18 ms·

Mozilla promised us Tor integration, IPFS integration and more private browsing by default. Brave delivered it all.

by agilob 6y ago

jonathansampson 6y ago
And we will continue to deliver :) Thank you for the support!
- dleslie 6y ago
  I've been using Firefox since its inception, and was a Netscape user before that. I _briefly_ tried Chrome, but swiftly returned to Firefox. Half my extensions are still broken on Firefox Android. I've been using Firefox desktop on my PinePhone off-and-on and not only do all of my extensions work, but it's snappy and has a superior UX. I can actually access and manage my bookmarks with a sane interface. And yet even desktop is sullied. Each major version tries to hide my bookmarks, or something equally egregious, and Mozilla frequently abuses my trust by promoting products and services through privileged channels. It's getting hard to justify using Firefox.
  - jjordan 6y ago
    Same boat. I've used Firefox in spite of countless boneheaded decisions by Mozilla leadership, because underneath all that mismanagement, the product was solid. They started trying to mimic Chrome rather than be their own browser, and it was all over. The final straw for me was with their recent divisive political statement in opposition to free speech.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - rurp 6y ago
    I too have recently departed the Firefox evangelism train after a great many years promoting the browser to all of my friends and family. The org has become far too disdainful of users. The constant UI/UX regressions are awful for people who just want their browser to work (ie. the vast majority of users), and management are more interested in political posturing than browser development.
mikece 6y ago
Does Brave have an implementation of Multi-Account Containers? This is the ONE killer feature in Firefox that makes it impossible for me to leave for Brave completely: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account-containers/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account...
- jonathansampson 6y ago
  Not a 1-to-1 parity at this time, but Brave offers parallel profiles. You can have one running personal interests, while the other has professional interests. Each profile is able to host a unique session for Facebook, etc. Brave already prohibits cookie and data bleed-over from one domain to another.
  - mikece 6y ago
    That creates a new window per Profile as opposed to just one window with a bunch of tabs, all conceivably in using their own Container, right?
    - mikewhy 6y ago
      How do you juggle multiple facebook / google / anything accounts in that sort of system?
      - w14 6y ago
        Each container can be colour coded (up to 8 colours) and each tab is underscored with the same colour, so you can immediately see which is which.
      - blntechie 6y ago
        The containers can be named and color coded. Also there are keyboard shortcuts which once learned makes it easier to switch.
  - 0-_-0 6y ago
    > Brave already prohibits cookie and data bleed-over from one domain to another. Is that similar to First Party Isolation in Firefox?
tarruda 6y ago
It is easier for Brave to deliver new features when the biggest work is done by Chrome team.
- pbhjpbhj 6y ago
  I don't quite follow, are you saying Mozilla's structure is poor so making modifications is harder? Or perhaps that Chrome's developers did the work on IPFS and adding Tor and that you feel Brave rubber stamped them? Mozilla has something like a $200M pa income (from Google alone). I wonder how that compares with Brave's income.
  - Legion 6y ago
    I think the person's point is that Mozilla is making a complete browser, rendering engine and all, while Brave is basically a shell of stuff on top of Chromium/Blink.
    - killingtime74 6y ago
      I don’t think the customer cares as long as you can use it
      - the_other 6y ago
        Some of us care.
      - bawolff 6y ago
        The type of people who are into decentralizing the internet are also usually against a single company (google) controlling the rendering engine of most users. If you're talking about typical user of the average web browser, they care about IPFS as much as they care about the rendering engine - i.e. not at all.
        00000000000h 6y ago
        I am that person. I moved away from Brave because its still chrome/chromium based. I am also not confident in their "blockchain" advertising model and don't trust they are actually any less private with my data than chrome/chromium. It would be cool to see IPFS integrated and enabled by default on all browsers. I doubt Google would ever take the leap, but maybe Mozilla would. I also have doubt that Microsoft would but they would be more willing than Google. Anyways, I hope this can happen before Mozilla's market share shrinks more.
caycep 6y ago
I kind of wonder how many Mozilla developers/engineers jumped ship to Brave over the years?
- jonathansampson 6y ago
  We have quite a few engineers whose roots lie within, or have passed through, Mozilla. We even have several engineers and team members who pioneered much of the Web at Netscape and prior :)
  - wolverine876 6y ago
    Are you sure you want to participate in a discussion badmouthing Mozilla? You're not directly saying those things, but you are taking part in the dialog. That sort of behavior makes me pretty angry about Brave. Focus on Brave. You have nothing to do with Mozilla.
    - bawolff 6y ago
      I think its a little extreme to call this bad mouthing. People switch jobs. It does not reflect negatively on firefox that some of their employees now work at other companies in the same space. That is how jobs work - its not a life long commitment.
      - joshmanders 6y ago
