7 ms·

Let me save you a few seconds: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/new/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/new/

merlinscholz 6y ago
Or a more privacy-focused and less politics-focused alternative: https://brave.com https://brave.com EDIT: It's funny how the votes switch between +5 and -5 every minute. I wanted to add that I did not say Firefox is a bad browser. I was just presenting an alternative.
- warkdarrior 6y ago
  Isn't Brave the advertising-focused, privacy-friendly alternative?
  - merlinscholz 6y ago
    The BAT system is opt-in
    - judge2020 6y ago
      However, you must keep in mind that BAT is brave’s profit motive. Google only rejected the proposal because of money, you can’t expect brave to stay angelic in behavior forever.
      - merlinscholz 6y ago
        Sadly, browser engines have become complicated enough, that an unfunded open source project is unsustainable after some time. In my opinion, Brave offers a new attempt to solve this (and other) problems with the modern web. I understand that not everybody likes this business model, but I think everybody has to decide on its own, which browser they want to use. After all, browser diversity is important.
        Daho0n 6y ago
        If browser diversity is important to you I can't see how you would want to support Brave? No matter how good it is still Chrome you support. If we ended up without Firefox, how do you think Brave users would protest and try to force a bug in standard compliance of CSS to be fixed for example? The answer is they wouldn't as for them and everyone else using Chrome it would be invisible. Chrome is cancer like Internet Explorer, except it has now metastasized. Supporting Brave is supporting a future monoculture of the web with fancy browser reskins and no matter how good Braves added features are it doesn't change the fundamental problem but becomes a part of it, working for instead of against the good of users.
    - yen223 6y ago
      Brave puts advertising on new blank tabs, by default.
      - merlinscholz 6y ago
        Yes they are using sponsored images on their new tab page, but at least these are privacy focused, and you can easily disable them. After all, even open source projects need sponsoring. I'd much rather have some sponsored images than have my data being sold or turned into advertisements.
        Proven 6y ago
        Brave Today > Disable New Tab Page > Show background images (OFF) These innocently named options are where the ads are coming from.... Didn't see them before (I could swear they weren't there before...).
  - throwawaysea 6y ago
    I don't think it is advertising focused as much as it tries to give a path for monetization. You can use Brave's currency to pay content providers (website owners) to reward them for their creation. To me, that's the opposite of being focused on advertising, since it gives people a way to operate without relying on advertising as the sole monetization strategy. More at https://www.pcmag.com/how-to/how-to-earn-and-use-cryptocurrency-with-the-brave-browser https://www.pcmag.com/how-to/how-to-earn-and-use-cryptocurre...
- vesche 6y ago
  Genuinely curious, how is Brave "more privacy-focused and less politics-focused" than Mozilla Firefox?
  - merlinscholz 6y ago
    I think this comment chain from yesterday presents both sides pretty well: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25839923 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25839923
    - vesche 6y ago
      This comment chain is seriously confusing, did you or any of these other people even read the article: 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... The article is perhaps poorly titled, and the modern age headline-skimmers will take it at face value. The article isn't calling for more extreme action or censorship... It's saying that deplatforming isn't the solution and what we should do is have transparency of advertisers & algorithms and support / fund research into studies on disinformation. I'm not sure how anyone can disagree with the substance of the article. Ok, so no political issues... Still waiting on the privacy argument.
      - merlinscholz 6y ago
        An example for the privacy focused argument is the EFF panopticlick (I think they renamed it recently) test, which shows that, while Firefox is definitely good, Brave seems to be a little bit better in some aspects. And again, I want to repeat that I do not think that Firefox is a bad browser in any way, I just disagree with some of Mozilla's business decisions. The browser itself is great. Also, Brave doesn't phone home as much as Firefox: https://www.zdnet.com/article/brave-deemed-most-private-browser-in-terms-of-phoning-home/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/brave-deemed-most-private-brow...
        vesche 6y ago
        I initially responded to this thread with being legitimately "genuinely curious" as to why you think Brave > Firefox, as it seems a lot of people have that same thought. However, every time I get into a dialogue like this there isn't any proof in the pudding. I'm sure Brave is a decent browser, but there doesn't seem to be any real reason to switch. I've been using Firefox for more than a decade, it's open-source, from a non-profit, great community, frequently updated, on-par with Chrome in-terms of performance/speed. Everything I hear is just hollow words- "I just disagree with some of Mozilla's business decisions" / "it's more privacy-focused than Mozilla Firefox" / "it's less politically focused than Mozilla Firefox" / "Brave seems to be a little bit better in some aspects"
