5 ms·

Thank God for the Brave browser. For those disliking their built-in adblocker, there is a Manifest v2 opt-out specifically for uBlock if you need it.

jollyllama 2mo ago
It's good but I find they EOL devices/OS's earlier than Firefox.
odidiejdiwjd 2mo ago
Isn’t Brave just another Chromium variant? Chromium is detestable. In whatever form it takes.
- armadyl 2mo ago
  What’s detestable is Firefox’s lack of security and Mozilla’s priorities surrounding it compared to Chromium https://www.reddit.com/r/GrapheneOS/comments/1unhtxu/initial_response_to_a_blog_post_claiming_to/ https://www.reddit.com/r/GrapheneOS/comments/1unhtxu/initial...
AstralSerenity 2mo ago
Peter Theil was an angel investor in Brave. That alone is all the reason privacy-minded users need to avoid it.
- fragmede 2mo ago
  Because Peter Thiel gave them some money, there's some secret backdoor code that's sending all your information to Palantir?
  - rwz 2mo ago
    It's quite likely that Brave itself collects data on your usage and shares at least some of it with Palantir. This isn't such an outrageous assumption to make here.
    - shooly 2mo ago
      Firefox also collects and sells data to no one really knows who. https://github.com/mozilla/bedrock/commit/d459addab846d8144b61939b7f4310eb80c5470e#diff-efc9fde0375fb98aa4918364737cb420fe33c44a52465ed89deb02db8cfe6c0a https://github.com/mozilla/bedrock/commit/d459addab846d8144b... https://blog.mozilla.org/en/firefox/update-on-terms-of-use/ https://blog.mozilla.org/en/firefox/update-on-terms-of-use/
      - rwz 2mo ago
        I mean sure, but there's a bit of a difference between "sells data to no one really knows who" and "sells data to no one really knows who AND PALANTIR" which the original commenter seem to be flagging as a problem.
        inigyou 2mo ago
        "no one really knows who" is probably also Palantir or someone who resells to Palantir.
        AstralSerenity 2mo ago
        From what I know personally, Firefox truly is responsible with user data. Though -- to steel man your point -- all the data Firefox sells is through their subsidiary Anonym, which goes through great lengths to anonymize all user data that can't be tied to any individual. Example: selling market preferences of a town rather than the individual people in it.
        deleted 2mo ago
        [deleted]
        shooly 2mo ago
        Well Thiel investing in Brave once at the beginning doesn't necessarily mean that Palantir is getting any data now (even though it's presented as if it was a fact in other comments here). It's probable, but really it's just speculation, just like anyone can speculate about who's getting data from Firefox. But at least with Brave, the initial funding information was made public, so there's already more information available to users in comparison with Mozilla. Mozilla just said: "there are a number of places where we collect and share some data with our partners" - that could mean literally anyone.
  - downrightmike 2mo ago
    That is their MO
  - AstralSerenity 2mo ago
    Sometimes you make decisions based on principle and future risk. Brave Software is a for-profit company that funded its start through Peter Thiel. Even if fine in the present, you cannot guarantee me the future of a Thiel-funded, VC-owned firm. Mozilla, in comparison, is a mature, non-profit with substantial goodwill and operational transparency. Everything past these details are just noise.
    - niutech 2mo ago
      Mozilla has also a for-profit corporation.
      - AstralSerenity 2mo ago
        No, Mozilla is a non-profit -- you may just misunderstand charitable structure optimization. It has a for-profit public-benefit subsidiary called Mozilla Corporation (Firefox). This is common in non-profits for a number of reasons: protects the foundations assets, allows for engaging in commercial operations (Mozilla VPN, Anonym), greater flexibility, etc. It is not a true for-profit company. All "profit" flows up to the non-profit and the non-profit parent retains complete, absolute control while being tied to the Mozilla mission.
- deleted 2mo ago
  [deleted]
- TiredOfLife 2mo ago
  As someone who lives in a country bordering russia, I will certainly switch to Brave now.
- al_borland 2mo ago
  Wasn't Brave also founded on the back of a bunch of Web3 nonsense? That's always what kept me away. I'm actually surprised how many fans it has. There was something else they did that was shocking a couple years ago that made me glad I never used it. I went to wikipedia to jog my memory and found this... > In 2020, the company was found to be appending affiliate referral codes to the end of certain cryptocurrency exchange URLs typed into the browser's address bar. The practice applied to exchanges such as Binance and Coinbase, and was later discovered to extend to suggested search queries for terms like "bitcoin" and "ethereum". I'm not sure why anyone would trust a browser that does this kind of thing. Some could claim it's a harmless way to make some extra cash, but it's very similar to what Honey was caught doing.
  - niutech 2mo ago
    Come on, it was 6 years ago, they have apologized since then. Firefox also had slip-ups like pop-up ads in 2023: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36073619 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36073619 and ToS backlash: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43251762 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43251762. Give Brave another try!
    - al_borland 2mo ago
      At this point, I won’t use any Chromium based browser. I don’t want Google having full control of the future of the web. I don’t trust an advertising company with that power.