        Not to mention Brave was co-founded by the former CEO of Mozilla and one of the influential people of the Netscape days, Brendan Eich. So it's only logical that a portion of Brave devs are former Mozilla/Netscape people.
      - pseudalopex 6y ago
        Jumping ship means something bad usually.
    - jonathansampson 6y ago
      I'm not bad-mouthing anybody; somebody wondered if we have engineers on staff who worked at Mozilla. We do. I'm proud of the history represented in our staff. They are the ones who pioneered much of this industry. And they are the ones who spun-up the browser wars again, rescuing the Web from IE. Mozilla will always be given credit for the wonderful work they have done, and continue to do, for the Web.
undefined1 6y ago
Mozilla seems to be moving in the other direction now. "We need more than deplatforming" https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2021/01/08/we-need-more-than-deplatforming/ https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2021/01/08/we-need-more-than-d...
- aarpmcgee 6y ago
  My sense is that this blog post is objectionable to you but I can't quite figure out why.
  - jjordan 6y ago
    It's a statement in support of suppressing speech, and it's needlessly political. Mozilla leadership has mostly rested on their laurels (read: Google money) while Firefox consistently slid in market share. I've been a loyal FF user for 17 years, and this was the final straw. In the process of switching to Brave.
    - aarpmcgee 6y ago
      I don't see anything in that post about suppressing speech—can you help me see it? The main bullet points in the article don't seem to have anything to do with suppressing speech (unless that is how you are framing the bullet point which reads: "Turn on by default the tools to amplify factual voices over disinformation."
      - al_chemist 6y ago
        It starts with title "We need more than deplatforming" which means "deplatforming is good, but it's not enough". noun: deplatforming; noun: de-platforming the action or practice of preventing someone holding views regarded as unacceptable or offensive from contributing to a forum or debate, especially by blocking them on a particular website. It continues with "Changing these dangerous dynamics requires more than just the temporary silencing or permanent removal of bad actors from social media platforms." Blocking, silencing and removal does suppress speech.
shuringai 6y ago
and in return, brave replaces your urls with their affilate links. no thanks i'll took the hassle to open tor browser on an ipfs client
- john-shaffer 6y ago
  That was a bug that was fixed pretty quickly. Details: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25841456 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25841456
- kenneth 6y ago
  Are we talking about BAT? Thought that was an opt in feature.
  - jjordan 6y ago
    It's on by default. If I had a complaint about Brave, is that it's a bit "noisy" by default. I'd like more customization options on setup so that there's less customization I have to do once the browser is installed.
- jonathansampson 6y ago
  You're referring to a bug from June of 2020, which was patched within a couple days of discovery, IIRC. An issue which had no privacy or security impact. Details in our blog on the subject: https://brave.com/referral-codes-in-suggested-sites/ https://brave.com/referral-codes-in-suggested-sites/. Happy to answer any questions you may have.
  - 3395810 6y ago
    It doesn't sound like a bug. It sounds like a feature that was removed when people noticed.
musicale 6y ago
> Mozilla promised us Tor integration, IPFS integration and more private browsing by default. Brave delivered it all. Interesting. When Mozilla promise this, and what sort of time frame were they talking about? Presumably "more private browsing" has been delivered somewhat already in Firefox?
- agilob 6y ago
  It was all after Snowdens leaks. Mozilla promised to de-fork Tor browser, move Tor into private browsing. They kept repeating this for years and years. They even started a bunch of Tor nodes to collect some metrics. It looks like they are removing their blog posts about it https://blog.mozilla.org/it/2015/01/28/deploying-tor-relays/ https://blog.mozilla.org/it/2015/01/28/deploying-tor-relays/ https://web.archive.org/web/20150722100146/https://blog.mozilla.org/it/2015/01/28/deploying-tor-relays/ https://web.archive.org/web/20150722100146/https://blog.mozi... > Our primary goal is to un-fork the Tor Browser https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1173199#c31 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1173199#c31 They were very vocal about how web is broken, needs more Tor and IPFS for everything to allow more free speech for disadvantage. Today they promote unregulated censorship, banning and shadow-banning public channels. You will find many posts about it between 2014 and 2018.
zoobab 6y ago
http://zoobab.wikidot.com/elinks-with-bittorrent-support http://zoobab.wikidot.com/elinks-with-bittorrent-support Boycott Firefox, Switch to Brave, my browser had Bittorrent support 16 years ago In 2005, Elinks browser had built-in Torrent support. In 2021, Firefox still does not have built-in Torrent support. In 2021, Brave has built-in Torrent support. Why Firefox has not focussed on decentralisation and uncensorability for the last 16 years? Maybe because they work for their grand masters (Google and other GAFAMs) who want power, and don't want decentralization?
- LockAndLol 6y ago
  As much as I feel that Firefox isn't delivering, Brave just extends a browser engine monopoly which is dangerous for the web. Google can decide to change a fundamental part and suddenly 90% of all users will have it because they use the same browser engine. I would've embraced brave had it written its own browser engine or simply picked something non-google.