- ListenLinda 6y ago
  Brave is still Chromium if that is the argument.
  - merlinscholz 6y ago
    I agree that's the worst part about Brave. Browser engine diversity is as important as browser diversity in general, but the modern web seems to be too complicated to achieve this.
- konjin 6y ago
  I'll go ahead and say it: Firefox is a bad browser that has lost its direction. They are to browsers what Nokia was to phones in 2010.
  - jjcon 6y ago
    They have the same browser market share as ‘Samsung Internet’ and have been consistently declining - it’s completely lost on me why people here get so uptight about their sacred cow Firefox. Is it nostalgia? I have no clue.
    - konjin 6y ago
      People think of Mozilla as the upstart opensource project they supported in 2004. It isn't. It's a zombie org that only exists because google needs to have a patsy to point to if there is ever an anti-trust case against it.
    - Daho0n 6y ago
      Because without Firefox we only have the new version of Internet Explorer, now with fancy skins. How Google defines the web standards are how every chromium variant defines it. I get it, not everyone cares about having a web not defined by advertising companies but those that do only have Firefox, like it or not.
      - konjin 6y ago
        >The majority of Mozilla Corporation's revenue is from royalties earned through Firefox web browser search partnerships and distribution deals. Precisely 94% of Mozilla revenues came through royalties received by search engines to be featured on its Mozilla Firefox browser. So much freedom. https://www.computerworld.com/article/3600206/mozilla-reports-338m-revenue-spike-from-settlement-over-yahoo-contract.html https://www.computerworld.com/article/3600206/mozilla-report...
        Daho0n 6y ago
        No one is perfect but everyone is better off without a monopoly or mono-culture.
- Daho0n 6y ago
  A webbrowser is not something most people can or will switch out easily. Google could any day they want rewrite an API that brave depends on (like one used by adblockers) and it would instantly have caught lots of Barve users with a Bad Browser, many not knowing. Brave lives even more on the whim of Google than Mozilla does. It's like using Windows 10 with telemetry ripped out instead of switching to Linux. Good enough for some, not for all, bad to depend on in the long run for most.
  - Sebb767 6y ago
    > Google could any day they want rewrite an API that brave depends on That's funny, because they did that literally six days ago: https://blog.chromium.org/2021/01/limiting-private-api-availability-in.html https://blog.chromium.org/2021/01/limiting-private-api-avail... (I'm not sure whether Brave actually used Google account syncing, but Chromium surely did and this move clearly shows the dependence)
- wilsonthewhale 6y ago
  I also find it funny how in every browser related thread there's inevitably someone selling Brave in the comments, usually near a Firefox comment. I've never personally used Brave -- my only interaction with it was when one of my profs in university invited a guy for a talk who then basically proceeded to shill Brave for half the talk. It left an awful taste in my mouth and continues to do so.
- paxys 6y ago
  Brave is also based on Chromium, which defeats the entire purpose of the suggestion. Using Brave over Firefox only gives Google more power to dictate web standards.
- dartharva 6y ago
  I read big discussions on Brave on HN yesterday and immediately tried switching to it. Uninstalled within an hour, it was too bloated and performed unironically slower on my computer.
6sup6 6y ago
Given one of the last mozilla blog entries (i.e. the one about deplatforming), I stopped using firefox and I'm now using Brave.
- dartharva 6y ago
  Why should that political view affect your technical decision? You choose and use browsers to browse the internet, not to show or reject support to some political alignment.
- hda2 6y ago
  I haven't jumped to the brave bandwagon just yet, but their native support for IPFS is very enticing.
- technick 6y ago
  Don't let the virtue signaling of one random who has access to blog on Mozilla's website put you off. Keep believing in whatever that is, we'll eventually get out of this echo chamber.
  - lnl 6y ago
    If you're talking about this [1], it's written by Mozilla's CEO, not by one random who has access to blog on Mozilla. [1] 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...
    - ikt 6y ago
      Reveal who is paying for advertisements, how much they are paying and who is being targeted. Commit to meaningful transparency of platform algorithms so we know how and what content is being amplified, to whom, and the associated impact. Turn on by default the tools to amplify factual voices over disinformation. Work with independent researchers to facilitate in-depth studies of the platforms’ impact on people and our societies, and what we can do to improve things. --- Nothing here sounds unreasonable?
Helloworldboy 6y ago
Mozilla is cringe and just as bad for privacy.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

