5 ms·

I am surprised there does not exist a community fork of Brave yet that strips out all of the commercial stuff (rewards, AI, own updates), making it suitable for

by drnick1 10mo ago

I am surprised there does not exist a community fork of Brave yet that strips out all of the commercial stuff (rewards, AI, own updates), making it suitable for inclusion in the repos of mainstream free/libre Linux distros.

w0ts0n 10mo ago
There is quite a lot of costs associated with running a browser (at scale). Brave is looking to offer something that does what you mention called Brave-origin. Brendan talks about this a bit more here: https://x.com/BrendanEich/status/2006412918783619455 https://x.com/BrendanEich/status/2006412918783619455
- drnick1 10mo ago
  This is good news, but I am confused by the following: """ Brave Origin is: 1/ new, optional, separate build (stripped down, no telemetry/rewards/wallet/vpn/ai); 2/ free on Linux, one time buy elsewhere. """ So the stripped down version (at least the non-Linux one) will not be open source?
  - dfajgljsldkjag 10mo ago
    Open source software can be sold for money. For example redhat selling cds with rhel on them, for quite a big sticker price. Free if you build it yourself but you have to pay to get a ready to use version.
    - chii 10mo ago
      or figure out how to build it yourself from source. But you can count on the lazy tax - esp. for windows (as building from source on linux is likely to be much more convenient).
      - HPsquared 10mo ago
        Maybe that's why it is free on Linux!
  - pxc 10mo ago
    open-source ≠ gratis binaries Rules that require the distribution of source code don't require the distribution of binaries.
  - WackyFighter 10mo ago
    That seems pretty reasonable proposition IMO. As other people have mentioned you can resell open source software. I have a big box Linux distro on my shelf here.
  - johnebgd 10mo ago
    I’d pay a monthly fee for a browser where I’m not the product anymore and it respects my privacy.
deleted 10mo ago
[deleted]
ipsum2 10mo ago
It's annoying, but Brave makes it pretty easy to remove, so you only have to do it once per installation.
- drnick1 10mo ago
  As far as I am concerned, this is more about Brave going through a vetting process and an independent build than only turning off annoyances.
  - cromka 10mo ago
    Indeed. It's basically like trying to get them into Debian main repo. If it works, then it's truly free.
OhioMan2943 10mo ago
You can hide bat with one click as soon as you install brave
- bastawhiz 10mo ago
  Linux distros won't host the code for the commercial bits. It doesn't matter if you can hide it, it's the fact that it's there at all
  - DaSHacka 10mo ago
    Yet they have no issue with Mozilla?
    - drnick1 10mo ago
      Mozilla does not have commercial bits. They do receive money from Google to be the default search engine, and the binaries they build report telemetry, but the versions found in Linux repos often either patch out the telemetry or disable it.
  - WackyFighter 10mo ago
    Most distros have a way of installing proprietary software via enabling additional repos after install.
    - bastawhiz 10mo ago
      And you can do that if you want with Brave
- aorth 10mo ago
  For technical users who are in the know, yes. I would not recommend Brave to less-technical friends and family knowing that they would surely be duped by some dark patterns in Brave's UI/UX. Even Firefox, which is the best we have currently, surprises us a few times a year with questionable decisions. Still, it's what I recommend to people.
rb666 10mo ago
Isn't this what Helium is doing? I have been using it as daily driver for half a year, works a charm. Only would like better 1Password integration.
- feverzsj 10mo ago
  Helium is based on ungoogled-chromium. It enables manifest v2 by simply reverting some code changes made by google. So, if google decides to remove manifest v2 wholly, helium will also lost its ublock original support.
  - pitkali 10mo ago
    Removing all manifest v2 support is also a code change that can be reverted. Of course, the larger the change, the more work it's likely to require to maintain it in the future.
brnt 10mo ago
This. I use Brave because it has a great, fast adblocker and is fast generally. Unticking all the wallet/AI crap upon install is an acceptable price, but if somebody is going to release Braveium I'm going to use it right away.
- thisislife2 10mo ago
  Is its adblocker as good as uBlock Origin?
  - brnt 10mo ago
    You can add the same lists as in uBlock. I haven't seen any ads in years, so yes.
  - jorvi 10mo ago
    It is better (especially than the Manifest V3 version) because it has first party access / integration. In general, of 3rd party blockers, uBlock Origin isn't even the best, AdGuard is.
    - oktoberpaard 10mo ago
      > In general, of 3rd party blockers, uBlock Origin isn't even the best, AdGuard is. Why? I thought uBlock Origin on Firefox was the most effective combination available (assuming that you use the same filter lists).
      - jorvi 10mo ago
        The main reason for people repeating "uBlock Origin + Firefox is best" is because CNAME uncloaking didn't work on most Chromium browsers, even on Manifest V2. It does on Brave. AdGuard works better simply because there's a bunch of people being paid to work on it. There's more optimization and less bugs. The UI is a whole lot more polished. Blocklists have improved syntax, and the lists themselves are updated more frequently to catch site breakage. EasyList often has breakage on their lists for months even after being reported on their Github, but reporting the same breakage to AdGuard results in the breakage being fixed in days if not hours. And they do adjacent projects like AdGuard Home (sort of a commercial Pi-Hole) too. FWIW, big names in adblocking work for these companies too. AFAIK, FanBoy (EasyList + EasyPrivacy + his own lists) gets paid by Brave to maintain the lists. So in a way, Brave is funding adblocking for everyone :)
uyzstvqs 10mo ago
You can disable all of that within seconds. There's no reason for it not to be included because of that, as all the code running on the client is open-source. If distros only shipped software without commercial interests (why even..?), it'd be an unusable mess of barely maintained hobby projects. And you should really be using https://flathub.org/en/apps/com.brave.Browser https://flathub.org/en/apps/com.brave.Browser