Mozilla promised us Tor integration, IPFS integration and more private browsing by default. Brave delivered it all.

by agilob 6y ago

Mozilla promised us Tor integration, IPFS integration and more private browsing by default. Brave delivered it all.

jonathansampson 6y ago

And we will continue to deliver :) Thank you for the support!

dleslie 6y ago
I've been using Firefox since its inception, and was a Netscape user before that. I _briefly_ tried Chrome, but swiftly returned to Firefox. Half my extensions are still broken on Firefox Android. I've been using Firefox desktop on my PinePhone off-and-on and not only do all of my extensions work, but it's snappy and has a superior UX. I can actually access and manage my bookmarks with a sane interface. And yet even desktop is sullied. Each major version tries to hide my bookmarks, or something equally egregious, and Mozilla frequently abuses my trust by promoting products and services through privileged channels. It's getting hard to justify using Firefox.
- jjordan 6y ago
  Same boat. I've used Firefox in spite of countless boneheaded decisions by Mozilla leadership, because underneath all that mismanagement, the product was solid. They started trying to mimic Chrome rather than be their own browser, and it was all over. The final straw for me was with their recent divisive political statement in opposition to free speech.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- rurp 6y ago
  I too have recently departed the Firefox evangelism train after a great many years promoting the browser to all of my friends and family. The org has become far too disdainful of users. The constant UI/UX regressions are awful for people who just want their browser to work (ie. the vast majority of users), and management are more interested in political posturing than browser development.

mikece 6y ago

Does Brave have an implementation of Multi-Account Containers? This is the ONE killer feature in Firefox that makes it impossible for me to leave for Brave completely: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account-containers/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account...

