6 ms·

Still more trustworthy than the mainstream alternatives (Google, Mozilla, Apple or Microsoft).

jfk13 6y ago
I don't think it's helpful to group Google, Mozilla, Apple and Microsoft together like this, as though they were all "of a kind". There are some very different business models and priorities among them.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- userbinator 6y ago
  They're all essentially controlled by Google to some extent, from the perspective of "web standards" churning... but then, so is Brave.
dkdbejwi383 6y ago
I find Safari good enough. Slow to support new APIs maybe, but it's perfectly serviceable for a daily driver. What's your issue with it?
- lmedinas 6y ago
  Safari is good, my dealbreak is the adblockers. Ive been using Safari since 2 months im already desperate to use Firefox, Chrome or even give Brave a try. And no, none of the available adblocker for Safari works well.
- stopChanging 6y ago
  I'm torn, to be honest. I like keychain, it makes Safari the only browser with password management I trust. Browser dev history has been littered with poor implementations. I want to say Chrome still stores shit unencrypted, but this is just what I recall off the top of my head from reading tech news. I'm no expert, and that's pretty much my point. I trust keychain and don't want to write a phd thesis on how secure the other options are. I like the ios integration. Other browsers offer this, but it's just another account to worry about - do i trust this company, will they still be around (and still be trustworthy) in ten years? browser history is the most personal thing I do on a computer so this matters a lot to me. (I guess both of these points are just tldr walled garden) The lack of good adblocking kills it for me. It's too much of a sacrifice, even with a pihole running at home. Also, as you said, they move slowly. Not just with shiny new tech, but also basic privacy things like if I type "old.reddit.com/r/embarrassingThingsImInto" or whatever, why are they still defaulting to http, and waiting for the web server to decide to upgrade the connection (leaking the initial request)? Why is defaulting to https hidden away in the developer menu? Developers are the only people these days who should be dealing with http anyway, and in those cases there's probably a ".local" at the end they could use to make a determination.
nobunaga 6y ago
To be honest, thats a claim that you have not proven. If anything, Firefox and safari are probably more trustworthy based on my own subjective opinion. They have never injected affiliate links or promised to do things which are borderline scam-like behaviour. I personally treat all software with a level of distrust. But brave has done things which all point to a certain behaviour in which people should think twice before using the product. You can get the benefits of privacy that Brave touts from other browsers. If you want to donate to content creators, plenty of ways to do so as well.
- rglullis 6y ago
  BS. Do a Google search on Firefox. The querystring has an identifier for Firefox. It's no different than what happened with Brave, except that Brave acknowledged it was bug behavior and that the identifier is only for the browser, not user data. As for ways to donate to content creators, please do tell: is there any solution out there that let us be rewarded by getting privacy-preserving ads and to contribute the proceeds further to other people?
  - LawnGnome 6y ago
    Having a source identifier in a query string isn't remotely the same thing as hijacking links or injecting content into a page.
    - rglullis 6y ago
      The ads are via notifications. There has NEVER been link hijacking or content injecting on a page, what are you smoking?
      - LawnGnome 6y ago
        Link hijacking: https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2020/06/06/the-brave-web-browser-is-hijacking-links-and-inserting-affiliate-codes/ https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2020/06/06/the-brave-we... Content injection: https://community.brave.com/t/does-brave-inject-buttons-onto-reddit-and-other-sites-3/91188 https://community.brave.com/t/does-brave-inject-buttons-onto...
anxrn 6y ago
One of these is not like the others. I would genuinely like to understand why I should not trust Mozilla.

I don't think it's helpful to group Google, Mozilla, Apple and Microsoft together like this, as though they were all "of a kind". There are some very different business models and priorities among them.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
userbinator 6y ago
They're all essentially controlled by Google to some extent, from the perspective of "web standards" churning... but then, so is Brave.

dkdbejwi383 6y ago

I find Safari good enough. Slow to support new APIs maybe, but it's perfectly serviceable for a daily driver. What's your issue with it?

lmedinas 6y ago
Safari is good, my dealbreak is the adblockers. Ive been using Safari since 2 months im already desperate to use Firefox, Chrome or even give Brave a try. And no, none of the available adblocker for Safari works well.
stopChanging 6y ago
I'm torn, to be honest. I like keychain, it makes Safari the only browser with password management I trust. Browser dev history has been littered with poor implementations. I want to say Chrome still stores shit unencrypted, but this is just what I recall off the top of my head from reading tech news. I'm no expert, and that's pretty much my point. I trust keychain and don't want to write a phd thesis on how secure the other options are. I like the ios integration. Other browsers offer this, but it's just another account to worry about - do i trust this company, will they still be around (and still be trustworthy) in ten years? browser history is the most personal thing I do on a computer so this matters a lot to me. (I guess both of these points are just tldr walled garden) The lack of good adblocking kills it for me. It's too much of a sacrifice, even with a pihole running at home. Also, as you said, they move slowly. Not just with shiny new tech, but also basic privacy things like if I type "old.reddit.com/r/embarrassingThingsImInto" or whatever, why are they still defaulting to http, and waiting for the web server to decide to upgrade the connection (leaking the initial request)? Why is defaulting to https hidden away in the developer menu? Developers are the only people these days who should be dealing with http anyway, and in those cases there's probably a ".local" at the end they could use to make a determination.

nobunaga 6y ago

To be honest, thats a claim that you have not proven. If anything, Firefox and safari are probably more trustworthy based on my own subjective opinion. They have never injected affiliate links or promised to do things which are borderline scam-like behaviour. I personally treat all software with a level of distrust. But brave has done things which all point to a certain behaviour in which people should think twice before using the product. You can get the benefits of privacy that Brave touts from other browsers. If you want to donate to content creators, plenty of ways to do so as well.

rglullis 6y ago
BS. Do a Google search on Firefox. The querystring has an identifier for Firefox. It's no different than what happened with Brave, except that Brave acknowledged it was bug behavior and that the identifier is only for the browser, not user data. As for ways to donate to content creators, please do tell: is there any solution out there that let us be rewarded by getting privacy-preserving ads and to contribute the proceeds further to other people?
- LawnGnome 6y ago
  Having a source identifier in a query string isn't remotely the same thing as hijacking links or injecting content into a page.
  - rglullis 6y ago
    The ads are via notifications. There has NEVER been link hijacking or content injecting on a page, what are you smoking?
    - LawnGnome 6y ago
      Link hijacking: https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2020/06/06/the-brave-web-browser-is-hijacking-links-and-inserting-affiliate-codes/ https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2020/06/06/the-brave-we... Content injection: https://community.brave.com/t/does-brave-inject-buttons-onto-reddit-and-other-sites-3/91188 https://community.brave.com/t/does-brave-inject-buttons-onto...

anxrn 6y ago

One of these is not like the others. I would genuinely like to understand why I should not trust Mozilla.