Why was appointing Eich as CEO so controversial? It’s because he donated $1,000 in support of California’s Proposition 8 in 2008, which was a proposed amendment to California’s state constitution to ban same-sex marriage.
Besides this I cannot find another good reason not to use brave. Nobody point to a specific line of code that ruins privacy, not enough reasons.
I’ve been using brave for over a year. I can’t remember the last time I saw an ad on my screen. Now there might very well have been some But I have no memory of it.
They used to change the url which the user typed into the address bar to include a referral code. The article mentions going to binance.us, the browser appended a referral link to the url.
They block the website’s own ads, but inject their own instead. So the user still gets ads, but the profits go to Brave. I know that if the site’s owner is aware of that and goes through the process of registering with Brave they get a share of the profits, but this should really be opt-in. As it is, the whole scheme is shady as fuck.
Besides this I cannot find another good reason not to use brave. Nobody point to a specific line of code that ruins privacy, not enough reasons.
deleted by creator
I’ve been using brave for over a year. I can’t remember the last time I saw an ad on my screen. Now there might very well have been some But I have no memory of it.
deleted by creator
They used to change the url which the user typed into the address bar to include a referral code. The article mentions going to binance.us, the browser appended a referral link to the url.
That’s scummy as fuck.
So you’ve read all the way up to that line and closed the article didn’t you ?
There were 3 points:
CEO is a dick: not enough of a reason
Swapping ads: I have ads disabled anyways so what do I care. If I did care I wouldn’t block ads in the first place
3.1. Promoting/friendships with crypto: ¯_(ツ)_/¯
3.2. Privacy leak: it happens ¯_(ツ)_/¯
3.3. Partnering with weird people: ¯_(ツ)_/¯
3.4. IS AN ADVERTISING PLATFORM: ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Good enough for this gay Californian.
Gay Nuyorican
I don’t know what you’re saying, but I infer it’s not meant kindly.
They block the website’s own ads, but inject their own instead. So the user still gets ads, but the profits go to Brave. I know that if the site’s owner is aware of that and goes through the process of registering with Brave they get a share of the profits, but this should really be opt-in. As it is, the whole scheme is shady as fuck.
Because Firefox is better.
I don’t care what the CEO of a corporation is doing because most of them are conservative pieces of shit.