jonathansampson 6y ago
Not a 1-to-1 parity at this time, but Brave offers parallel profiles. You can have one running personal interests, while the other has professional interests. Each profile is able to host a unique session for Facebook, etc. Brave already prohibits cookie and data bleed-over from one domain to another.
- mikece 6y ago
  That creates a new window per Profile as opposed to just one window with a bunch of tabs, all conceivably in using their own Container, right?
  - mikewhy 6y ago
    How do you juggle multiple facebook / google / anything accounts in that sort of system?
    - w14 6y ago
      Each container can be colour coded (up to 8 colours) and each tab is underscored with the same colour, so you can immediately see which is which.
    - blntechie 6y ago
      The containers can be named and color coded. Also there are keyboard shortcuts which once learned makes it easier to switch.
- 0-_-0 6y ago
  > Brave already prohibits cookie and data bleed-over from one domain to another. Is that similar to First Party Isolation in Firefox?

tarruda 6y ago

It is easier for Brave to deliver new features when the biggest work is done by Chrome team.

pbhjpbhj 6y ago
I don't quite follow, are you saying Mozilla's structure is poor so making modifications is harder? Or perhaps that Chrome's developers did the work on IPFS and adding Tor and that you feel Brave rubber stamped them? Mozilla has something like a $200M pa income (from Google alone). I wonder how that compares with Brave's income.
- Legion 6y ago
  I think the person's point is that Mozilla is making a complete browser, rendering engine and all, while Brave is basically a shell of stuff on top of Chromium/Blink.
  - killingtime74 6y ago
    I don’t think the customer cares as long as you can use it
    - the_other 6y ago
      Some of us care.
    - bawolff 6y ago
      The type of people who are into decentralizing the internet are also usually against a single company (google) controlling the rendering engine of most users. If you're talking about typical user of the average web browser, they care about IPFS as much as they care about the rendering engine - i.e. not at all.
      - 00000000000h 6y ago
        I am that person. I moved away from Brave because its still chrome/chromium based. I am also not confident in their "blockchain" advertising model and don't trust they are actually any less private with my data than chrome/chromium. It would be cool to see IPFS integrated and enabled by default on all browsers. I doubt Google would ever take the leap, but maybe Mozilla would. I also have doubt that Microsoft would but they would be more willing than Google. Anyways, I hope this can happen before Mozilla's market share shrinks more.

caycep 6y ago

I kind of wonder how many Mozilla developers/engineers jumped ship to Brave over the years?

jonathansampson 6y ago
We have quite a few engineers whose roots lie within, or have passed through, Mozilla. We even have several engineers and team members who pioneered much of the Web at Netscape and prior :)
- wolverine876 6y ago
  Are you sure you want to participate in a discussion badmouthing Mozilla? You're not directly saying those things, but you are taking part in the dialog. That sort of behavior makes me pretty angry about Brave. Focus on Brave. You have nothing to do with Mozilla.
  - bawolff 6y ago
    I think its a little extreme to call this bad mouthing. People switch jobs. It does not reflect negatively on firefox that some of their employees now work at other companies in the same space. That is how jobs work - its not a life long commitment.
    - joshmanders 6y ago
      Not to mention Brave was co-founded by the former CEO of Mozilla and one of the influential people of the Netscape days, Brendan Eich. So it's only logical that a portion of Brave devs are former Mozilla/Netscape people.
    - pseudalopex 6y ago
      Jumping ship means something bad usually.
  - jonathansampson 6y ago
    I'm not bad-mouthing anybody; somebody wondered if we have engineers on staff who worked at Mozilla. We do. I'm proud of the history represented in our staff. They are the ones who pioneered much of this industry. And they are the ones who spun-up the browser wars again, rescuing the Web from IE. Mozilla will always be given credit for the wonderful work they have done, and continue to do, for the Web.

undefined1 6y ago

Mozilla seems to be moving in the other direction now. "We need more than deplatforming" https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2021/01/08/we-need-more-than-deplatforming/ https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2021/01/08/we-need-more-than-d...

