• danhab99@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Unless someone wants to disagree with me

    All the code is opensource and no one has ever raised a privacy alarm in a merged pull request. There’s nothing to fear

  • satanmat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    From the JDLR dept… notice how brave is listed first, and passes every test (except a very few)

    This report just looks biased. Even if it is totally legitimate, and many users have pointed out how it isn’t , it looks biased.

    It looks like every sales pitch for a product where they list everything their product does and how it’s better than the other things.

    I vote librewolf

  • Linus_Torvalds@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    For further explanation of any point, please hit me up :)

    • It is Chromium based
    • It has used dubious methods in the past (replacing links with affiliate links, the whole ad/crypto thing, …)
    • Brave’s business model relies on ads (I think)
    • [This is a weak point, but at least in the privacy community, Brave isn’t super popular. It feels more geared towards the “hyped crypto early adopters”. [1] It might be “fine” for someone switching from Chrome (which is always a good thing) but going all the way would be a modded Firefox.]

    TL;DR For most provacy concious Brave users, Brave is a step in their journey towards more privacy, and not the final destination.

    [1] The “dumb AF tech youtubers” you mentioned in another post are typically the Brave hype crowd. This is not meant to discredit Brave; it’s just that a share of their users are this way.