I’ve been using Brave for the past three or so years but I do know that Linux/privacy enthusiasts tend to swear by Firefox. Wanted to get people’s thoughts on this topic to see if I should be making a potential switch. Thanks!

  • Voxel@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Please provide any evidence for your false claim.

    • spiritedaway@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not OP, and these aren’t scams as such, but there was some controversy with Brave inserting affiliate links within web pages and also hijacking links to redirect to other URLs that would earn them money.

      The CEO also has some controversial views on the Corona virus and LGBTQ rights.

      • Voxel@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The CEO was before CEO of Mozilla lmao, but stepped back, because the entire Internet hated Firefox, because of his political opinion.

      • Engywuck@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        The CEO also has some controversial views on the Corona virus and LGBTQ rights.

        Completely unrelated to “security” or “privacy”.

        • spiritedaway@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          1 year ago

          I disagree, especially from a privacy perspective. Just as an example, if the CEO of the company goes on a full power trip (Elon, for example with banning users/censoring content that doesn’t align with his views), whose to say they won’t include nefarious changes to their product or service that could jeopardise users they don’t agree with, or start handing over data of their users?,

          I’ll need to find the article again, but if I’m not mistaken in my recollection, I recall reading about an app collecting and handling over data to anti-abortion organisation.

          • Engywuck@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Again, this has nothing to do with technical issue regarding privacy or security. People are just making excuses. Don’t use it if you prefer something else, but don’t mix non-relevant stuff or paranoia in a semi-technical discussion.

            By the way, that’s funny. In a similar way, I hope that you or other virtue-signaling people, don’t buy stuff on Amazon (i.e., support them) as the are notoriously mistreating their warehouse workers. Yes, it’s unrelated. I’m just point out a blatant hypocrisy.

            • spiritedaway@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              1 year ago

              Where was it mentioned by OP or yourself this is limited to a purely technical discussion? You’re in the Privacy community, if you read the sidebar it states it’s for discussion for digital privacy, including abuse of power, which is what I and others are discussing with this topic.

              • Engywuck@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                “Private/secure” is in the title and has nothing to do with the political/social view of the CEO. Until abuse of power happens/is proven, there’s no point in spreading FUD, fear-mongering and manipulation. As if FF and Mozilla didn’t have their fair share of controversies as well…

                Don’t even bother replying, this is going to be my last comment in this thread (and probably in this sub, as I’m tired of discussion on “privacy-oriented” subs becoming paranoid every-fucking-time).

                Good luck.

                • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Until abuse of power happens/is proven, there’s no point in spreading FUD, fear-mongering and manipulation.

                  So, should we first wait for the abuse and harm to happen first, when nothing can be done by powerless individuals?

          • Engywuck@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Again, this has nothing to do with technical issue regarding privacy or security. People are just making excuses. Don’t use it if you prefer something else, but don’t mix non-relevant stuff in a semi-technical discussion.

            By the way, that’s funny. In a similar way, I hope that you or other virtue-signaling people, don’t buy stuff on Amazon (i.e., support them) as the are notoriously mistreating their warehouse workers. Yes, it’s unrelated. I’m just point out a blatant hypocrisy.

    • 133arc585@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Depends on what you call a scam. I am not sure it’s the right word, but duplicitous behavior and definite privacy violations (even if by negligence) are absolutely true.

      They have sent out direct mailers that basically equated to a customer list leak; also I’d take a peek at the wikipedia entry about their business model, which mentions some stuff that isn’t the most savory:

      … Brave earns revenue from ads by taking a 15% cut of publisher ads and a 30% cut of user ads. User ads are notification-style pop-ups, while publisher ads are viewed on or in association with publisher content.

      On 6 June 2020, a Twitter user pointed out that Brave inserts affiliate referral codes when users navigate to Binance

      In regards to the mailers, they messed up and passed blame,

      In this process, our EDDM vendor made a significant mistake by not excluding names, but instead including names before addresses, resulting in the distribution of personalized mailers.

      With regards to the CEO, he made a donation to an anti-LGBT cause when he was CEO of Mozilla in 2008. He lost his job at Mozilla due to his anti-LGBT stance.

      He also spreads COVID misinformation.

      • Voxel@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Tbh. Mozilla wasn’t better in the past and as long it doesn’t affect the product I don’t mind the political views of the owner (it’s still concerning). As long Brave can provide me better privacy and security for my daily browsing I will continue using and recommending it. And listening to Wikipedia he stepped back, by himself.

      • Unlucky_Boot3467@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        Really loving how a CEO’s political views somehow fucking matter the security of a browser lmao. God I fucking hate this generation

        • spiritedaway@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s just a conversation dude, you can make your point without the need for Reddit style aggression.

          The views of those CEO can in some instances be important, those in charge shape the direction of the company and ultimately the product. Look at Twitter for example, once a place of relative free speech, but now controlled by a CEO who bans users he personally doesn’t like, demotes content that doesn’t fit his beliefs, and prevents linking to other services like Mastodon/Lemmy/Instagram.

          I’m not claiming it would, but whose to say similar censorship wouldn’t happen with Brave? The CEO has already injected content into webpages and redirected links for monetisation purposes, what if more nefarious actions were taken for content he doesn’t agree with?