aarpmcgee 6y ago
My sense is that this blog post is objectionable to you but I can't quite figure out why.
- jjordan 6y ago
  It's a statement in support of suppressing speech, and it's needlessly political. Mozilla leadership has mostly rested on their laurels (read: Google money) while Firefox consistently slid in market share. I've been a loyal FF user for 17 years, and this was the final straw. In the process of switching to Brave.
  - aarpmcgee 6y ago
    I don't see anything in that post about suppressing speech—can you help me see it? The main bullet points in the article don't seem to have anything to do with suppressing speech (unless that is how you are framing the bullet point which reads: "Turn on by default the tools to amplify factual voices over disinformation."
    - al_chemist 6y ago
      It starts with title "We need more than deplatforming" which means "deplatforming is good, but it's not enough". noun: deplatforming; noun: de-platforming the action or practice of preventing someone holding views regarded as unacceptable or offensive from contributing to a forum or debate, especially by blocking them on a particular website. It continues with "Changing these dangerous dynamics requires more than just the temporary silencing or permanent removal of bad actors from social media platforms." Blocking, silencing and removal does suppress speech.

shuringai 6y ago

and in return, brave replaces your urls with their affilate links. no thanks i'll took the hassle to open tor browser on an ipfs client

john-shaffer 6y ago
That was a bug that was fixed pretty quickly. Details: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25841456 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25841456
kenneth 6y ago
Are we talking about BAT? Thought that was an opt in feature.
- jjordan 6y ago
  It's on by default. If I had a complaint about Brave, is that it's a bit "noisy" by default. I'd like more customization options on setup so that there's less customization I have to do once the browser is installed.
jonathansampson 6y ago
You're referring to a bug from June of 2020, which was patched within a couple days of discovery, IIRC. An issue which had no privacy or security impact. Details in our blog on the subject: https://brave.com/referral-codes-in-suggested-sites/ https://brave.com/referral-codes-in-suggested-sites/. Happy to answer any questions you may have.
- 3395810 6y ago
  It doesn't sound like a bug. It sounds like a feature that was removed when people noticed.

musicale 6y ago

> Mozilla promised us Tor integration, IPFS integration and more private browsing by default. Brave delivered it all. Interesting. When Mozilla promise this, and what sort of time frame were they talking about? Presumably "more private browsing" has been delivered somewhat already in Firefox?

agilob 6y ago
It was all after Snowdens leaks. Mozilla promised to de-fork Tor browser, move Tor into private browsing. They kept repeating this for years and years. They even started a bunch of Tor nodes to collect some metrics. It looks like they are removing their blog posts about it https://blog.mozilla.org/it/2015/01/28/deploying-tor-relays/ https://blog.mozilla.org/it/2015/01/28/deploying-tor-relays/ https://web.archive.org/web/20150722100146/https://blog.mozilla.org/it/2015/01/28/deploying-tor-relays/ https://web.archive.org/web/20150722100146/https://blog.mozi... > Our primary goal is to un-fork the Tor Browser https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1173199#c31 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1173199#c31 They were very vocal about how web is broken, needs more Tor and IPFS for everything to allow more free speech for disadvantage. Today they promote unregulated censorship, banning and shadow-banning public channels. You will find many posts about it between 2014 and 2018.

zoobab 6y ago

http://zoobab.wikidot.com/elinks-with-bittorrent-support http://zoobab.wikidot.com/elinks-with-bittorrent-support Boycott Firefox, Switch to Brave, my browser had Bittorrent support 16 years ago In 2005, Elinks browser had built-in Torrent support. In 2021, Firefox still does not have built-in Torrent support. In 2021, Brave has built-in Torrent support. Why Firefox has not focussed on decentralisation and uncensorability for the last 16 years? Maybe because they work for their grand masters (Google and other GAFAMs) who want power, and don't want decentralization?

LockAndLol 6y ago
As much as I feel that Firefox isn't delivering, Brave just extends a browser engine monopoly which is dangerous for the web. Google can decide to change a fundamental part and suddenly 90% of all users will have it because they use the same browser engine. I would've embraced brave had it written its own browser engine or simply picked something non-google.