The ceo is a bigoted asshole, Brave is chromium, it was initially funded by Peter Thiel and they're literally just trying to make their own adsense network.
The self-proclaimed privacy focused browser is tracking your browsing and want to serve you personalized ads, and I think they want to use that tracking data for AI training as well, meaning other people can potentially access it.
And lets not forget about their crypto currency that you can earn by turning on special ads. Which they seemingly unironically called it "Basic Attent Tokens"..
TL;DR: The company is basically a sham company trying to usher in a dystopia. Where you'll get paid for staring at ads, while having all your data stolen and sold back to you.
I have absolutely no idea how Brave got the reputation it has. It's business model is disgusting and extortionate, it's like paying for warez. Been clear as day since day one.
Brave is a marching band of red flags. It claims privacy while injecting ads, affiliate codes and crypto into the browser. It's kind of sad to see someone like Brendan Eich who should know better turn to the dark side and pretend this is all fine. It isn't.
Best advice I could give for anyone who wants privacy is use Firefox or a branch of it. Firefox is out of the box the most privacy conscious mainstream browser and add-ons make it more so. If you want absolute privacy you could even use a derivative like Tor Browser.
First, I have been online for almost 30 years. I’ve led an open source project for 14 years. I speak regularly at conferences around the world, and socialize with members of the Mozilla, JavaScript, and other web developer communities. I challenge anyone to cite an incident where I displayed hatred, or ever treated someone less than respectfully because of group affinity or individual identity.
So I hid my hatred from everyone for 30 years successfully. Now that everyone finds out that I donated to a cause to strip them of rights everyone wants to say I'm hateful? Give me one example where I displayed hatred....how about the time you donated to strip people of their rights? That might be a big one for me.
At one point they were scummy enough to automatically add their referral codes to any Amazon link you see. Lots of people today still mindlessly recommend Brave, and that's what's wrong in general with the "but the UX is so nice" mentality.
Holy shit man imagine if we judged every huge project by one asshole at the top. There wouldn't be a single thing to enjoy in this world.
Edit:
I am going to add more perspective to this, because holy shit people are so into eating nothing burgers.
Reddit/Twitter was a database and API that everyone was centralized onto, there was no choice. Brave you can literally fork because its open source. Aside from that this was literally the CEO's personal donation of $1000...in like 2014. Almost 10 yrs ago.
The fact that its main 2 gimmicks are a shitty ad blocker and integrated cryptocurrency should be enough of a red flag, honestly. Just use Firefox, people!
This article is useless trash. There is no real technical argument here except "founder bad".
I do have reasons for not using Brave, but it's to do with the annoying defaults and the crypto integration. They default whitelist Google, LinkedIn, and Facebook garbage that I have to go and toggle off.
Given the level of effort and extensions like Facebook container on Firefox, I just prefer the better experience for me. This bullshit about getting on identity politics agendas I find abhorrent and repulsive. This author's a stupid fuckhead.
"If someone recommends Brave to you, you should ignore them, because they are wrong."
I stopped reading here. If you would like to present objective technical arguments, please try not to sound like a 5 year old "I'm right, you're wrong, blah blah".
Use Brave or use Firefox. They both work great for privacy, but I find Brave is easier to configure to be private.
I use Brave as a backup browser. My main one is Firefox.
You can turn off the crypto stuff. You don't have to use Brave Shields (in browser ad blocker). It can be turned off. Now you can use uBlock Origin or another ad blocker.
About the CEO, I can't see nothing about his beliefs reflecting in his work. Looks like he kept them separated. I'm not for said beliefs.
Thanks. Whenever I raised the issue of homophobia or his general support of right-wing causes that threaten people's privacy (see the aftermath of Roe v. Wade for example), I got downvoted, be it on the PrivacyGuides sub where they adore the browser, or right here just weeks ago.
Use Firefox or Safari, the more people use Chromium-based browsers the faster we get to the situation where Google completely owns the Internet (andtheyalmostdonow).
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.
This article did not present a compelling case for abandoning brave. Who cares what the founder thinks about various political issues. If the software is good, then that’s all that matters.