Or a more privacy-focused and less politics-focused alternative: https://brave.com https://brave.com EDIT: It's funny how the votes switch between +5 and -5 every minute. I wanted to add that I did not say Firefox is a bad browser. I was just presenting an alternative.

warkdarrior 6y ago
Isn't Brave the advertising-focused, privacy-friendly alternative?
- merlinscholz 6y ago
  The BAT system is opt-in
  - judge2020 6y ago
    However, you must keep in mind that BAT is brave’s profit motive. Google only rejected the proposal because of money, you can’t expect brave to stay angelic in behavior forever.
    - merlinscholz 6y ago
      Sadly, browser engines have become complicated enough, that an unfunded open source project is unsustainable after some time. In my opinion, Brave offers a new attempt to solve this (and other) problems with the modern web. I understand that not everybody likes this business model, but I think everybody has to decide on its own, which browser they want to use. After all, browser diversity is important.
      - Daho0n 6y ago
        If browser diversity is important to you I can't see how you would want to support Brave? No matter how good it is still Chrome you support. If we ended up without Firefox, how do you think Brave users would protest and try to force a bug in standard compliance of CSS to be fixed for example? The answer is they wouldn't as for them and everyone else using Chrome it would be invisible. Chrome is cancer like Internet Explorer, except it has now metastasized. Supporting Brave is supporting a future monoculture of the web with fancy browser reskins and no matter how good Braves added features are it doesn't change the fundamental problem but becomes a part of it, working for instead of against the good of users.
  - yen223 6y ago
    Brave puts advertising on new blank tabs, by default.
    - merlinscholz 6y ago
      Yes they are using sponsored images on their new tab page, but at least these are privacy focused, and you can easily disable them. After all, even open source projects need sponsoring. I'd much rather have some sponsored images than have my data being sold or turned into advertisements.
      - Proven 6y ago
        Brave Today > Disable New Tab Page > Show background images (OFF) These innocently named options are where the ads are coming from.... Didn't see them before (I could swear they weren't there before...).
- throwawaysea 6y ago
  I don't think it is advertising focused as much as it tries to give a path for monetization. You can use Brave's currency to pay content providers (website owners) to reward them for their creation. To me, that's the opposite of being focused on advertising, since it gives people a way to operate without relying on advertising as the sole monetization strategy. More at https://www.pcmag.com/how-to/how-to-earn-and-use-cryptocurrency-with-the-brave-browser https://www.pcmag.com/how-to/how-to-earn-and-use-cryptocurre...
vesche 6y ago
Genuinely curious, how is Brave "more privacy-focused and less politics-focused" than Mozilla Firefox?
- merlinscholz 6y ago
  I think this comment chain from yesterday presents both sides pretty well: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25839923 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25839923
  - vesche 6y ago
    This comment chain is seriously confusing, did you or any of these other people even read the article: 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... The article is perhaps poorly titled, and the modern age headline-skimmers will take it at face value. The article isn't calling for more extreme action or censorship... It's saying that deplatforming isn't the solution and what we should do is have transparency of advertisers & algorithms and support / fund research into studies on disinformation. I'm not sure how anyone can disagree with the substance of the article. Ok, so no political issues... Still waiting on the privacy argument.
    - merlinscholz 6y ago
      An example for the privacy focused argument is the EFF panopticlick (I think they renamed it recently) test, which shows that, while Firefox is definitely good, Brave seems to be a little bit better in some aspects. And again, I want to repeat that I do not think that Firefox is a bad browser in any way, I just disagree with some of Mozilla's business decisions. The browser itself is great. Also, Brave doesn't phone home as much as Firefox: https://www.zdnet.com/article/brave-deemed-most-private-browser-in-terms-of-phoning-home/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/brave-deemed-most-private-brow...
      - vesche 6y ago
        I initially responded to this thread with being legitimately "genuinely curious" as to why you think Brave > Firefox, as it seems a lot of people have that same thought. However, every time I get into a dialogue like this there isn't any proof in the pudding. I'm sure Brave is a decent browser, but there doesn't seem to be any real reason to switch. I've been using Firefox for more than a decade, it's open-source, from a non-profit, great community, frequently updated, on-par with Chrome in-terms of performance/speed. Everything I hear is just hollow words- "I just disagree with some of Mozilla's business decisions" / "it's more privacy-focused than Mozilla Firefox" / "it's less politically focused than Mozilla Firefox" / "Brave seems to be a little bit better in some aspects"
