Why was appointing Eich as CEO so controversial? It's because he donated $1,000 in support of California's Proposition 8 in 2008, which was a proposed amendment to California's state constitution to ban same-sex marriage.
I want to try a thought experiment. Imagine that you observe this comment in reaction to the above:
I just don’t get why the author is so pissed about their political contributions. Guess what, people who are involved in big business are usually right-wing and support right-wing organizations. Shocking. Who could have known. I don’t even want to imagine how the author comes to the conclusion that this is some big conspiracy but I think we all know what political spectrum that guy belongs to.
What I just wrote is a mirror-image version of the top rated comment on that article from a few days ago about the Mozilla foundation funding left-wing organizations. Do you agree with one of those statements and not the other? If so, why?
It is one-sided to say that someone involved in Brave should only be "allowed" to do so if he doesn't support anything conservative. Just as would be one-sided and wrong to say that Mozilla shouldn't be "allowed" to support left-wing organizations. Flipping it around, and looking at the reaction when it's the other way around, is an easy way to analyze your own internal reactions on it.
(Generally, I'm in agreement with the idea that you shouldn't use Brave because of all these other shady things; just this one part jumped out at me as one thing that's not like the others.)
Very good observation. The issue being, the way I see it,
he supported a generally accepted hateful conservative rhetoric. Most left wing organizations do not promote hateful rhetorics.
Yeah, it's one-sided. Prop 8 was stupid and CA rightfully rejected that shit later.
It's good to be one-sided against stupid shit that is a crime against humanity. Gay marriage is now legal federally. Same as interracial marriage. Nazis got beat the fuck up in WW2. Slavery is over. Deal with it.
You're not going to want to hear this, but this logic (i.e. "But MY side is the RIGHT one, so it's different") is exactly why the right wing thinks Trump shouldn't go to prison and it's okay when they cheat in elections.
I do agree with you that the left wing is the right side of history. That doesn't mean someone who's on the other side suddenly shouldn't be an executive of anything.
Supporting politicians you like and supporting basic human rights being taken away on the basis of completely arbitrary factors outside one's control are two very different things.
You're not going to want to hear this, but this logic (i.e. "But MY side is the RIGHT one, so it's different") is exactly why the right wing thinks Trump shouldn't go to prison and it's okay when they cheat in elections.
I do agree with you that the left wing is the right side of history. That doesn't mean someone who's on the other side suddenly shouldn't be an executive of anything.
It's not even about sides. There is no left wing party in the USA - the Democrats are a right wing party. The problem with the GOP is not that they are right wing, it's that they are extremists. A lot of their "policies" are not policies, they are crimes against humanity. 'People who are demographic X shouldn't have the basic human right of Y" is not an opinion, a policy or justifiable in any way.
And boycotting people as Eich is first and foremost an act of self-preservation.
Eich is, evidently, a hateful cunt who invests into destroying the human rights of random people. By exposing your e-mail, bank accounts, your communications and your identity to him (by using his browser), you are inviting him to violate your rights as well.
By using Brave's shit, you giwe Eich money. Thot same money he later uses to fund the atrocities he and his peers commit. Thus, by using Brave's shit, you are not only complacent in these crimes, but actively participating.
Less relevant, but still, by using a Chromium-based browser, you help inflate Google's oppressive market share in the browser space, letting them push shit like Mv3 or WEI. If Brave actually cared about making a private and secure browser and fighting Google's monopoly, they'd base off Gecko or, better yet, build their own engine.
The fact that you would consider your counterfactual a mirror image is itself problematic.
In the case of the Foundation, it supports exactly what it purports to support. They’re like the EFF and other civil rights organizations. If you consider the EFF left wing, I think that says a bit more about where you stand.
The original article was outrage-bate blog spam, with random Capitalized Words and the prolific use of “scare quotes.” It doesn’t even say anything. No charges of misinformation. No citation of law. Just “They have a Billion Dollars!!” kinds of sentences.
On the other hand, the CEO of a company - particularly a small company - lends his personality to the company. It often makes sense to co-identify them, given that the CEO has an incredible amount of influence.
So if you are saying that libertarian software project : libertarian institutions :: conservative ideas : homophobic legislation, I guess you’re just really endorsing the position of judging the company by the politicians and politics it supports. If you see prop 8 as being as fundamental to the conservative position as internet freedom is to an organization specifically dedicated to preserving internet freedom, all I can say is that I hope more people start to see it that way.
The two sides are not morally equal. Prop 8 was an awful, bigoted stain on California's history and he was unrepentant. I am glad he no longer is at Firefox. And Brave is a sketchy company that makes clear it was a good decision to give him the boot. I can support companies with moral stances I agree with and not support companies that do bad things.
