284 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
reply
71 points

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…

permalink
report
parent
reply
34 points

Oh he’s THAT guy?!

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

JavaScript is also the whole reason that the web is interactive. Without JavaScript the web would be mostly just static pages without any client side dynamic behavior.

Brendan Eich is a tool, but JavaScript is a useful tool, at least.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

JavaScript?

Like, we use JavaScript everywhere.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

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! ;)

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
169 points

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.

permalink
report
reply
60 points

Truly no atonement can be sufficient for a sin that grave

permalink
report
parent
reply
142 points
*

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.

permalink
report
reply

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points
*

afaik he was pushed out of mozilla over the same 1k dono

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

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

Volatility :-)

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

But Volatilability sounds cool

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Very volatibable word

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Agree :-D

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Thank you, I fixed it!

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

These guys tried to get a previous employer of mine to advertise with them. It works great if your entire audience is tech bros. Ours was not.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

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?

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Because it is cool thing to cancel everything in 2023.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-37 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

Brave is still bad. With their “incidents” they had. Brave is chromium = Google controlled in a way. Brave is a coorperation, yes a PROFIT seeking company. Mozilla does nit promote google, it uses duckduckgo as its default search engine. There are forks from Firefox too that hardens the browser and the develop/ceo is not a complete *ss. The referal link “scam” was real, they injected it in Amazon links…

Screw Brave go search for a real alternative to google.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Firefox does default to Google. If you see DDG, it’s likely an edit by your distribution.

Also, Brave Search is a real alternative. It’s one of the few engines aside from Google, Bing and Yandex that has its own crawler.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

These people are basically a cult. Do not bother trying to enlighten the Brave browser community cult. If you use brave, you are a certifiable idiot.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Bro spitting facts.

Mozilla Fandogs are attacking

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

well thats a bunch of lies

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

Mozilla deals with Google

With how much revenue comes from those deals, we might say it’s practically financed by Google. FF is more Google than Chromium-based Brave if you follow the money.

permalink
report
parent
reply
90 points

No. Couldn’t care less what the founder did or didn’t do. We need as many non-Google browsers as possible. The problem with Brave is that it is a chromium browser.

permalink
report
reply
39 points

I’d say being chromium makes it a Google browser…

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I mean, does that mean Edge is a Google browser, too?

Chromium is open-source. Even if Google adds something malicious to the source code (such as that Web Environment Integrity stuff), it can be removed by someone else creating their own browser based on Chromium. That’s the very definition of open-source.

Related side-note: Lemmy itself is open-source, too. If the creator of Lemmy added something to the software that someone running an instance didn’t agree with, they could simply fork the original software and remove the unwanted addition. Some people do disagree with that person’s views, and yet they’re still here. Many of them joined .world and other instances instead of .ml because they disagreed with the creator’s views.

While Google, the creator of Chromium, isn’t a good company for the consumer, I personally think Chromium itself isn’t a bad idea. It’s just that Google and some other companies modify it for their own means, and those means aren’t always consumer-friendly.

All that to say: while the company that originally created Chromium is bad, the software isn’t. And while some of the companies and people using that software are bad (including Brave, IMO), some of them are looking out for their users’ interests, and those forks of Chromium are generally ok. (You should still actually do research and not pick a fork because the company developing it said it’s okay, though. Take a look at what others are saying and verify it.)

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I mean, does that mean Edge is a Google browser, too?

Yes.

All that to say: while the company that originally created Chromium is bad, the software isn’t.

Only to the extent that websites are built for chromium compatibility, due to its monopoly on the internet. It’s great software because it’s the most popular software so all other smaller providers that serve that software have to focus their resources into ensuring compatibility. Chromium(Blink) itself is pretty mid, and definitely equal to WebKit or Gecko, not better or significantly worse.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Brave works for what I need it to do. I don’t like lending credence to bigots(secret or otherwise) but if someone is gonna say “don’t use this browser” they need to list a replacement that has the same functionality. And it can’t be “just use duckduckgo” because we all fucking have that on our phones and none of us can use it as our primary browser and we all know exactly why. 😒

permalink
report
parent
reply
66 points

What’s wrong with Firefox?

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Nothing. I use it all the time.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

A little slower, but nothing. Mullvad is pretty good. A mix of Firefox and Tor.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

For me personally, the one and only reason I don’t main Firefox is because it doesn’t work with Chromecast and I use that a LOT. I would switch to FF tomorrow if I could easily and reliably cast with it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

On Android, Firefox is still less secure than Chromium-based alternatives: Mozilla’s engine, GeckoView, has yet to support site isolation or enable isolatedProcess.

From Privacy Guides. Firefox on desktop though!

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

It works almost exactly the same as Chrome.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-23 points

It has a monopoly on being non-Chromium based

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Why?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

As far as I’m aware, the ddg browser collects data and they sell it to Microsoft. The search by itself is fine though.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

In fact. Mozilla rely more in Google. If i wasn’t mistaken 90% of their money came from Google and they rely Google safebrowsing wherein it exposes your IP to Google

permalink
report
parent
reply
-54 points

no one wants to secure their web render so they’ll always use whatever is native to the platform.

on windows that’s chromium. on macos that’s webkit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points
*

What does this even mean. Chromium or Webkit are not “native” to an OS. OSs don’t magically include browser engines, its not a critical component of an OS either.

Most OSs do come with browsers preinstalled, but they are programs just like any other. You can remove Safari from macOS (albeit its pretty hard because root is read only and signed), you can remove Edge from Windows. In my desktop with Windows 10 the only browser I have is Firefox (not even Edge), does that make Gecko the “native” browser engine?

If anything, the native browser engine for Windows would be MSHTML from Internet Explorer.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-40 points

you’re overthinking the word native.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

What?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-18 points

what’s your confusion

permalink
report
parent
reply
78 points

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

permalink
report
reply

Had me in the first half not gonna lie. But yeah I agree with you.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I would go for Vivaldi or ungoogled chromium

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I’d probably just use chromium.

But in all honesty, anything that requires me to use a certain browser over another isn’t going to get any support from me.

Incompetence shouldn’t be rewarded.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Firefox

!firefox@lemmy.ml

Create post

A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox

Community stats

  • 3.2K

    Monthly active users

  • 813

    Posts

  • 14K

    Comments

Community moderators