Don’t get me wrong, I support same sex marriage, but people have a right to oppose the concept as marriage is a government idea that is tied up in politics.
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.
That has nothing to do with the software. And that's a tiny donation. I'm not going to stop using an excellent tool because one of the guys in charge is a bigot. If that were the case, I wouldn't be able to eat, drink, breathe, make a phone call, or do anything really. There's a lot of people out there. Some of them are bigots. We should work to reduce their influence but we can't boycott literally everything. Every alternative to Brave has at least one bigot involved in it, I guarantee it.
Brave’s replacement for ads doesn’t reward users in a meaningful amount
Not enough > 0, which is what you get without adblock. And I'm fine with occasional non-targeted and unobtrusive ads to help fund a service I use.
Brave’s BAT was built around the cryptocurrency ecosystem
Who gives a shit except crypto bros? And who gives a shit about crypto bros anyway?
Brave was also caught up in a privacy scandal in 2020, when it was revealed that the browser was adding affiliate codes to some URLs typed into the address bar.
Are these affiliate codes tracking you? No? Who gives a shit? It's more money for Brave, same webpage for you.
That should have been enough to swear off Brave as a privacy-centric browser forever, considering the entire point of affiliate links is to collect data about the user and traffic source. For example, when you click an Amazon affiliate link in a web article, the publisher can see the exact products you purchase in the timeframe the tracking cookie remains active
Brave blocks cookies by default. Unless they specifically made an exception in their own browser for these codes, then this carefully-worded paragraph is just bullshit.
Much like the rest of this article. Bunch of poo-flinging. "Brave is involved in crypto, here's all the bad things crypto has done, that's why you shouldn't use Brave". Stupid guilt by association and a lot of hot air. Bringing a smoke machine to make people think there's fire.
There's a lot of effort going into making Brave seem like a bad browser and I don't know why.
I ditched Brave ages ago when the ad and crypto bullshit really ramped up, and finding out Peter Thiel was involved and Brendan Eich was a bigot, were more than enough to keep me away from Brave.
I currently use Arc on desktop because it makes my life as a busy dev much easier to organize, and Safari on iOS because every browser on there is just Safari anyway. iOS Safari + custom DNS to block ads. Works for me.
I’d use Firefox but Arc’s organization features have become insanely useful.
I get people wanting an alternative Chromium based browser. Vivaldi, IMO, is a much better than Brave, and doesn't have all the annoying crypto weirdness.
Okay, so the creator of Brave might be a bigot and some of the stuff it does with crypto currency is a little sketchy? And the ads it replaces with the blocked ads are somewhat invasive?
So disable the crypto stuff and use ad-blocking software along with its own adblocking functions.
If a mechanic fixes my car and does a really good job, but he might have some shitty opinions of gay people, as long as he fixes my car I don't care about what he might think of gay people.
Everyone needs to be aware that there's propaganda everywhere. microsoft and google REALLY want you to use their browsers and people are tired of the data MS Edge and chrome collect.
I for one, hate that chrome constantly connects other shit to your google account with just one accidental click sometimes. Edge does the same shit, but brave is the only chromium based browser that doesn't deceptively do shit like that.
I still like firefox better and I only have brave for those rare instances where firefox won't work on a website. And I don't actually believe that the creator of brave is actually a bigot. Pro-liberty, Pro-privacy and anti-surveillance types are always getting smeared as bigots when they aren't.
urghhhhh but firefox just doesn't perform as well. i tried, i really did. i found a 15 year old (!!) bug affecting svg drawing performance that was fucking up a page i was working on, i'm not imagining it.
The writer is proposing Vivaldi, a closed-source browser, as an alternative to Brave, which is free and open-source. I think a better alternative would be Ungoogled Chromium.
Edit: After reading the article I'm sceptical about a bias as the writer clearly misrepresented the lawsuit against Gawker by Hulk Hogan, which in turn puts the whole article into question.
Not saying that the allegations against Brave aren't true, I'm just saying I wouldn't trust a journalist who misrepresents the truth to tell me the truth.
That 1k donation, from years ago, is very usefull to someone. I dont know who cares so much to destroy this Brave founder, but that story for a 1k donation keep being repeated over and over.