I used Brave for a few years but recently switched to LibreFox. I really enjoyed Brave as a browser but couldn't handle all the sketchy shit that seems to keep coming up
The only reason I haven't switched to Firefox from Chrome fully is because for some reason Firefox for Android still doesn't have tabs for large screen devices. Mozilla says it's not a priority. 🤷
If you think the things brave has done are bad, go read through the list of things microsoft has done. You really don't want them to ever have a browser again, and certainly don't want to personally use it.
It was because of 'security', which was never explained. And it doesn't make much sense when other browsers can and do alow it. I'll see if I can dig up some historical links if I remember tomorrow.
Last time I checked,there was still no acknowledgement of it and appeared to be no intention of ever addressing it. The fact that they're now telling people to run a webserver suggests that nothing has changed ☹️
White list firewall. Because this is the real reason everyone has a right to ad block. Ads are hidden links to other websites. It's like walking through a gauntlet of pick pockets bribing the credit card company just to make it to the checkout at your local grocery store, or some asshole you invite into your home that goes to the bathroom, opens a window, and lets a dozen random people in your home if they pay a dollar for the access. The entire system is based on stalking people. It is criminal.
It changes many default Firefox preferences in about:config to be as private as possible. The main selling point is resist fingerprinting (RFP). I highly suggest reading the wiki. It can break some websites, but you can configure it to fit your needs.
I think I've made this comment before, but I really wish people would learn more about technologies like pihole. Get the ad once, get the hyperlink, add it to blacklist.
Ironically, I wish people including yourself knew more about shit like how PiHole/RaspPi simply leverage Unbound, which is not unique to only Pi software or Pi devices. You can do this same thing on any OS that has it installed.
GUI and cli, however, has no where near the options pihole or adguardhome have; my limited experience is with it in opnsense, so by far isn't complete but I disable it and forward everything to adguardhome.
That's a very rare case, and you can whitelist a domain using the pihole's web interface. It may require extra two clicks, but I had to do that maybe twice in the last year.
I run a pihole as well, but it is a very rudimentary tool compared to browser based adblockers like uBlock origin. It can only block DNS queries, and can't for example block ads if they are served from the same domain as the main site (i.e. youtube) or block specific elements on a page or block a specific script from running.
can’t for example block ads if they are served from the same domain as the main site (i.e. youtube) or block specific elements on a page or block a specific script from running.
Definitely not. Gun ownership should be abolished like slavery was. A knife has good use for cutting and cooking, but a gun, especially in private hands, has absolutely no reason to exist.
Plus it's kind of impossible to understand how you see police brutality and the way they responded to the George Floyd protests and think, "Yeah, these guys should be trusted with the only guns in existence."
Like have you already forgotten about Uvalde? If the cops hadn't been there to cower behind their cars and stop people rescuing their kids then less kids would've died.
First: Is "every redneck yokel and his dumb brother is allowed to own an arsenal" in anyway better than a government monopoly in that regard?
Second: This would of course need properly selected and trained policemen, not those trigger-happy yokels that the US uses instead.
My position is from a country where "Police Brutality" is seen as an American or other third world country thing. We don't allow every random idiot to own a gun. We have properly trained police. We therefor also don't have issues like Uvalde and George Floyd. For an American, it is hard to draw a straight line between those factors, but in the rest of the civilized world, it is the standard.
So sorry for assuming you were talking about the US when you talked about school shootings.
I come from a country like that too, but if you think police brutality doesn't happen in your country then again: political bubble.
Go ahead, tell me what country you're from and I'll burst it for you.
I used to say the same thing about my country, Australia, where they've recently been imprisoning whistleblowers who expose clear government abuse. EDIT: They've also been doing racist colonial violence since day 0 and they have never stopped.
There is no such thing as a state that can be trusted with violence. They always use it to oppress.
You provided exactly zero reasoning for most of your statements and have now taken a condescending position. People like you are why we can't have nice things in the world.
I prefer basing my opinions on logic, arguments, and facts over feelings. Your inability to articulate a response to certain arguments shows why this is still a debate. Further, you're relying on the idea that something is crazy to you, therefore it should be to everybody, but that's not how it works. There's racist people that use this exact type of reasoning to support their racism.
E.G.
"Black people are less than white people"
logical counterpoint
logical counterpoint
"WTF do you need a reasoning that black people are less than white people"
If your position is really stronger, then it shouldn't be hard for you to make arguments in favor of it.
So you completely accept the state’s monopoly on violence
That's the whole point of the state. And no, you guys are not fighting the US army with its armored vehicles, rockets, bombs, drones, etc. with your guns.
Firefox auto-updates with the snap version, whereas it doesn't with most package manager versions. So if it updates while you're using it, it won't let you open new tabs without restarting it (Firefox, not the machine), which can interrupt your workflow. On other distros, that only happens when installing updates manually, which isn't an issue because you're aware of it.
