I have been using brave on android and really enjoy the experience. It is very similar to chrome and thus gives most of the advantages of chrome (opening browser after a long time feels very snappy, swipe to switch tabs). It also has convenient options to block ads and js placed very prominently at the url bar. It also has features like HTTPS everywhere and fingerprinting protection(haven't tried this one yet). Firefox on Android supports desktop extensions like uBlock origin, and I tried making it my default for some time, but brave is simply much more usable. The two shortcomings for Android firefox for me have been (a) No swipe to switch tabs, (b) Loading new pages is noticeable slower than Chrome/Brave.
Brave 0.55 released
31–40 of 95 posts
Re: Brave 0.55 released
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fundamental question is who decides. Ideally the browser is the product, but not the user. For that, the browser needs to solve the question of the flow of money. Using Firefox makes you the product, because Mozilla monetizes you with selling you to Google. That is not a browser that "puts you first" or promotes the "open culture of the internet". Giving people the ability to chose whether they want to participat…
> Firefox makes you the product, because Mozilla monetizes you with selling you to Google That's hyperbole. Firefox was the first browser that made switching search engines or dealing with multiple search engines easy. Firefox was also the first to have usable add-ons for blocking invasive ads and trackers, always promoted as the best add-ons in their addons.mozilla.org. The pro-privacy culture has basically grown on…
What would Google do if Mozilla blocks all ads browser wide by default? (Which they can't do adhoc because it is probably explitically forbidden in their contract with Google)
The answer will give you a clue about the question who is the product.
Irregardless of semantics, Mozilla is entirely dependent on the privacy invading ad system.
Everyone knows that default settings matter, as around 80% of users never change much in their browsers, and it is this majority user base which forms the foundation for the contracts between browser makers and search engines.
Re: Brave 0.55 released
#33I love the irony in “You are not a product“ from a commercial product (open source, I know) designed to monetize surfing (aka pay-to-surf), as if this is what the internet is about. I think we should resist such an effort and stick with projects (not companies) that want to keep the internet as it was meant to be, ie Mozilla Firefox. No problem with monetization but I want a browser that puts me first, not a middlema…
The fundamental question is who decides. Ideally the browser is the product, but not the user. For that, the browser needs to solve the question of the flow of money. Using Firefox makes you the product, because Mozilla monetizes you with selling you to Google. That is not a browser that "puts you first" or promotes the "open culture of the internet". Giving people the ability to chose whether they want to participat…
> Using Firefox makes you the product, because Mozilla monetizes you with selling you to Google. That is not a browser that "puts you first" or promotes the "open culture of the internet".
Why not? The idea of being targeted with more effective ads based on what I look at is microscopic when compared to the things that got me excited about the internet originally, and it doesn't even seem to contradict them.
Re: Brave 0.55 released
#34I love the irony in “You are not a product“ from a commercial product (open source, I know) designed to monetize surfing (aka pay-to-surf), as if this is what the internet is about. I think we should resist such an effort and stick with projects (not companies) that want to keep the internet as it was meant to be, ie Mozilla Firefox. No problem with monetization but I want a browser that puts me first, not a middlema…
Because Mozilla is totally not a corporation. Brave makes usage of BAT and their ads optional and disabled by default.
What makes you believe the guise of privacy as a right is anything more than a trick to gain network effect?
If the rewards system doesn't make it out of beta, or worse, does and leads to adtech having an easier time profiling you, what we may end up with is more centralization around data collection—it just won't be as obvious.
And with the move to Chromium It's time for me to bail on Brave. Because if Muon doesn't compete with Chromium we've simply inched closer to a closed loop system.
Orfox here I come!
Re: Brave 0.55 released
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it’s worse than that, I mean, it’s anecdotal but I think their premise is flawed. Because I don’t think enough people are going to enable adds for it to ever be viable option for advertisers. I mean, their business case evolves around advertisers paying users to watch adds instead of paying Facebook or google. But Facebook only earns a few dollars per user per year, who in their right mind would turn off thei…
> But Facebook only earns a few dollars per user per year, who in their right mind would turn off their adblocker for a few dollars? This is a good point and it is interesting to think about the economic logic of advertising. It seems to me the burden it places on it's viewers is far greater than the (often questionable) value it brings to the advertiser. A huge unaccounted-for externality. In fact, when you consider…
> A huge unaccounted-for externality.
Not even close to the definition of an externality. Everybody involved in the transaction is there voluntarily.
Re: Brave 0.55 released
#36I wanted to compile it myself a few months ago... gave up after about 15min of looking. I _know_ I missed some obvious repo/instructions somewhere.
Re: Brave 0.55 released
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fundamental question is who decides. Ideally the browser is the product, but not the user. For that, the browser needs to solve the question of the flow of money. Using Firefox makes you the product, because Mozilla monetizes you with selling you to Google. That is not a browser that "puts you first" or promotes the "open culture of the internet". Giving people the ability to chose whether they want to participat…
> Firefox makes you the product, because Mozilla monetizes you with selling you to Google That's hyperbole. Firefox was the first browser that made switching search engines or dealing with multiple search engines easy. Firefox was also the first to have usable add-ons for blocking invasive ads and trackers, always promoted as the best add-ons in their addons.mozilla.org. The pro-privacy culture has basically grown on…
Yet it was (the company) Opera that first included adblocking by default.
Re: Brave 0.55 released
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fundamental question is who decides. Ideally the browser is the product, but not the user. For that, the browser needs to solve the question of the flow of money. Using Firefox makes you the product, because Mozilla monetizes you with selling you to Google. That is not a browser that "puts you first" or promotes the "open culture of the internet". Giving people the ability to chose whether they want to participat…
>Ideally the browser is the product I disagree. I don't have anything against paid software but it's not the only possibility, a lot of the software I use are open source projects maintained by volunteers, not products. I ideologically refuse to consider that every piece of software is a product. Now regarding Firefox things are not really clear cut, Mozilla is effectively non-profit but clearly their well being (and…
I bet your work doesn't depend on selling software unless you are using two measures here.
Re: Brave 0.55 released
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because Mozilla is totally not a corporation. Brave makes usage of BAT and their ads optional and disabled by default.
We've discussed this Mozilla is a "corporation" many times before, here and elsewhere. https://blog.mozilla.org/press/2005/08/mozilla-foundation-fo...
Re: Brave 0.55 released
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Ideally the browser is the product I disagree. I don't have anything against paid software but it's not the only possibility, a lot of the software I use are open source projects maintained by volunteers, not products. I ideologically refuse to consider that every piece of software is a product. Now regarding Firefox things are not really clear cut, Mozilla is effectively non-profit but clearly their well being (and…
> I ideologically refuse to consider that every piece of software is a product. 1. Who pays for the hosting? How do they pay for it? 2. Who pays for the site development? How do they pay for it? 3. Who pays for the site content? How do they pay for it? The vast majority of sites out there are commercial products, in some forms or another. Even Wikipedia is, they're periodically begging for money. Since we have this p…
Software is not only web sites/applications.
In that very same application domain there are pieces of software like the Apache http server. AFAIK the Apache Foundation is founded by donations.
Is httpd a product? They're not selling it and apparently they don't sell data about its users.