5 ms·

Interesting, I must have missed the first Leo announcement. I really like how privacy conscious it is. They don’t store any chat record which is what I want.

Dwedit 3y ago
There is no way to confirm that claim, just like there is no way to confirm that a VPN service is "no log".
- Erratic6576 3y ago
  You gotta trust them by their word
- lolinder 3y ago
  Yes, at some point if you're going to interface with other humans you will eventually just have to trust their word. For some people's threat models that isn't good enough, but for the vast majority of people—people who aren't being pursued by state intelligence agencies but who are squeamish about how much data a company like Google collects—a pinky promise from Brave or Mullvad is good enough.
  - bcye 3y ago
    I would like to think GDPR ensures this pinky promise is good enough
  - wolverine876 3y ago
    > For some people's threat models that isn't good enough, but for the vast majority of people—people who aren't being pursued by state intelligence agencies but who are squeamish about how much data a company like Google collects—a pinky promise from Brave or Mullvad is good enough. Who are you to say it's good enough (and ridicule people who disagree)? We don't have too much evidence of it, because they have very few options and of course most people are not informed and lack the expertise to understand the issues (a good situation for regulation). At one point lots of people used lead paint and were fine with it; they would have told us. > Yes, at some point if you're going to interface with other humans you will eventually just have to trust their word. There's technology, such as the authorization tokens used by Brave, that reduces that risk. Of course, no risk can be complete eliminated but that doesn't mean we shouldn't reduce it.
    - lolinder 3y ago
      > say it's good enough (and ridicule people who disagree)? I'm not ridiculing anyone, I explicitly say that for some people's threat models it isn't good enough.
      - wolverine876 3y ago
        You said that people who agreed with you are, > people who aren't being pursued by state intelligence agencies That implies that the only valid reason to disagree is if you are pursued by state intelligence agencies. Obviously it's ridiculous to think that you are.
        salad-tycoon 3y ago
        Well, these days a lot of people are actually pursued. You know like parents, social activists, various religious movements. It’s not just only the Dr. Evils of the world anymore.
Tanath 3y ago
It's foolish to trust Brave. https://www.spacebar.news/p/stop-using-brave-browser https://www.spacebar.news/p/stop-using-brave-browser

Dwedit 3y ago

There is no way to confirm that claim, just like there is no way to confirm that a VPN service is "no log".

Erratic6576 3y ago
You gotta trust them by their word
lolinder 3y ago
Yes, at some point if you're going to interface with other humans you will eventually just have to trust their word. For some people's threat models that isn't good enough, but for the vast majority of people—people who aren't being pursued by state intelligence agencies but who are squeamish about how much data a company like Google collects—a pinky promise from Brave or Mullvad is good enough.
- bcye 3y ago
  I would like to think GDPR ensures this pinky promise is good enough
- wolverine876 3y ago
  > For some people's threat models that isn't good enough, but for the vast majority of people—people who aren't being pursued by state intelligence agencies but who are squeamish about how much data a company like Google collects—a pinky promise from Brave or Mullvad is good enough. Who are you to say it's good enough (and ridicule people who disagree)? We don't have too much evidence of it, because they have very few options and of course most people are not informed and lack the expertise to understand the issues (a good situation for regulation). At one point lots of people used lead paint and were fine with it; they would have told us. > Yes, at some point if you're going to interface with other humans you will eventually just have to trust their word. There's technology, such as the authorization tokens used by Brave, that reduces that risk. Of course, no risk can be complete eliminated but that doesn't mean we shouldn't reduce it.
  - lolinder 3y ago
    > say it's good enough (and ridicule people who disagree)? I'm not ridiculing anyone, I explicitly say that for some people's threat models it isn't good enough.
    - wolverine876 3y ago
      You said that people who agreed with you are, > people who aren't being pursued by state intelligence agencies That implies that the only valid reason to disagree is if you are pursued by state intelligence agencies. Obviously it's ridiculous to think that you are.
      - salad-tycoon 3y ago
        Well, these days a lot of people are actually pursued. You know like parents, social activists, various religious movements. It’s not just only the Dr. Evils of the world anymore.

Tanath 3y ago

It's foolish to trust Brave. https://www.spacebar.news/p/stop-using-brave-browser https://www.spacebar.news/p/stop-using-brave-browser