Some people gave millions to have trans right banned.. we never hear about thoses people. But 1k, big deal!
I stopped using Brave over the whole BAT thing, it just felt shady and weird. This article just validated my decision even more. Happy to be back with Firefox, even though Mozilla has its own issues.
I've been trying out the DuckDuckGo browser lately on mobile. It uses the Chromium backend, so some sites work better in it than in my normal Firefox.
The neatest feature of the browser is the ability to generate random email addresses in signup forms, and those emails all get forwarded to your real email address. As it forwards the emails, it removes trackers from them. You can click a link in one of the forwarded emails to disable that address from being forwarded any more if it gets spammy.
Maybe it's me but some of the things in this articles make me question their reporting.
What makes sense to me is that they have been involved with some shady crypto companies and they have been opaque about their goals, with some of the developers disagreeing with the CEO every now and again.
What rubs me the wrong way is the focus on his own political viewpoint (this is holy irrelevant to the software), his involvement with FTX (almost no one saw the collapse coming. It was one of only a few crypto companies that people didn't expect to be that shady) and getting a cease and desist from a newspaper corporation (this is much expected and frankly idk if the cease and desist even holds up. This is not as shady as the article makes it out to be and legally this is not cotton dry at all iirc. IANAL tho ofc)
I agree it's not the best idea to mindlessly go on using Brave, but honestly this article is really not that good.
I think that the number 1 reason to not use brave is that is based on the chromium engine. The number 2 is that they use limited anti fingerprinting tools and support his self built tracking and ads. The others about ideology of the CEO i think are not so important.
Soooo... bad PR = bad browser... advertising bad, crypto bad, source of funds bad, anti gay marriage guy bad.... meh I get the reasoning here but.. it's a bit of a reach
Don't use Brave because of the ads and crypto currency stuff
I don't see why how one person even the CEO and founder's political beliefs from 15 years ago should stop anyone from using a product today. Unless we want to expose all 7 million+ people who voted for and passed prop 8 in 2008 and cancel them all into oblivion.
Firefox works well enough for me. Never given me any problems or grief. I don't really understand the fascination with chromium forks or the insistence on using them instead of Mozilla's engine.
I think we have far bigger problems than Brendan Eich in the tech industry. Far more people have suffered or died in recent years from tax cuts and austerity lobbied by by some of the biggest billionaires (i.e. Zuckerberg, Gates, Ballmer, Musk, Bezos) than from the causes Eich has funded.
Can we truly call ourselves humanitarians when we continue to lap up everything that big tech gives to us?
At best, we're hypocrites for cancelling Eich whilst simultaneously sweeping issues like worker exploitation, political/medical disinformation, erosion of privacy, etc from the rest of big tech under the rug.
Out of the box Firefox is definitely not very privacy conscious, better than Chrome no doubt, but worse than Brave. It can be configured to be better than both or one can use Librewolf/Mullvad browser
If you put aside the crypto crap, Brave is an okay browser. Sometimes I use it for web development. But I don't like the direction the company is heading towards.
Most of the time I use Firefox with Extensions and Librewolf for everything. Firefox has been my go-to for years and I sure hope it stays that way.
I tried Brave for maybe 2 days before going back to literally anything else. The heavy push for Crypto made me wary, and it really didn't seem to be doing anything specific to increase my privacy online.
I hadn't read the details of their intended ad network. I just recall it sounded shady. Now that I read about it, it sounds very similar conceptually to Google's Privacy Sandbox. I'm not sure if this is a better or worse approach than the status quo but I surely don't trust Brave Inc, a startup with a questionable business model and investors, with gathering and processing this data.
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.
I want to try a thought experiment. Imagine that you observe this comment in reaction to the above:
I just don’t get why the author is so pissed about their political contributions. Guess what, people who are involved in big business are usually right-wing and support right-wing organizations. Shocking. Who could have known. I don’t even want to imagine how the author comes to the conclusion that this is some big conspiracy but I think we all know what political spectrum that guy belongs to.
