this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2024
156 points (100.0% liked)

Privacy

789 readers
10 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

Chat rooms

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] starflower@lemmy.blahaj.zone 153 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Your friendly reminder that the Brave CEO is Mozillas old CEO, who was fired from Mozilla for being unapologetically homophobic.

[–] BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 23 points 9 months ago (3 children)

So?

What I care about in this story is the technical issues.

[–] BolexForSoup@kbin.social 32 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Then you can not act on it and those of us who care about such things can. Does that bother you?

[–] AnonTwo@kbin.social 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I mean it's derailed the entire thread so pretty much nobody is talking about the removed feature anymore.

[–] BolexForSoup@kbin.social 33 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Are you seriously complaining about different comment threads within a post? That is literally how this works. Anybody who wants to talk about the feature is welcome to. You are not restricted to one thread at a time.

Be real, you just don’t like the critique of brave.

[–] AnonTwo@kbin.social 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

I mean, it's more like I wanted to see more discussion about brave. It's not even like it's talking about things the CEO specifically did to the browser, it's just talking about the CEO.

And yeah I'm complaining about different threads in a post, when 3 comments are about the browser and like 15 are about the CEO.

If you have something to say negative about brave from this feature, that's cool, but I'm not seeing it.

[–] BolexForSoup@kbin.social 18 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You are spending more time than anybody discussing this. The person wrote one short comment and here you are going back and forth still. If you want to talk about the removed feature then talk about the removed feature! Nobody stopping you my dude

[–] beardown@lemm.ee 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If you're a real person then you're very unlikable and antisocial

If you're a shill against Brave then you're bad at your job. I'm going to check Brave out now because of your offensive and unlikable behavior

[–] BolexForSoup@kbin.social 12 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (8 children)

I can assure you I am not in any way impacted by your decision to use or not use Brave

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Umbrias 13 points 9 months ago

"People want to talk about the things they care about when they should be talking about the things I care about!"

[–] YeetPics@mander.xyz 20 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

technical issues

Well technically the CEO would have an issue with you if you were gay

Lmao

[–] starflower@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 9 months ago (2 children)

O...kay? I don't really care lmao

[–] AnonTwo@kbin.social 8 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (3 children)

Wait why are you on the privacy community when you don't care about the parts that are specifically related to privacy?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] dime 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Please don’t tell me you wear adidas (founded by a Nazi), or drive a Ford (made by an antisemite), or listen to Wagner, (a racist), or drive a Volkswagen, or play Minecraft, or use wix, or eat at Chick-fil-A, or…etc etc

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Engywuck@lemm.ee 17 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

He wasn't fired. He voluntarily left. And thus Mozilla is left with an incompetent CEO whose only aim is to increase her paycheck year after year, despite pathetic market share results for FF. Enjoy that.

That said, nobody cares about your "friendly remainders". We're talking about software here, not politics.

And, to stay on topic, yes, it happened to me that Strict FP broke some website, in particular those displaying a frame with a map or similar stuff. So I've resorted to use "standard" FP myself.

[–] Umbrias 13 points 9 months ago (4 children)

Technology and ethics and politics are not airgapped magically distinct things. Pretending that they are is a strategic political choice you are actively making.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] LWD@lemm.ee 11 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Do you hate the Brave CEO for doing the same thing as the Mozilla CEO, but with even less restraint?

Or are you just whining in hopes that nobody will question whether you're being a hypocrite

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] YeetPics@mander.xyz 84 points 9 months ago (13 children)

The scam company brave? The one that scams people? With their scam based crypto rewards that don't pay out? THAT brave?

[–] LWD@lemm.ee 81 points 9 months ago (4 children)

There's no reason to hate Brave unless you have a political bias against their CEO.

Besides in 2016, when Brave promised to remove banner ads from websites and replace them with their own, basically trying to extract money directly from websites without the consent of their owners

And when the CEO unilaterally added a fringe, pay-to-win Wikipedia clone into the default search engine list.

And in 2018, Tom Scott and other creators noticed Brave was soliciting donations in their names without their knowledge or consent.

And in 2020, when Brave got caught injecting URLs with affiliate codes when users tried browsing to various websites.

Also in 2020, when they silently started injecting ads into their home page backgrounds, pocketing the revenue. There was a lot of pushback: "the sponsored backgrounds give a bad first impression." Further requests were ignored (immediately closed)

And in 2022, when Brave floated the idea of further discouraging users from disabling sponsored messages.

