7 ms·

Mozilla is in bed with Google. I use brave because: * it has reasonable way of funding, crypto may suck, but it is believable they will not sell my data * ano

by sed3 2y ago

Mozilla is in bed with Google. I use brave because: * it has reasonable way of funding, crypto may suck, but it is believable they will not sell my data * anonymous bookmark sync with multiple profiles. With Chrome and Firefox I have to sign up for each sync. * Chrome based debug tools * It is usable without any plugins. In some environments I do not want to install some questionable plugins, that may change ownership anytime! (It is already named "Ublock Origin", ownership already changed ) * Proprietary Video Codecs support out of the box on Linux. Some distros do not have it, and I do not want to enable community repos.

llmblockchain 2y ago
[flagged]
- VancouverMan 2y ago
  Does that same reasoning of yours apply to JavaScript, given that person's involvement with its development? For example, do you disable JavaScript in whichever browser(s) you use? Do you avoid all desktop and mobile apps that may contain JavaScript code? Does it also apply to Mozilla's offerings in general, given that person's significant involvement with the formation of that community, its organizations, and its software? Do you avoid Firefox, Thunderbird, and so forth?
  - llmblockchain 2y ago
    Yes, the same reasoning is used whenever I have a choice. However, let's not pretend like choosing JS or NoJS is the same as choosing a browser. At least you have a small handful of browsers to choose from. I mainly use NoScript and enable as needed for a select set of websites (banking, etc). I'm not a full on RMS, but I at least make choices that align with my thoughts and opinions, even when it's not convenient.
- pixxel 2y ago
  > Brave was co-founded by a person that is against same-sex marriage Is he throwing gays off of buildings, or does he hold a popular belief on marriage and procreation?
  - llmblockchain 2y ago
    You'd have to ask him. He financially supported campaigns against it, so he's willing to put his money where his beliefs are. I have no idea how many gays he has tossed.
wubrr 2y ago
> it has reasonable way of funding, crypto may suck, but it is believable they will not sell my data You can rest assured that Brave absolutely will and does sell your data. > anonymous bookmark sync with multiple profiles. With Chrome and Firefox I have to sign up for each sync. Nothing at all anonymous about it, firstly. Secondly, you can import/export bookmarks from Firefox and Chrome and do an actual 'anonymous' sync that way. > Chrome based debug tools Like.... chrome has? > It is usable without any plugins. In some environments I do not want to install some questionable plugins, that may change ownership anytime! (It is already named "Ublock Origin", ownership already changed ) No it's not. It's completely unusable if you actually don't want ads. > Proprietary Video Codecs support out of the box on Linux. Some distros do not have it, and I do not want to enable community repos. The only reason prop codec implementations are not supported in some (not most) repos is because of licensing/OSS policy... which would equally apply to Brave within those same repos.

by sed3 2y ago

llmblockchain 2y ago

[flagged]

VancouverMan 2y ago
Does that same reasoning of yours apply to JavaScript, given that person's involvement with its development? For example, do you disable JavaScript in whichever browser(s) you use? Do you avoid all desktop and mobile apps that may contain JavaScript code? Does it also apply to Mozilla's offerings in general, given that person's significant involvement with the formation of that community, its organizations, and its software? Do you avoid Firefox, Thunderbird, and so forth?
- llmblockchain 2y ago
  Yes, the same reasoning is used whenever I have a choice. However, let's not pretend like choosing JS or NoJS is the same as choosing a browser. At least you have a small handful of browsers to choose from. I mainly use NoScript and enable as needed for a select set of websites (banking, etc). I'm not a full on RMS, but I at least make choices that align with my thoughts and opinions, even when it's not convenient.
pixxel 2y ago
> Brave was co-founded by a person that is against same-sex marriage Is he throwing gays off of buildings, or does he hold a popular belief on marriage and procreation?
- llmblockchain 2y ago
  You'd have to ask him. He financially supported campaigns against it, so he's willing to put his money where his beliefs are. I have no idea how many gays he has tossed.

wubrr 2y ago

> it has reasonable way of funding, crypto may suck, but it is believable they will not sell my data You can rest assured that Brave absolutely will and does sell your data. > anonymous bookmark sync with multiple profiles. With Chrome and Firefox I have to sign up for each sync. Nothing at all anonymous about it, firstly. Secondly, you can import/export bookmarks from Firefox and Chrome and do an actual 'anonymous' sync that way. > Chrome based debug tools Like.... chrome has? > It is usable without any plugins. In some environments I do not want to install some questionable plugins, that may change ownership anytime! (It is already named "Ublock Origin", ownership already changed ) No it's not. It's completely unusable if you actually don't want ads. > Proprietary Video Codecs support out of the box on Linux. Some distros do not have it, and I do not want to enable community repos. The only reason prop codec implementations are not supported in some (not most) repos is because of licensing/OSS policy... which would equally apply to Brave within those same repos.