5 ms·

The (summary) message seems to be: Don't use Opera because "The company is chasing trends and extracting the most money possible from its declining users". B

The (summary) message seems to be: Don't use Opera because "The company is chasing trends and extracting the most money possible from its declining users". But there are no links that would truly show the extent of the alleged unethical behavior. There are no links to court-decisions. What about unethical behaviors by other browser-providers? Isn't Google also "extracting the most money possible from its users"? And Microsoft? Apple's Safari is provided by the company which takes 30% cut from products sold in its app-store and prevents its users from using anything but their app-store.

gmuslera 3y ago
Firefox also has been "chasing trends". Pocket, VPN, Relay, OS, and others. Maybe their conception of "trending" is different from Opera's one, and maybe more focused on what they understand of how a browser can be made more useful and the toolset around it. Or not. In any case, the trendy picks by Opera are shadier, and the next one can be harmful for most of their users.
- rolltrunhert 3y ago
  Firefox needs to have other income than the google search money, that's hardly surprising. So did Opera, if you read the article you would have a clue. They described the Opera Mini moneymaker in the third paragraph already.
  - galaxyLogic 3y ago
    An interesting piece of information from the article is this: "Hindenburg is an investment firm that researches publicly-traded companies and shorts their stocks if they find sufficient evidence of investor fraud before releasing its report. Since Hindenburg directly profits from the company's decline in stock, it's not an impartial source of information "
- nine_k 3y ago
  The OS, BTW, does relatively well, after it has been discontinued by Mozilla. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_OS#Forks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_OS#Forks
rolltrunhert 3y ago
> The (summary) message seems to be: Don't use Opera because "The company is chasing trends and extracting the most money possible from its declining users". Your summary is dumb. Here's why, and I quote from the article you claim to summarize: > Hindenburg alleged that when the Opera browser continued losing users (due to competition from Google and Apple), the company shifted gears to building mobile apps that provided predatory short-term loans. The interest rates on those loans ranged from 365-876% per year, and loan terms from 7-29 days. Opera also falsely advertised longer loan terms and lower interest rates in the app descriptions, because the Google Play Store had rules against predatory loan services. > The loan apps specifically targeted customers in Kenya, India, and Nigeria. Nobody read the links anymore, just chatting?? Also, everybody check out Firefox, not corporate boring Chrome!
- galaxyLogic 3y ago
  > "Your summary is dumb." I didn't provide a summary of the article, just quoted from it's Conclusion (== Summary) -section verbatim: "The company is chasing trends and extracting the most money possible from its declining users" For me that is not a good enough reason to stop using Opera. Also the Hindenburg report is from 2020. Not very trendy. If Opera really is more "evil" company than say Google, Apple and Microsoft I would think there would by now be more information about the "alleged" misbehaviors. Maybe they mended their ways, because of that report? I'm using Opera, Firefox, Chrome and Edge. Chrome and Edge seem to give me more adds than Opera. I think it's good there are more browser-choices regardless of what Hindenburg-report said in 2020. Certainly it is good to bring up reports of alleged unethical behavior by corporations. But Opera is a very small company compared to Google, Apple and Microsoft. Trying to bash them now because of a report that came out in 2020 just seems a bit odd. Here's another quote from the article which seems over the top to me: "You should not, under any circumstances, use Opera Browser or any of its derivatives." Why not even derivatives? Under any circumstances?
- rehan104 3y ago
  [dead]
arp242 3y ago
You can be unethical while not being prosecuted. "Law" and "morality" should not be conflated. And there's tons of details in the linked report – specifically about their short-term loan apps. And looking up "CashBean" (of which there's a screenshot) shows they had their license revoked by the Indian government. That sort of thing is usually not a good sign. > What about unethical behaviors by other browser-providers? I'm not aware of them operating predatory loan schemes in developing nations.
- galaxyLogic 3y ago
  > I'm not aware of them operating predatory loan schemes in developing nations. Is Opera doing it currently?
  - arp242 3y ago
    I don't think it matters because all of this was very recent under the same ownership. But if you think it does matter then enter a few of those names in your favourite search engine and find out.
dartharva 3y ago
What is this whataboutism? The article is about Opera, not other browsers. And its focus is on its unethical practices, the kinds of which are illegal in many countries (you may want to look up on how horrendously evil microlending apps are). And the article does give a reasonable of instances and sources on their antics. Hell, the most popular activist short seller in the world targeted it. What more do you want?

