zlacker

>>rand0m+(OP)
It's always surprising to me when I hear people using the brave browser... It's by a company that initially tried to replace their blocked ads with their own "safe and non-intrusive" ads as far as I remember, until they backpaddled because of the outrage.

It's also a for-profit company and you're not the customer, as you're not paying them money.

I'd be way more worried how they're using the data they're collecting on you vs Google or MS

>>411111+hn
People still like to defend Brave when it gets caught on shady things over and over again. I guess there are no too many other options. For some people it is already too difficult to install uBlock or know its existence.

>>nicce+pp
It's because a lot of people are bought into BAT (Brave's cryptocurrency) and have a strong financial incentive to shill Brave.

>>lalala+mH
I do not use BAT or any crypto. Brave just works, and it blocks ads automatically when I tell friends to install it on their computers.

I used to recommend Firefox, but Mozilla has totally jumped the shark (privacy violations [multiple], wastes too much money, blocks APIs that are useful with no real security risks while approving APIs with little use that do have security risks, etc, very user hostile).

Chromium is obviously not trustworthy at this point, let alone Chrome. So that leaves like, Safari and Opera?

Brendan Eich is the CEO of Brave, and I trust him. Mozilla was good until he was ousted for political reasons.

>>boondo+eZ
> Chromium is obviously not trustworthy at this point, let alone Chrome. So that leaves like, Safari and Opera

Brave is like 99% of Chromium + uBlock…

>>nicce+g41
Right, I should have said "the main Chromium branch is obviously not trustworthy". It is possible to remove the untrustworthy bits, however, and there are a variety of de-googled Chromium builds.

Chromium is a great browser, unfortunately the official branch has been poisoned by Google.