by drnick1 10mo ago

w0ts0n 10mo ago

There is quite a lot of costs associated with running a browser (at scale). Brave is looking to offer something that does what you mention called Brave-origin. Brendan talks about this a bit more here: https://x.com/BrendanEich/status/2006412918783619455 https://x.com/BrendanEich/status/2006412918783619455

drnick1 10mo ago
This is good news, but I am confused by the following: """ Brave Origin is: 1/ new, optional, separate build (stripped down, no telemetry/rewards/wallet/vpn/ai); 2/ free on Linux, one time buy elsewhere. """ So the stripped down version (at least the non-Linux one) will not be open source?
- dfajgljsldkjag 10mo ago
  Open source software can be sold for money. For example redhat selling cds with rhel on them, for quite a big sticker price. Free if you build it yourself but you have to pay to get a ready to use version.
  - chii 10mo ago
    or figure out how to build it yourself from source. But you can count on the lazy tax - esp. for windows (as building from source on linux is likely to be much more convenient).
    - HPsquared 10mo ago
      Maybe that's why it is free on Linux!
- pxc 10mo ago
  open-source ≠ gratis binaries Rules that require the distribution of source code don't require the distribution of binaries.
- WackyFighter 10mo ago
  That seems pretty reasonable proposition IMO. As other people have mentioned you can resell open source software. I have a big box Linux distro on my shelf here.
- johnebgd 10mo ago
  I’d pay a monthly fee for a browser where I’m not the product anymore and it respects my privacy.

deleted 10mo ago

[deleted]

ipsum2 10mo ago

It's annoying, but Brave makes it pretty easy to remove, so you only have to do it once per installation.

drnick1 10mo ago
As far as I am concerned, this is more about Brave going through a vetting process and an independent build than only turning off annoyances.
- cromka 10mo ago
  Indeed. It's basically like trying to get them into Debian main repo. If it works, then it's truly free.

OhioMan2943 10mo ago

You can hide bat with one click as soon as you install brave

bastawhiz 10mo ago
Linux distros won't host the code for the commercial bits. It doesn't matter if you can hide it, it's the fact that it's there at all
- DaSHacka 10mo ago
  Yet they have no issue with Mozilla?
  - drnick1 10mo ago
    Mozilla does not have commercial bits. They do receive money from Google to be the default search engine, and the binaries they build report telemetry, but the versions found in Linux repos often either patch out the telemetry or disable it.
- WackyFighter 10mo ago
  Most distros have a way of installing proprietary software via enabling additional repos after install.
  - bastawhiz 10mo ago
    And you can do that if you want with Brave
aorth 10mo ago
For technical users who are in the know, yes. I would not recommend Brave to less-technical friends and family knowing that they would surely be duped by some dark patterns in Brave's UI/UX. Even Firefox, which is the best we have currently, surprises us a few times a year with questionable decisions. Still, it's what I recommend to people.

rb666 10mo ago

Isn't this what Helium is doing? I have been using it as daily driver for half a year, works a charm. Only would like better 1Password integration.

feverzsj 10mo ago
Helium is based on ungoogled-chromium. It enables manifest v2 by simply reverting some code changes made by google. So, if google decides to remove manifest v2 wholly, helium will also lost its ublock original support.
- pitkali 10mo ago
  Removing all manifest v2 support is also a code change that can be reverted. Of course, the larger the change, the more work it's likely to require to maintain it in the future.

brnt 10mo ago

This. I use Brave because it has a great, fast adblocker and is fast generally. Unticking all the wallet/AI crap upon install is an acceptable price, but if somebody is going to release Braveium I'm going to use it right away.

thisislife2 10mo ago
Is its adblocker as good as uBlock Origin?
- brnt 10mo ago
  You can add the same lists as in uBlock. I haven't seen any ads in years, so yes.
- jorvi 10mo ago
  It is better (especially than the Manifest V3 version) because it has first party access / integration. In general, of 3rd party blockers, uBlock Origin isn't even the best, AdGuard is.
  - oktoberpaard 10mo ago
    > In general, of 3rd party blockers, uBlock Origin isn't even the best, AdGuard is. Why? I thought uBlock Origin on Firefox was the most effective combination available (assuming that you use the same filter lists).
    - jorvi 10mo ago
      The main reason for people repeating "uBlock Origin + Firefox is best" is because CNAME uncloaking didn't work on most Chromium browsers, even on Manifest V2. It does on Brave. AdGuard works better simply because there's a bunch of people being paid to work on it. There's more optimization and less bugs. The UI is a whole lot more polished. Blocklists have improved syntax, and the lists themselves are updated more frequently to catch site breakage. EasyList often has breakage on their lists for months even after being reported on their Github, but reporting the same breakage to AdGuard results in the breakage being fixed in days if not hours. And they do adjacent projects like AdGuard Home (sort of a commercial Pi-Hole) too. FWIW, big names in adblocking work for these companies too. AFAIK, FanBoy (EasyList + EasyPrivacy + his own lists) gets paid by Brave to maintain the lists. So in a way, Brave is funding adblocking for everyone :)

uyzstvqs 10mo ago

You can disable all of that within seconds. There's no reason for it not to be included because of that, as all the code running on the client is open-source. If distros only shipped software without commercial interests (why even..?), it'd be an unusable mess of barely maintained hobby projects. And you should really be using https://flathub.org/en/apps/com.brave.Browser https://flathub.org/en/apps/com.brave.Browser