2 ms·

You're really grasping for straws here to defend this. I'll explain: > 2. Brendan Eich never said that it was supposed to be turned on by default, hence a bug.

You're really grasping for straws here to defend this. I'll explain: > 2. Brendan Eich never said that it was supposed to be turned on by default, hence a bug. What are you even arguing against here? Turned on by default? Who was it supposed to be on for according to you? > 3. Brave stopped the affiliate link partnership. After the backlash they realized how stupid it was, apologized and removed the feature (not bug) yes. The articles from the time are still around, quotes and everything. > 4. Brave is the only mainstream browser at the moment that does not advertise in the address bar. Even Firefox runs ads there BY DEFAULT! Whataboutism, stay on topic. > I don't see what one gets from being so biased against a browser company that fixed a bug even before it became a news? It's not a bias, they crossed every line possible. My browser is not supposed to fuck with my requests, ever. No excuses. They considered it a good choice at the time and I will keep reminding people every time brave comes up. But you shouldn't worry, that means you'll still have a job hunting down such comments to damage control.

NayamAmarshe 2y ago
> It's not a bias, they crossed every line possible. My browser is not supposed to with my requests, ever. No excuses. They considered it a good choice at the time and I will keep reminding people every time brave comes up. But you shouldn't worry, that means you'll still have a job hunting down such comments to damage control. All this rage is pointless. The issue is literally on GitHub and was created by Brave's engineer himself. Fixed and merged on day 1, in the nightly, even before anybody ever found it. So all your points are just biased and not worthwhile to discuss.
- worksonmine 2y ago
  Don't mistake my annoyance with this "discussion" for rage. Github history can be manipulated (I'm not saying they did, just stating a fact). Why would Eich himself claim it was a bad judgement call and apologize? He calls it an attempt at monetization not a mistake. This is not the kind of code your cat types, it was 100% intentional. Use Brave if you want I don't care but what's the point in making up all these far-fetched excuses? Anyone can read the articles themselves and make up their own mind. You don't know what biased means, I have an educated opinion on the matter, bias is something else.

NayamAmarshe 2y ago

> It's not a bias, they crossed every line possible. My browser is not supposed to with my requests, ever. No excuses. They considered it a good choice at the time and I will keep reminding people every time brave comes up. But you shouldn't worry, that means you'll still have a job hunting down such comments to damage control. All this rage is pointless. The issue is literally on GitHub and was created by Brave's engineer himself. Fixed and merged on day 1, in the nightly, even before anybody ever found it. So all your points are just biased and not worthwhile to discuss.

worksonmine 2y ago
Don't mistake my annoyance with this "discussion" for rage. Github history can be manipulated (I'm not saying they did, just stating a fact). Why would Eich himself claim it was a bad judgement call and apologize? He calls it an attempt at monetization not a mistake. This is not the kind of code your cat types, it was 100% intentional. Use Brave if you want I don't care but what's the point in making up all these far-fetched excuses? Anyone can read the articles themselves and make up their own mind. You don't know what biased means, I have an educated opinion on the matter, bias is something else.