Why I recommend against Brave.

I'm almost certain they mean Reddit, but there are a lot of sites that aren't lemmy.dbzer0.com ... like lemm.ee and infosec.pub ... even some sites that aren't Lemmy instances like infosec.exchance or hachyderm.io.

Ublock Origin on Firefox can also play YT without ads...

Netflix Idk

ultimately they're still chromium and they still contribute to chrome's dominance.

I’m using brave lol. As a web developer I really need to test the work I do on a chromium based browser. Brave seems to be the best chromium based browser that still supposed ad blocking after the whole manifest v3 thing.

So let me pose this question to you. As someone that needs to use Chromium for work, what’s the best Chromium based browser that still supports ad blocking?

I get that Firefox is better. Heck Tor is even better. But realistically what is something I can actually use to get real work done?

Edit: ok I read the article. That is kinda bad. So please find me a chromium based alternative that I can use for work

I prefer either TorBrowser or Waterfox.

TorBrowser is, hands down, the best privacy browser out there but it's a bit slow because it operates like a decentralized VPN.

Waterfox browser is built on Mozilla's Gecko Engine just like firefox, but it isn't managed directly by Mozilla.

I know that I am overly paranoid but they do the weird user ID thing. It it opt in ask they said in their privacy policy.

    
When you install Vivaldi browser (“Vivaldi”), each installation profile is assigned a unique user ID that is stored on your device. Vivaldi will send a message using HTTPS directly to our servers located in Iceland every 24 hours containing this ID, version, cpu architecture, screen resolution and time since last message. 


  

    
We anonymize the IP address of Vivaldi users by removing the last octet of the IP address from your Vivaldi client then we store the resolved approximate location after using a local geoip lookup


  

At least to my knowledge brave do not do anything like this or maybe it is opt out by default. But honesty, I think from now, I will recommend both of them and just let people choose.

I hear Vivaldi is pretty good too

This is like saying "I see he was murderer until he got caught". No shit Sherlock some of those are past tense, because he got caught. If you want to go ahead and get exploited by a dickhead and his future pending scams go ahead.

"Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, and apparently I end up supporting the right wing all the time because I'm a dunce" is apparently how it works these days.

My understanding is that he had a very good working relationship w/ LGBTQ people in the org

Then why betray them? He has nothing to gain from funding such a campaign. There is no logical explanation and sure as hell no justification for it.

[...] so it really shouldn’t be anyone’s business.
\ How he votes or spends his personal money shouldn’t be relevant at all.

Oh, shut up. When this asshole funds a campaign that's actively fighting against the rights of millions of people, it absolutely is our damn fucking business.

Yeah, this is totally wrong, and they reversed course immediately.

It's bad enough that they even got the idea, let alone implement and actually ship it. Negative reactions shouldn't be the first deciding factor for reversing such decisions.

Brave should have worked with major websites to share revenue

Not just share, completely give up that revenue. Blocking ads is one thing, but to then also monetise other people's content should not allow Brave to earn even a single cent.
\ Your proposed solution sounds fine, though.

CEO is generally a right-wing dick.

Fair, but that should be a separate consideration from whether to use a given product.

Again, no. Maybe if there weren't any alternatives, but there are plenty.

You probably wouldn’t like the CEO of any company whose products you like,

That's probably true, however, Eich is a different story. Despite not gaining anything from it, neither for his companies nor for himself, he was willing to go out of his way to support a campaign in favour of discriminating millions of people, proactively. This doesn't just make me not like him, it makes me despise him.
\ Other CEO's typically at least keep quiet about politics, and make me dislike them mainly because of self-interest and their resulting business decisions, which can at least still be somewhat understandable.

And let me be clear that I'm not going to jump on people who use Brave for whatever reason. But under no circumstances will I defend those who downplay or justify Brave's, and especially Eich's, actions.