    - AstralSerenity 2mo ago
      Everyone properly informed on the topic now understands the Mozilla ToS debacle was a complete nothing burger and simply a result of California law, miscommunication, and Mozilla being careful. Not one thing changed in actuality. Brave is a Thiel-funded, VC-owned private company with far more egregious monetization efforts. Ultimately I know everything at Mozilla is completely controlled by the mission-driven non-profit parent -- something they've recently double-downed on. Brave does not have those same assurances and cannot be trusted.
matheusmoreira 2mo ago
It's certainly better than stock Chrome but Firefox becoming relevant again is still the ideal option.
- culi 2mo ago
  I think it's necessary for the future of the web. Ever since Opera gave up on Presto and Edge gave up on Trident, we've seen a massive and sudden consolidation towards Chromium. It's sad how quickly we forgot the lessons we learned from the days of IE's dominance
  - matheusmoreira 2mo ago
    Sad indeed. What trully pisses me off though is the fact Mozilla has like hundreds of millions of dollars in the bank, possibly a billion dollars, and yet they continue to neglect Firefox.
    - culi 2mo ago
      I don't know why people say this. They've consistently improved firefox and done phenomenally on all of the WPT inter-ops for 5 years running https://wpt.fyi/interop-2025 https://wpt.fyi/interop-2025 https://wpt.fyi/interop-2024 https://wpt.fyi/interop-2024 https://wpt.fyi/interop-2023 https://wpt.fyi/interop-2023 https://wpt.fyi/interop-2022 https://wpt.fyi/interop-2022 https://wpt.fyi/interop-2021 https://wpt.fyi/interop-2021 This doesn't look like neglect to me at all. And in addition to all this, they've dramatically reduced their dependency on Google for funding.
ipsum2 2mo ago
Brave is great. Works across windows/mac/ios/android/linux.
iLoveOncall 2mo ago
Brave is malware, I don't understand how anyone on HN can use it, baffles me every time. They've literally been caught MITMing web pages for their own financial gains.
- culi 2mo ago
  [dead]
- TiredOfLife 2mo ago
  In that case Firefox is also out. They have been caught auto installing random hidden extensions with full read/write access to all websites and blocking uBlock Origin from working on, for example, the Firefox extension site.
  - iLoveOncall 2mo ago
    > have been caught auto installing random hidden extensions with full read/write access to all websites Lol, they chose to ship parts of their browser as extensions, it's definitely now "random extensions". > and blocking uBlock Origin from working on, for example, the Firefox extension site Any other example? Bypassing an extension on their own website has absolutely no link to the browser itself being a malware, this is ridiculous. I don't even use Firefox and I think Mozilla is a shit organization misusing its funds to pursue bad ventures lately, but even I think your claims are bullshit.
culi 2mo ago
It's on a time limit. Chromium deprecated MV2 but still keeps the webRequest API in the codebase. Google could at any time decide to strip it entirely. Or it could just stop working due to lack of maintenance as Chromium grows. Brave is relying on a fork that takes advantage of the fact that the webRequest API is still technically there
- drewfax 2mo ago
  That's why Brave probably built an in-built adblocker written in Rust. Works great on both desktop and mobile.
  - culi 2mo ago
    Brave's adblocker looks pretty good but it's not nearly as customizable or granular as uBlock Origin is. I don't use Brave but I think it'd be nice to be able to choose from a variety of adblockers instead of being forced to rely on the "official" one because of the MV2 stuff
WickyNilliams 2mo ago
Why use Brave rather than FF? Sincere question. Lots of tech minded people choose it, when FF seems like an ideal choice? My reasoning for not using Brave: not only is it a wrapper around Chromium, but their crypto stuff and some dodgy affiliate injection in the past paints them as untrustworthy.
- niutech 2mo ago
  Come on, this was 6 years ago, they have apologized since. Firefox also had trips like pop-up ads in 2023: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36073619 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36073619 and ToS rewriting: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43251762 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43251762. Brave is faster, suspends tabs when getting short of RAM with hundreds of tabs, has a first-class built-in ad blocker and fingerprinting protection, is compatible with Chrome extensions, includes Tor support, provides anonymous Brave Search with Goggles out of the box, free and private AI assistant Leo.
  - WickyNilliams 2mo ago
    I was just explaining my reasoning. Trust is gained in drops and lost in buckets. Affiliate fraud is far more serious and untrustworthy than a popup advertising their own product. But yes Mozilla have had their missteps too, no doubt. In any case, thanks for explaining. There are some features there I was unaware of

jollyllama 2mo ago

It's good but I find they EOL devices/OS's earlier than Firefox.

odidiejdiwjd 2mo ago

Isn’t Brave just another Chromium variant? Chromium is detestable. In whatever form it takes.

armadyl 2mo ago
What’s detestable is Firefox’s lack of security and Mozilla’s priorities surrounding it compared to Chromium https://www.reddit.com/r/GrapheneOS/comments/1unhtxu/initial_response_to_a_blog_post_claiming_to/ https://www.reddit.com/r/GrapheneOS/comments/1unhtxu/initial...