And in 2023, when Brave got caught installing a paid VPN service on users' computers without their consent.

[–] YeetPics@mander.xyz 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I had a small mountain of BAT they locked me out of due to shoddy linking with their banking affiliates and out of date DRM practices locking me out of my account due to too many devices being logged in (each OS update counted as its own device).

I noticed you didn't have that linked, that's because not every shitty move a company makes gets news coverage. Sorry I don't fit into your narrow view on what constitutes a valid reason.

[–] LWD@lemm.ee 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If there's something interesting to add to the list, I'm curious. Brave did partner with a criminal organization currently under a $1.1 billion lawsuit, but I don't have enough information about your particular case.

Did the software lock you out or did their servers? Was this reported on anywhere?

[–] YeetPics@mander.xyz 3 points 9 months ago

The banking backend that grifted me is called uphold and at the time that was the ONLY way to move BAT out of their wallet.

The device limit was a known issue for years and I left before they fixed it.

While I was still a user I would try their forum for support. Big shocker, LOTS of other users had the same issue and reports got ignored or muted by the mods there.

[–] Mikina@programming.dev 3 points 9 months ago

This made me wonder - is there any active Best Of community on any instance? This would be a perfect candidate.

[–] moreeni@lemm.ee 2 points 9 months ago

You can dig as much shit on Mozilla. Every big browser company right now is shitty

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)
[–] tazy@lemmy.tazy.xyz 73 points 9 months ago (2 children)

fuck brave all my homies hate brave

[–] Pantherina@feddit.de 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

What would you use then, if Firefox doesnt launch when using hardened_malloc on Linux?

[–] joyjoy@lemm.ee 11 points 9 months ago (1 children)

So we're shitting on a browser because of a bug reported 2 days ago?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 61 points 9 months ago (6 children)

Honestly you really should be using Firefox.

[–] Mikina@programming.dev 2 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I've been having a pretty good experience with Mullvad, however I don't hear many people talking about it. I wonder why is that, IIRC it's being developed with Tor Foundation, and is basically a Tor browser for clear web, and that sounds perfect. So far, I didn't run into any issues, so is there a catch, or are they just not well enough known yet? Or, maybe people are turned away by their optional VPN?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] ZeroHora@lemmy.ml 34 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Another issue is that Strict mode is used by roughly 0.5% of Brave's users, with the rest using the default setting, which is the Standard mode.

How are they getting this data? If it's with telemetry this data doesn't seem reliable, I doubt that people who change the fingerprint setting don't disable telemetry.

[–] Umbrias 3 points 9 months ago

Alternatively, lol

[–] moitoi@feddit.de 34 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Brave to end 'Strict' fingerprinting protection as it breaks owns ad revenue.

[–] Pantherina@feddit.de 3 points 9 months ago (3 children)

No it literally breaks sites. I was using Firefox with Arkenfox user.js, basically Torbrowser, and nothing broke unless the site told me "your browser is not supported". Braves strong defaults broke Github and more.

[–] AnonTwo@kbin.social 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Was strict the default? I'd assume the standard would be the default.

I'd imagine if you were using strict you want the sites to break because you absolutely do not want fingerprinting. That kindof restriction usually comes with the breaking being expected.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] LainOfTheWired@lemy.lol 27 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I used brave for a while, but left as I felt there was something fishy about them. Seems I was right

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] const_void@lemmy.ml 23 points 9 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] bc1@lemmy.l0l.city 21 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Whenever people tell me to use Brave, I know they fall for marketing very easily

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Byter@lemmy.one 14 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I'd ask why they don't make it optional (I'm not a Brave user) but it seems it was.

Another issue is that Strict mode is used by roughly 0.5% of Brave's users, with the rest using the default setting, which is the Standard mode.

This low percentage actually makes these users more vulnerable to fingerprinting despite them using the more aggressive blocker, because they constitute a discernible subset of users standing out from the rest.

Given that, I'm inclined to agree with the decision to remove it. Pick your battles and live to fight another day.

[–] averyminya 5 points 9 months ago

So rather than fixing the issue they just removed it entirely.

That's kind of a joke from a "privacy" based browser.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Dark_Dragon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 9 months ago

I don't like brave browser from first use. Something seemed off.

[–] library_napper@monyet.cc 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Damn I didn't hate on brave before for all the dumb crypto hate, but this is fuuucked

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›