It’s tempting to see his donations to prop 8 as just his personal business, but like so many others you’re missing the fact that when your political beliefs are that other humans are actually subhuman and not equals, that goes beyond “personal politics.” Like outright naziism, there should be no safe place for a single ounce of this thinking. If you think it’s akin to liking shrimp more than chicken, you should deeply rethink your own “personal politics” because you’re casually glancing over the dehumanization of other people with a shrug.

Using software made by people who are politically aligned to sell out your country to russia is stupid stupid stupid and makes you an idiot, idiot, idiot.

Its not just politics when the politics are treason and electing a kgb asset. In a normal country and time it wouldn't be a big thing wether your browser maintainer wants feee public transit or not but in current time right wing means you literally voted to destroy the entire us in order to weaken nato for the russian invasion.

Holy copium batman, imagine excusing malware and checks notes literally aiding in denying rights to LGBTQ+ people.

Let me guess, you pretend to be centrist by day, and you wear

By night?

He didn't push for any company policy change, didn't advertise the donation, and didn't use company funds (used personal funds), so it really shouldn't be anyone's business.

It's everyone's business that cares about those people.

How he votes or spends his personal money shouldn't be relevant at all.

Using products from a company that benefits him is empowering him to do those things.

Brave should have worked with major websites to share revenue

That's a monumental task. They would have had to create their own ad network similar to Google and then somehow out-compete them to get their business without any of the information that Google has about users.

they weren't affiliated with the creator in any way.

Yes, that's the problem.

Yeah, this is totally wrong, and they reversed course immediately.

Only because they got caught, and they didn't refund any of the crypto they earned in the interim.

Mistakes happen.

When it comes to TOR, mistakes can be a matter of life and death. People only use TOR when they need complete anonymity.

they should have instead had a big warning when enabling this (e.g. many sites will break if you enable this).

They did indeed have exactly that. It said in the actual setting itself "Strict, may break sites".

You probably wouldn't like the CEO of any company whose products you like, so basing a decision of what product to use based on that is... dumb.

Not true. I like Our Lord Gaben. I like Meredith Whitaker. I like lots of CEOs.

Fair, but that should be a separate consideration from whether to use a given product. Using Brave doesn't make you a right-wing dick. You probably wouldn't like the CEO of any company whose products you like, so basing a decision of what product to use based on that is... dumb.

So it’s ok to buy a Tesla nowadays in your opinion? Genuinely curious.

We've already seen many other browsers stop development, like (...) LibreWolf, due to lack of resources.

Wait, what?

Two things:

1. When did Librewolf stop development?
2. On funding, they say in their FAQ:

If we don't need funding, we won't risk becoming dependent on it. And also: no donations means no expectations. This means that people working on LibreWolf are free to move on to other projects whenever they want.

Librewolf seems to very consciously not looking for "resources" from advertising or donations, or etc. The only resource they seem to want is motivation.

Which I think is one of the big issues with OSS projects - many are based around a very small number of people being motivated to work on something for free. And it dies if that stops.

I think that having expectations and funding to continue is important, like you say.

But I'm still confused about what you mean by the "resources" comment re: Librewolf.

No browser is sustainable without money because

• The infrastructure and labor costs money
• Google charges out the ass for Widevine which is a must for Netflix, Apple TV+, etc
• H.264 Licensing

My take: We can have an open source browser. No resources are required. We don't need ads to view content we make. There is no need for a megacorp or any entity taking money and controlling us.

Since when did LibreWolf stop development? First I heard of it, and concerning if accurate.

i found one called waterfox that is a nice little firefox fork ive been using. super chill.

I've been loving it.

Corrected the mistake, thanks.

I don't care about the personal life of the CEO, and I don't care about crypto, and everything else is a giant pile of nothing. Ads in the home screen? Like who gives a shit??

How is LibreWolf niche ?

"Other people are assholes too" is a terrible reason to support an asshole. Expect better.

Why should the crawler be blockable? That only brings disadvantages for a search engine. There is no sensible reason to allow Google but exclude other search engines.