AstralSerenity 2mo ago

Peter Theil was an angel investor in Brave. That alone is all the reason privacy-minded users need to avoid it.

fragmede 2mo ago
Because Peter Thiel gave them some money, there's some secret backdoor code that's sending all your information to Palantir?
- rwz 2mo ago
  It's quite likely that Brave itself collects data on your usage and shares at least some of it with Palantir. This isn't such an outrageous assumption to make here.
  - shooly 2mo ago
    Firefox also collects and sells data to no one really knows who. https://github.com/mozilla/bedrock/commit/d459addab846d8144b61939b7f4310eb80c5470e#diff-efc9fde0375fb98aa4918364737cb420fe33c44a52465ed89deb02db8cfe6c0a https://github.com/mozilla/bedrock/commit/d459addab846d8144b... https://blog.mozilla.org/en/firefox/update-on-terms-of-use/ https://blog.mozilla.org/en/firefox/update-on-terms-of-use/
    - rwz 2mo ago
      I mean sure, but there's a bit of a difference between "sells data to no one really knows who" and "sells data to no one really knows who AND PALANTIR" which the original commenter seem to be flagging as a problem.
      - inigyou 2mo ago
        "no one really knows who" is probably also Palantir or someone who resells to Palantir.
        AstralSerenity 2mo ago
        From what I know personally, Firefox truly is responsible with user data. Though -- to steel man your point -- all the data Firefox sells is through their subsidiary Anonym, which goes through great lengths to anonymize all user data that can't be tied to any individual. Example: selling market preferences of a town rather than the individual people in it.
        deleted 2mo ago
        [deleted]
      - shooly 2mo ago
        Well Thiel investing in Brave once at the beginning doesn't necessarily mean that Palantir is getting any data now (even though it's presented as if it was a fact in other comments here). It's probable, but really it's just speculation, just like anyone can speculate about who's getting data from Firefox. But at least with Brave, the initial funding information was made public, so there's already more information available to users in comparison with Mozilla. Mozilla just said: "there are a number of places where we collect and share some data with our partners" - that could mean literally anyone.
- downrightmike 2mo ago
  That is their MO
- AstralSerenity 2mo ago
  Sometimes you make decisions based on principle and future risk. Brave Software is a for-profit company that funded its start through Peter Thiel. Even if fine in the present, you cannot guarantee me the future of a Thiel-funded, VC-owned firm. Mozilla, in comparison, is a mature, non-profit with substantial goodwill and operational transparency. Everything past these details are just noise.
  - niutech 2mo ago
    Mozilla has also a for-profit corporation.
    - AstralSerenity 2mo ago
      No, Mozilla is a non-profit -- you may just misunderstand charitable structure optimization. It has a for-profit public-benefit subsidiary called Mozilla Corporation (Firefox). This is common in non-profits for a number of reasons: protects the foundations assets, allows for engaging in commercial operations (Mozilla VPN, Anonym), greater flexibility, etc. It is not a true for-profit company. All "profit" flows up to the non-profit and the non-profit parent retains complete, absolute control while being tied to the Mozilla mission.
deleted 2mo ago
[deleted]
TiredOfLife 2mo ago
As someone who lives in a country bordering russia, I will certainly switch to Brave now.
al_borland 2mo ago
Wasn't Brave also founded on the back of a bunch of Web3 nonsense? That's always what kept me away. I'm actually surprised how many fans it has. There was something else they did that was shocking a couple years ago that made me glad I never used it. I went to wikipedia to jog my memory and found this... > In 2020, the company was found to be appending affiliate referral codes to the end of certain cryptocurrency exchange URLs typed into the browser's address bar. The practice applied to exchanges such as Binance and Coinbase, and was later discovered to extend to suggested search queries for terms like "bitcoin" and "ethereum". I'm not sure why anyone would trust a browser that does this kind of thing. Some could claim it's a harmless way to make some extra cash, but it's very similar to what Honey was caught doing.
- niutech 2mo ago
  Come on, it was 6 years ago, they have apologized since then. Firefox also had slip-ups like pop-up ads in 2023: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36073619 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36073619 and ToS backlash: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43251762 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43251762. Give Brave another try!
  - al_borland 2mo ago
    At this point, I won’t use any Chromium based browser. I don’t want Google having full control of the future of the web. I don’t trust an advertising company with that power.
  - AstralSerenity 2mo ago
    Everyone properly informed on the topic now understands the Mozilla ToS debacle was a complete nothing burger and simply a result of California law, miscommunication, and Mozilla being careful. Not one thing changed in actuality. Brave is a Thiel-funded, VC-owned private company with far more egregious monetization efforts. Ultimately I know everything at Mozilla is completely controlled by the mission-driven non-profit parent -- something they've recently double-downed on. Brave does not have those same assurances and cannot be trusted.