This is second hand info though since I don't use Ubuntu, so YMMV.
Mentions UBlock seems.to be fast and safe, but that the API used lets extensions look at everything you do amd can dramatically affect browser speed. Implying that UBlock Origin is responsible for Chrome being such a memory Hog and that they, not Google, are the ones after your data.
Except the part where it didn't imply that at all?
That performance cost seems to be negligible in uBlock Origin and other popular ad blockers that have focused on optimization (uBO has an explainer wiki page), but there were probably other extensions not doing that well. It’s not hard to see a situation where multiple poorly-optimized extensions installed using the Web Request API could dramatically slow down Chrome, and the user would have no way of knowing the issue.
That performance cost seems to be negligible in uBlock Origin and other popular ad blockers that have focused on optimization [...], but there were probably other extensions not doing that well.
The article goes out of its way to not do what you're accusing it of. I don't understand how you've managed to read the article as having the opposite slant as what it actually does.
I don’t think that’s necessarily the case: Google knows as well as I do that a total crackdown would give governments like the European Union and United States more ammo for antitrust lawsuits.
They do not care, never have, never will. Cost of operation.
It would also be a motivator for more people to switch browsers, which would weaken Google’s browser monopoly.
Not enough even care that would make noticable difference in market share.
A lot of people were upset 23 years ago when Windows ME removed real mode DOS, too.
And they all stopped using it, right? Right?
The new Declarative Net Request API is still a downgrade in capability compared to the older API, but the feature gap has closed significantly.
Chrome now allows extensions to include 100 rule lists, with up to 50 lists active at once. There are also additional filtering options, including an option to have case-insensitive rules, which cuts down on duplicates in filter lists. The maximum number of filter rules now varies by use case — an extension can now have up to 30,000 dynamic rules (filters downloaded by the extension) if they are deemed as “safe” (block, allow, allowAllRequests or upgradeScheme), an additional 5,000 other types of dynamic requests, and more filters included in the extension package.
for context, EasyList is just one of the lists enabled by default in uBlock Origin and other ad blockers, and it has over 75,000 rules.
That seems like it's fine for general use, and those limits might go up again. EasyList and the other big lists can be consolidated to varying degrees with Chrome's rules format, and there's probably some dead rules in there. uBlock Origin on Firefox will definitely be more versatile moving forward, but every time I've used uBlock Origin Lite in Chrome it's almost the same experience.
If you like this article, please consider following the site on Mastodon/Fedi, email, or RSS. It helps me get information like this out to a wider audience :)
They only have 40 posts so I gave them a follow. It's when accounts have like 10k posts and an account is less than a year old that I won't follow them, I don't need that noise.
uBlock Origin for Chrome has over 34 million installations according to the Chrome Web Store
Oh wow, that is very surprising to me. I somehow expected a billion of installations. Especially when I saw the screenshots without it in the article, how can anyone browse the web without it?
There are other ad block options. And there is Firefox. I use Vivaldi browser, it has a built-in ad blocker, just like many other browsers. I just wish Vivaldi would be Firefox based.
Adblock users are still a statistical minority of web users. Most people don’t care (as evidenced by Netflix’s ad tier gaining subscribers every quarter) or don’t know those extensions exist.
I'm a bit clueless when it comes to that but certainly interested. Could you maybe go into more detail as to which hardware and software is needed to set that up?
So the main software is here https://pi-hole.net/ (and they have good documentation, so I'm not going to repeat the nitty-gritty here)
You obviously need something to run it on, which could be some existing computer that's always on, but (as the name might suggest) a lot of people use some form of Raspberry Pi (or similar) single-board computer.
Pihole will run on basically anything, so you can get an ancient pi and it will still run fine
I mean it's just a browser. Bit of fiddling with the saved password and your go to go again to never look back. If they value their users they will improve again like Firefox did in the background over years.
I only hope a good search engine will appear again. I don't like the alternatives.
Great explainer about the changes, and reasons why it actually behooves Google to continue to allow ad blockers in some form. All that said...this still reaffirms my decision to go Firefox, always and forever, to get the most complete privacy options.
Everything said in that article makes me very happy to have switched to Firefox.
Google can dress this up all they want, but a happy byproduct of this (for them) is that they can now purposefully ignore rules/filtering for their own sites, such as youtube, since it puts the real control of such filtering with the browser (and the company who created it) instead of the extension. Yes there is a trust concern with extensions. And yes, there is a performance hit with extensions vetting each network call. But that’s the price we, as the user, should continue to have the power to choose to pay, but Google is forcing us to go their way.
If you like this article, please consider following the site on Mastodon/Fedi, email, or RSS. It helps me get information like this out to a wider audience :)
spacebar.news
Active