is unethical and should be stopped but don’t actually affect me in any way.

    What else ya got?

    • phej@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      The “anti-LGBT stuff” is enough imo. It may be “small fries”, but I’d rather not support someone (or their company) when they clearly don’t support me.

    • lieuwex@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      hijacking affiliate codes is unethical and should be stopped but don’t actually affect me in any way.

      I mean, alright. But you could say “I don’t care” about any infraction of freedom and/or trust. I trust software to not modify my intent, any software that does so without asking can not be trusted in any way.

      • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Agree to disagree, I suppose. It’s worth it for the comprehensive privacy features.

          • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I do. In fact I use 5 different browsers on a semi-regular basis. None of them are vanilla Firefox. Most of the “more private” browsers simply don’t work on many pages.

    • dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      hijacking affiliate codes is unethical and should be stopped but don’t actually affect me in any way.

      It does affect you because it would have meant that you couldn’t claim cashback offers from sites like TopCashback and Rakuten, as the cashback site’s affiliate code would have been replaced with Brave’s.

    • bankimu@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      CEO donating to what’s cause is ideology that should be separated from you assessment of the product.

      I don’t care about this, sounds like another Hogwarts fiasco.

  • KickMe@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Mozilla wants to censor and cancel people, harder. And Google is the king of censorship.

    I’m going to stick with Brave.

    • CarbonScored [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The CEO of Brave literally supports Censorship so hard that he wants to censor gay marriage out of existence - this actually affects people in real life. When you use Brave, you directly support that individual and their shitty politics.

        • raven [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The “precise and specific actions” called for in that article, specifically for the purpose of combating speech that encourages violence, like homophobia or white supremacy:

          • Reveal who is paying for advertisements, how much they are paying and who is being targeted.

          • Commit to meaningful transparency of platform algorithms so we know how and what content is being amplified, to whom, and the associated impact.

          • Turn on by default the tools to amplify factual voices over disinformation.

          • Work with independent researchers to facilitate in-depth studies of the platforms’ impact on people and our societies, and what we can do to improve things.

          What’s your problem here?

          • KickMe@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Turn on by default the tools to amplify factual voices over disinformation.

            This, because it’s a fucking web browser, and it can be weaponized for bad while pretending to be good.

              • KickMe@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Why can’t a browser company just be opinionated about making the best browser? Why does it have to have a shitty controversial opinion about social media? I don’t know why, but my trust in the org and therefore the browser itself is gone.

                • raven [he/him]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  I don’t think being anti white supremacy and homophobia is shitty or controversial. Why would an Internet company write an article about something that affects the biggest sector of the Internet, social media? 🤔
                  “No they should stay in their lane and only talk about, I don’t know, CSS or something.” I don’t buy it.