matheusmoreira 2mo ago

It's certainly better than stock Chrome but Firefox becoming relevant again is still the ideal option.

culi 2mo ago
I think it's necessary for the future of the web. Ever since Opera gave up on Presto and Edge gave up on Trident, we've seen a massive and sudden consolidation towards Chromium. It's sad how quickly we forgot the lessons we learned from the days of IE's dominance
- matheusmoreira 2mo ago
  Sad indeed. What trully pisses me off though is the fact Mozilla has like hundreds of millions of dollars in the bank, possibly a billion dollars, and yet they continue to neglect Firefox.
  - culi 2mo ago
    I don't know why people say this. They've consistently improved firefox and done phenomenally on all of the WPT inter-ops for 5 years running https://wpt.fyi/interop-2025 https://wpt.fyi/interop-2025 https://wpt.fyi/interop-2024 https://wpt.fyi/interop-2024 https://wpt.fyi/interop-2023 https://wpt.fyi/interop-2023 https://wpt.fyi/interop-2022 https://wpt.fyi/interop-2022 https://wpt.fyi/interop-2021 https://wpt.fyi/interop-2021 This doesn't look like neglect to me at all. And in addition to all this, they've dramatically reduced their dependency on Google for funding.

ipsum2 2mo ago

Brave is great. Works across windows/mac/ios/android/linux.

iLoveOncall 2mo ago

Brave is malware, I don't understand how anyone on HN can use it, baffles me every time. They've literally been caught MITMing web pages for their own financial gains.

culi 2mo ago
[dead]
TiredOfLife 2mo ago
In that case Firefox is also out. They have been caught auto installing random hidden extensions with full read/write access to all websites and blocking uBlock Origin from working on, for example, the Firefox extension site.
- iLoveOncall 2mo ago
  > have been caught auto installing random hidden extensions with full read/write access to all websites Lol, they chose to ship parts of their browser as extensions, it's definitely now "random extensions". > and blocking uBlock Origin from working on, for example, the Firefox extension site Any other example? Bypassing an extension on their own website has absolutely no link to the browser itself being a malware, this is ridiculous. I don't even use Firefox and I think Mozilla is a shit organization misusing its funds to pursue bad ventures lately, but even I think your claims are bullshit.

culi 2mo ago

It's on a time limit. Chromium deprecated MV2 but still keeps the webRequest API in the codebase. Google could at any time decide to strip it entirely. Or it could just stop working due to lack of maintenance as Chromium grows. Brave is relying on a fork that takes advantage of the fact that the webRequest API is still technically there

drewfax 2mo ago
That's why Brave probably built an in-built adblocker written in Rust. Works great on both desktop and mobile.
- culi 2mo ago
  Brave's adblocker looks pretty good but it's not nearly as customizable or granular as uBlock Origin is. I don't use Brave but I think it'd be nice to be able to choose from a variety of adblockers instead of being forced to rely on the "official" one because of the MV2 stuff

WickyNilliams 2mo ago

Why use Brave rather than FF? Sincere question. Lots of tech minded people choose it, when FF seems like an ideal choice? My reasoning for not using Brave: not only is it a wrapper around Chromium, but their crypto stuff and some dodgy affiliate injection in the past paints them as untrustworthy.

niutech 2mo ago
Come on, this was 6 years ago, they have apologized since. Firefox also had trips like pop-up ads in 2023: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36073619 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36073619 and ToS rewriting: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43251762 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43251762. Brave is faster, suspends tabs when getting short of RAM with hundreds of tabs, has a first-class built-in ad blocker and fingerprinting protection, is compatible with Chrome extensions, includes Tor support, provides anonymous Brave Search with Goggles out of the box, free and private AI assistant Leo.
- WickyNilliams 2mo ago
  I was just explaining my reasoning. Trust is gained in drops and lost in buckets. Affiliate fraud is far more serious and untrustworthy than a popup advertising their own product. But yes Mozilla have had their missteps too, no doubt. In any case, thanks for explaining. There are some features there I was unaware of