291–300 of 394 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does anyone use Brave on the desktop? I thought Brave was only relevant on mobile, since mobile Chrome doesn't support extensions, and for some reason unknown to me people don't want to just use Firefox there.
Unless something's changed recently, Brave mobile doesn't support extensions either.
https://www.xda-developers.com/brave-browser-android-dev-wou...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah so it seems you don't know how suggestion boxes work - If I have more relevant links like some logged in binance page that I visited and type binance.us it will also not show binance.us at the top. If you have problems with how suggestion boxes work though, why don't you just disable them - it's pretty easy, it's a toggle in the settings and it's not hidden or anything. U can disable it and the list still works…
I just downloaded Brave onto a computer that has never had Brave on it and typed "binance.us" into its address bar. Hit return. Oh look, I seem to be at " https://www.binance.us/en?ref=35089877" .
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know I'm not supposed to reference downvotes on HN. But I would like to kindly ask downvoters to explain why what I've written is incorrect.
Regardless of whether the terminology is technically correct, it's easily understood what the meaning is. Modifying links and modifying typed URLs are equally bad, so your claim that it is sensationalist doesn't make sense. Your post is pure pedantry that does not make any substantive contribution.
I assumed from the title that Brave was adding affiliate codes to links on the page. That is not the case and now the author feels that he is a victim because Eich pointed this out.
The author also added an inflammatory HN comment from this thread to his blog post. This doesn't make any substantive contribution and is sensational.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Latency. Just tested with a "hello world" page (18ms ping). Chrome takes 102-200ms to render the page, Firefox takes 150-400ms. 1.5 to 2x slower -- and that's after all the performance upgrades they've done with Rust and Quantum. Network inspector says Firefox is spending 150-270ms "blocked" before it even initiates the connection. On Chrome the block is 3-18ms (15-50x (!!) faster). There's also UI lag. When I press…
> Chrome takes 102-200ms to render the page, Firefox takes 150-400ms. 1.5 to 2x slower -- and that's after all the performance upgrades they've done with Rust and Quantum. How did you actually measure this? I wonder whether these small timing differences may just be differences in how the respective dev tools report the timing info. FWIW I also don't think the relative difference will be this large for bigger sites -…
So once the page is loaded, JS performance seems to be about on par, but page loads are faster in Chrome.
To measure I just used dev tools. But there is quite a lot of randomness involved -- sometimes the engine scheduling planets align, and sometimes they are way out of alignment. You'd need thousands of samples or more to get an accurate reading. I just refreshed a few times to get ballpark numbers.
From the same browser that brought you “Hey we’ll just start taking donations for everyone whose ads we block, and we won’t put any effort into contacting anyone to tell them about this - and if they do find out, the process to start getting those donations is a giant pain in the ass!” I’m tempted to add some browser sniffing to my site just so I can block this scammy thing. I don’t even have ads on my comics any mor…
Being a happy Firefox user and watching all the browser drama from the backyard. I still don't understand why people uses Chrome or Chrome variants claiming privacy things.
I'm all in Firefox too, but Brave is not just a Chrome privacy thing. Brave goes out of its way to make money by ripping off publishers. As a publisher myself, I respect ad blockers. If they block ads, they aren't gonna click the ads in the first place, so it's their choice. I even respect DNT header and not put my pixel tracking for the users. Brave, on the other hand, is doing these sneaky stuff to earn from my eff…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which is missing nearly all of the addons that I use and which don't seem to be a priority for Mozilla. Their whole strategy regarding addons is incredibly frustrating.
I agree that the lack of full support for add-ons is frustrating, but the alternative you end up going back to, Brave, doesn't (seem to) support add-ons at all. How is that better?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm quite happy with FF on desktops, but the mobile version is just ... overall a miserable experience compared to Brave. After using it for a while, going back to FF constantly makes me feel like useful QoL features are missing and I end up going back to Brave.
I'm considering trying FF on mobile and I am curious what QoL features are missing? Thanks!
Then there's absolutely infuriating stuff like the address bar and tabs disappearing when scrolling, which is fine, but it can be really fucking annoying trying to get it to show up again. It doesn't respond properly, sometimes I'll have to scroll back up a whole page before it does anything and all I wanted to do was switch tabs, so I have to scroll back down when I come back. Makes me want to punch an FF developer.
I'm going to have to switch browser AGAIN? Dammit. Is Opera safe or what shady shit have they done? I haven't used Opera since Opera back in 2006. God I miss the Presto engine and dragonfly. Can I go back to them or they doing shady stuff?
Opera is still proprietary, and, uh, also they got caught doing some stuff involving predatory short-term loans to the impoverished in African countries, not to mention their CEO was also involved in an entirely different Chinese conglomerate that was also involved with fraud and some lending thing. Oh yeah and if you haven't used it since 2006: Opera is Chromium now, and the company behind it got sold a time or two.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> and they are correcting it. Only after getting caught. It's not like you can 'accidentally' write a bunch of code and push it out.
He says "We are a Binance affiliate, we refer users via the opt-in trading widget on the new tab page, but autocomplete should not add any code." Charitable interpretation: It is possible that he told the development team to add the affiliate code on the new tab page, and someone in the development team decided to add it to the autocomplete code as well, without him realising. I've certainly seen it happen when devel…