What I just wrote is a mirror-image version of the top rated comment on that article from a few days ago about the Mozilla foundation funding left-wing organizations. Do you agree with one of those statements and not the other? If so, why?
It is one-sided to say that someone involved in Brave should only be "allowed" to do so if he doesn't support anything conservative. Just as would be one-sided and wrong to say that Mozilla shouldn't be "allowed" to support left-wing organizations. Flipping it around, and looking at the reaction when it's the other way around, is an easy way to analyze your own internal reactions on it.
(Generally, I'm in agreement with the idea that you shouldn't use Brave because of all these other shady things; just this one part jumped out at me as one thing that's not like the others.)
I don't use Brave because they screwed me (banned my Brave Creators without them providing a reason) and I think I would disagree with their CEO on many points - including same sex marriage - but if I did this with every piece of software I use, then I wouldn't be able to use a computer at all. Even if you go all open source, you'll quickly find wild and weird people involved with these projects...
This is really just a rip on the CEO because of his political beliefs. I imagine if he donated money to some sort of left wing thing there would be no story. Just another tech person doing what they do. It's so amazing how divided everyone is nowadays, always looking for some reason to hate someone. That goes for left, right and center!
I used brave in the past sometimes still do. I don't care for the leadership. The browser is opensource and solid. I use librewolf as my main browser now though.
Who cares? As liberal I'm sick of the mellow-dramatic outrage culture. People aren't perfect. Who knew? If you don't use brave what's the alternative? Google, who is much worse? Maybe "don't let perfect be the enemy of good" and stop using the lefts social capital to alien people over small personal gripes.
I notice people who write these types of articles never open themselves to the same sort of scrutiny.
Right we shouldn't use brave because CEO donated $1000 to some law author doesn't like. Maybe we should leave lemmy too because creators believe in things most other people don't like. These kind of morality plays are stupid, who knows what every devs and ceo of company actually think and do with their money and honestly if it's legal who cares.
So why exactly should people stop using brave browser? This article is just smearing campaign, I can easily write much more compelling reasons as to "why you should stop using Firefox browser", coming from a Firefox user myself
Just to play devils advocate, while I do agree that there are some shady stuff happening, if the browser remains open source that wouldn't be a problem right? These "features" while present can be disabled by the end user, either within the settings menu or by adjusting in the configs page.
I use Firefox on desktop but on Android i use Brave for one single reason: it lets me open links in the full browser rather than a webview. Or whatever that tech is called. I hate that stuff. It drives me absolutely bonkers. Like, you might think that's irrational and/or that i have some kind of anger management problem but i promise you it is way beyond that. I'm fucking actually feral about this. This one thing determines which browser i use. If i couldn't find one with it i would have to start uninstalling apps that don't let me force full external browsers.
Firefox used to allow you to force this setting but at some point stopped. I don't know why. Give it back, please. (Along with full desktop extensions...)
Anyway if anyone knows how to change this i would be happy.
They just started showing ads again on YouTube when watching on Brave. Which is a very good way to get me to permanently switch elsewhere! Thanks Brave!
How I love seeing people talk the big talk about 'democracy' and 'freedom' but also do their best to remind everyone that "your'e free as long as you agree with them", else they attack with pitchforks and torches. Lovely. (Yes I'm talking to you).
I use brave as it really blocks the things from foking meta, and goo gel, even if i think javascript is a warcrime against human kind, and against IT, and its created by eich
It just works the best. Ad-blocking is unrivalled. I've tried Firefox+extensions, Duduck Go browser etc, but none match Brave's ad-blocking capabilities on mobile and desktop.
And I'm all on board with the dream of users receiving a return on their attention. Yes the quantity is small now, but that's because it's just starting out.
Yandex is working so nicely for me lately--even better than Firefox. I think any possible spying by Russian capitalists or government will have little to no effect on my life.
I really enjoy brave on desktop and mobile. Other mobile browsers turn every internet interaction into chaos with all the popups and ads (even let’s you use YouTube in the background with its playlist feature on mobile). I read the article and I didn’t understand why the product itself was bad? CEO did some stuff that the writer (and me) doesn’t agree with, doesn’t make it a crappy product though?