gmuslera 3y ago

Firefox also has been "chasing trends". Pocket, VPN, Relay, OS, and others. Maybe their conception of "trending" is different from Opera's one, and maybe more focused on what they understand of how a browser can be made more useful and the toolset around it. Or not. In any case, the trendy picks by Opera are shadier, and the next one can be harmful for most of their users.

rolltrunhert 3y ago
Firefox needs to have other income than the google search money, that's hardly surprising. So did Opera, if you read the article you would have a clue. They described the Opera Mini moneymaker in the third paragraph already.
- galaxyLogic 3y ago
  An interesting piece of information from the article is this: "Hindenburg is an investment firm that researches publicly-traded companies and shorts their stocks if they find sufficient evidence of investor fraud before releasing its report. Since Hindenburg directly profits from the company's decline in stock, it's not an impartial source of information "
nine_k 3y ago
The OS, BTW, does relatively well, after it has been discontinued by Mozilla. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_OS#Forks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_OS#Forks

rolltrunhert 3y ago

> The (summary) message seems to be: Don't use Opera because "The company is chasing trends and extracting the most money possible from its declining users". Your summary is dumb. Here's why, and I quote from the article you claim to summarize: > Hindenburg alleged that when the Opera browser continued losing users (due to competition from Google and Apple), the company shifted gears to building mobile apps that provided predatory short-term loans. The interest rates on those loans ranged from 365-876% per year, and loan terms from 7-29 days. Opera also falsely advertised longer loan terms and lower interest rates in the app descriptions, because the Google Play Store had rules against predatory loan services. > The loan apps specifically targeted customers in Kenya, India, and Nigeria. Nobody read the links anymore, just chatting?? Also, everybody check out Firefox, not corporate boring Chrome!

galaxyLogic 3y ago
> "Your summary is dumb." I didn't provide a summary of the article, just quoted from it's Conclusion (== Summary) -section verbatim: "The company is chasing trends and extracting the most money possible from its declining users" For me that is not a good enough reason to stop using Opera. Also the Hindenburg report is from 2020. Not very trendy. If Opera really is more "evil" company than say Google, Apple and Microsoft I would think there would by now be more information about the "alleged" misbehaviors. Maybe they mended their ways, because of that report? I'm using Opera, Firefox, Chrome and Edge. Chrome and Edge seem to give me more adds than Opera. I think it's good there are more browser-choices regardless of what Hindenburg-report said in 2020. Certainly it is good to bring up reports of alleged unethical behavior by corporations. But Opera is a very small company compared to Google, Apple and Microsoft. Trying to bash them now because of a report that came out in 2020 just seems a bit odd. Here's another quote from the article which seems over the top to me: "You should not, under any circumstances, use Opera Browser or any of its derivatives." Why not even derivatives? Under any circumstances?
rehan104 3y ago
[dead]

arp242 3y ago

You can be unethical while not being prosecuted. "Law" and "morality" should not be conflated. And there's tons of details in the linked report – specifically about their short-term loan apps. And looking up "CashBean" (of which there's a screenshot) shows they had their license revoked by the Indian government. That sort of thing is usually not a good sign. > What about unethical behaviors by other browser-providers? I'm not aware of them operating predatory loan schemes in developing nations.

galaxyLogic 3y ago
> I'm not aware of them operating predatory loan schemes in developing nations. Is Opera doing it currently?
- arp242 3y ago
  I don't think it matters because all of this was very recent under the same ownership. But if you think it does matter then enter a few of those names in your favourite search engine and find out.

dartharva 3y ago

What is this whataboutism? The article is about Opera, not other browsers. And its focus is on its unethical practices, the kinds of which are illegal in many countries (you may want to look up on how horrendously evil microlending apps are). And the article does give a reasonable of instances and sources on their antics. Hell, the most popular activist short seller in the world targeted it. What more do you want?