ListenLinda 6y ago
Brave is still Chromium if that is the argument.
- merlinscholz 6y ago
  I agree that's the worst part about Brave. Browser engine diversity is as important as browser diversity in general, but the modern web seems to be too complicated to achieve this.
konjin 6y ago
I'll go ahead and say it: Firefox is a bad browser that has lost its direction. They are to browsers what Nokia was to phones in 2010.
- jjcon 6y ago
  They have the same browser market share as ‘Samsung Internet’ and have been consistently declining - it’s completely lost on me why people here get so uptight about their sacred cow Firefox. Is it nostalgia? I have no clue.
  - konjin 6y ago
    People think of Mozilla as the upstart opensource project they supported in 2004. It isn't. It's a zombie org that only exists because google needs to have a patsy to point to if there is ever an anti-trust case against it.
  - Daho0n 6y ago
    Because without Firefox we only have the new version of Internet Explorer, now with fancy skins. How Google defines the web standards are how every chromium variant defines it. I get it, not everyone cares about having a web not defined by advertising companies but those that do only have Firefox, like it or not.
    - konjin 6y ago
      >The majority of Mozilla Corporation's revenue is from royalties earned through Firefox web browser search partnerships and distribution deals. Precisely 94% of Mozilla revenues came through royalties received by search engines to be featured on its Mozilla Firefox browser. So much freedom. https://www.computerworld.com/article/3600206/mozilla-reports-338m-revenue-spike-from-settlement-over-yahoo-contract.html https://www.computerworld.com/article/3600206/mozilla-report...
      - Daho0n 6y ago
        No one is perfect but everyone is better off without a monopoly or mono-culture.
Daho0n 6y ago
A webbrowser is not something most people can or will switch out easily. Google could any day they want rewrite an API that brave depends on (like one used by adblockers) and it would instantly have caught lots of Barve users with a Bad Browser, many not knowing. Brave lives even more on the whim of Google than Mozilla does. It's like using Windows 10 with telemetry ripped out instead of switching to Linux. Good enough for some, not for all, bad to depend on in the long run for most.
- Sebb767 6y ago
  > Google could any day they want rewrite an API that brave depends on That's funny, because they did that literally six days ago: https://blog.chromium.org/2021/01/limiting-private-api-availability-in.html https://blog.chromium.org/2021/01/limiting-private-api-avail... (I'm not sure whether Brave actually used Google account syncing, but Chromium surely did and this move clearly shows the dependence)
wilsonthewhale 6y ago
I also find it funny how in every browser related thread there's inevitably someone selling Brave in the comments, usually near a Firefox comment. I've never personally used Brave -- my only interaction with it was when one of my profs in university invited a guy for a talk who then basically proceeded to shill Brave for half the talk. It left an awful taste in my mouth and continues to do so.
paxys 6y ago
Brave is also based on Chromium, which defeats the entire purpose of the suggestion. Using Brave over Firefox only gives Google more power to dictate web standards.
dartharva 6y ago
I read big discussions on Brave on HN yesterday and immediately tried switching to it. Uninstalled within an hour, it was too bloated and performed unironically slower on my computer.

6sup6 6y ago

Given one of the last mozilla blog entries (i.e. the one about deplatforming), I stopped using firefox and I'm now using Brave.

dartharva 6y ago
Why should that political view affect your technical decision? You choose and use browsers to browse the internet, not to show or reject support to some political alignment.
hda2 6y ago
I haven't jumped to the brave bandwagon just yet, but their native support for IPFS is very enticing.
technick 6y ago
Don't let the virtue signaling of one random who has access to blog on Mozilla's website put you off. Keep believing in whatever that is, we'll eventually get out of this echo chamber.
- lnl 6y ago
  If you're talking about this [1], it's written by Mozilla's CEO, not by one random who has access to blog on Mozilla. [1] 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...
  - ikt 6y ago
    Reveal who is paying for advertisements, how much they are paying and who is being targeted. Commit to meaningful transparency of platform algorithms so we know how and what content is being amplified, to whom, and the associated impact. Turn on by default the tools to amplify factual voices over disinformation. Work with independent researchers to facilitate in-depth studies of the platforms’ impact on people and our societies, and what we can do to improve things. --- Nothing here sounds unreasonable?

Helloworldboy 6y ago

Mozilla is cringe and just as bad for privacy.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]