This article has attracted the obvious responses it wants to attract.
I bet many who've responded in agreement with the sentiment of this article use windows which is tied to a company that has done far worse than brave software.
Edit:
I am not sitting here for hour or more trying to figure out who is employed at a company of a piece of software I chose to use just to ensure their personal opinions, views and opinions align with current trends on what is sociably acceptable.
If we all were to apply this to all the software we use you will fast find out that you'll be looking for quite a few alternatives to what you assumed was neutral or aligned to your view point.
As a Brave user who doesn't dabble with its crypto BS and only uses Private Browsing on it, I find this virtue signaling an overreach. Fuck your downvotes.
"The Brave web browser has carved out a niche over the past few years as an alternative to Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, and other mainstream web browsers."
Excellent article my only criticism is that firefox is not a mainstream browser lol. Im saying this as a proud firefox user.
This doesn't give a balanced overview of the positives of Brave, for example they have Tor integration which is interesting: https://brave.com/tor-bridges/
How about duckduckgo? That's my to go. Also I have all my password from Ransome websites stored in brave browser, any idea how to migrate them to another browser? I really like that I can connect my account and my password migrate with me.
Ignoring all other concerns, Brave is simply the buggiest browser I've ever used, both on desktop and mobile. It's the only one where I have to regularly switch to a different browser due to sites not loading properly.
If I want to keep a chrome-based browser, what is a decent (in terms of privacy intrusion and adblocking) one to use?
Is Vivaldi a reasonable choice as a replacement of Brave?
I've been using Brave for years especially on Android. It's secure, open-source and supports all chrome extensions and easiest to recommend anyone. I guess majority people care only about that much.
Firefox needs improvement on Android, besides that their leadership are not saints either.
The problem with the author is the idea of lumping together some good reasons to avoid Brave and some really bad reasons. The idea that the company behind brave depends on ads for revenue is good reasoning, the fact that they have a volatile cryptocurrency to use as payment is another. But when you mention that the founder is a bigot, or that he was associated with Peter Theil, or that they CONSIDERED a shady ad practice are not really reasons to avoid the product.
In the end, you want to have some competition in the browser market (that means not using the same base browser with a skin and some features). I would recommend Firefox over Brave for that reason alone.
These browser wars are funny. It's not like you have a real choice anyways. You get either some sort of Chrome, with it's various problems. Or you get some sort of Firefox... which has it's own host of issues. The rest of the competition is so far behind that it'd take a miracle for them to enter the mainstream.
Hate that Eich turned out to be a piece of shit. If i have a chance to donate to an organization that actively works to fight against his own human rights, I still would not. Because i’m not a piece of shit like Brendan Eich. I don’t donate to any organization that fights against human rights, full fucking stop.
But it sure is great hearing him justifying being a piece of shit by saying i’m not making a “reasoned argument” by saying i would never treat him the way he would treat me and others for being ourselves.
They also lack any documentation about how to use their policies on Linux (where you can disable all the bloat). But it should be doable, I will give it another try.
Is the browser even FOSS? Can you compile a working version yourself?
I use a derivative of this browser for what I call "junk surfing" and I find it personally satisfying to feed it garbage searches, just for the fun of collecting an obscure crypto I know will never accrue any true value.
But if they are willing to give it to me, I'll take it.
The important searches go through FF or the DuckDuckGo browser.
I thought it was nice that maybe a private browser would be mainstream but then on second thought.... Something icky must be going on if it's mainstream, i mean the whole crypto part was an instant warning for me. Proud Librewolf user over here!!!
I thought this would bring up serious issues with the browser but it's just...the creator doesn't support gay marriage, the browser isn't an adblock hardliner, and it has built-in crypto support?
Just want to chip in on the mobile browsers. A big issue is that webview is chromium based. So even if you use Firefox on android , you are using chromium/chrome plus Firefox.
Options on mobile would be vanadium (only on graphene I believe) or bromite (on F-droid). Bromite has its own webview separate as well , crashed my phone many years ago , no idea about it now.
On PC (Linux) I use Firefox with chromium as backup.
Also fuck brave ,why support shady bigots if you can avoid it?