4 ms·
Blocking ads by default would require a judgement that ads and ad-supported Web sites are bad by default. That is a much more extreme and less supportable posit
by roca 7y ago
Blocking ads by default would require a judgement that ads and ad-supported Web sites are bad by default. That is a much more extreme and less supportable position than Mozilla's position that tracking is bad by default. People who want to block all ads can opt into that with a Firefox ad-blocking extension (including on Android, unlike Chrome).
Brave's fine, but if you're worried about Google/Chrome hegemony you'd better not use it, because as a Chromium browser it's a part of that hegemony.
- jorvi 7y ago> People who want to block all ads can opt into that with a Firefox ad-blocking extension Except on iOS, where you have to finagle with VPN-based blockers > because as a Chromium browser it's a part of that hegemony I'm well aware. I'd rather use (and recommend to less techy people) Firefox, but I can't with their current stance. People want/need adblocking but they also want sync. If Firefox had an ad-blocking toggle that was off by default that'd be fine by me.
- BrendanEich 7y agoJust to clarify, Brave blocks tracking not ads, and so does what @roca advocates — but we have always done it by default, and we block more tracking than Firefox belatedly does. What’s more, we include an optional way to support your favorite sites and channels. See https://batgrowth.com/ https://batgrowth.com/ for results so far. I’m curious what ads you want to block that effective tracking protection does not block as an effect of blocking scripts that both track and (via generated scripts) place ads. Thanks.