Brave have had a history of controversy since their inception. Every time something happens, the CEO went on a marketing campaign across social media and drummed up enough new users to drown it out. However the attitude of the business is clear: it would take a very small sack of money for Brave to sell out its users.
If you're going to use a Chromium web browser, there are non-commercial open source projects that don't have a history of shady shit. However Firefox forks are better.
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.
Not a single solid reason given in this unhinged rent except a mention of that affiliate link fiasco, which even they themselves agree was a major fuckup.
All BAT and crypto stuff are completely opt-in and it barely takes a few clicks to set the browser to never let you see that side of it again. As for Brendan's political affiliations, most users couldn't care less. He might as well be a furry flat-earther but if the product is good, it is good. Stop acting like you're sure all the things you use throughout the day aren't made by people with doubtful leanings.
I personally don't use Brave on desktop, Firefox is good enough; but it is the best option on Android currently since Bromite is almost always a Chromium version behind whatever is current.
Edit: Just learnt that I was wrong in my perception of what "furry" meant. Reading the replies objecting to that reference made me dig a bit deeper and realise that it's just a type of fandom, and not some sex-deviant cult that pop media made me believe.
Sorry for the wrong example.
To anyone reading this article, only the first quarter of it is about the beliefs and political stance of the developers. The rest of the article after that goes into more technical reasons.
I love Brave, use it daily, and this article didn't convince me at all. Vaguely motioning at the founder's ancient political donations or the optional crypto features, doesn't make a strong case.
Now it makes sense why some of the Fox News-parroting, right wing people I know use Brave. I had no idea about what the author mentioned about the browser, I just know it is based on Chromium which I will not use. Thus, I am on Firefox. And for many reasons, including those the author laid out, I'm happy I chose wisely.
Don't need to tell me twice. I've distrusted Brave since I saw their advertisement for it. It just feels like they sell the browser in same mood as pyramid schemers does their products.
But its just my gut feeling. Got no good reason why people should avoid the browser. And because the CEO is an ass isn't a good enough reason for most people.
I don't use Brave, won't use Brave, and have my reasons for it.
Brave is Chromium based; a project which is slave to the whim of Google.
Brave integrates an unnecessary cryptocurrency.
I hate shitcoins
I don't trust small crypto projects, and I doubly do not want this to be integrated into my browser. It's a good way to lose your stable crypto-holdings if you have them. (I don't; but I've seen lots of anecdotes about catching malware that subsequently stole their crypto wallets, including any BAT tokens they owned)
Brave does not block ads! It does not 'enhance' your privacy. It just absorbs some ads, replaces some, and blatantly lets first-party advertisements through the filter. That's not ad-blocking
Brave does not protect your privacy. As per my previous point; it does not block ads, it injects it's own right into browser chrome! That's worse than plain Chrome! Your privacy is automatically violated when you watch/view even a single ad.
Brave does not have many benefits above "Ungoogled Chromium" or other competing projects. It just doesn't. Unless you like marketing fluff.
Brave is NOT BETTER THAN Firefox. It's worse; because it's Chromium; which is enslaved to Google whims. Don't believe me? Try to contribute something to Chromium that goes contrary to Google's stated goals and watch how fast you get shot down.
But sometimes...
Yes, Sometimes a programmer does succeed. But only sometimes; and this is usually because they have the clout, coding skills, chops and public reach to embarrass the fuck out of the Google PMs. This will never be you, unless you put an extraordinary amount of effort into becoming a very well known and respected contributor in the OSS space. If you already are a respected contributor in the OSS space, Congrats! You're still likely to be forced to fight a long and protracted battle against the Google nerds to get "Google-Hostile" code changes approved.
I like the idea of a system where users get a share of the revenue from the ad networks, which then can be used to support other content creators or businesses online. I think that if most of the web worked like this, we wouldn't have people being treated as eyeballs and we would still have the power to vote with our wallets to choose who is actually worth of our attention. Is there any other browser or company doing anything like that?
People keep talking about Firefox as if it's a paragon of virtue, but casually forget that they are only alive because they are completely dependent on Google to survive and are nothing more than "controlled opposition" nowadays. They also have done a ton user-hostile shit like sponsored links in the frontpage and completely crippled pocket, and let's not forget that current Mozilla execs are raking in millions while laying off people and disbanding key projects.
The crypto part keeps called a scam, but their system has been working perfectly fine and it has always been liquid enough for me at the exchanges. Is their BAT token needed? Certainly not, and I would be fine if the 3-8 euros worth of BAT I receive every month (depending on my mobile usage and on their success as an network) were sent to me directly via SEPA. But can anyone realistically say that there is any efficient worldwide way to distribute payouts? For every dollar you sent to someone via Patreon (or Ko-Fi, or any alternative), how much do they get to keep? With the Brave creators program, all of the $15/month that I send to the different people get to them.
All in all, I will stop using Brave in a heartbeat if there is anyone else providing any alternative with a slight chance to fight Surveillance Capitalism. None of the Chromium or Mozilla forks are doing that.
Here’s my current problem: I use Firefox mainly, but I need a chromium browser for work occasionally. I feel like brave is better than chrome proper right? But the CEO is also terrible. Is there something I can use that’s chromium based (occasional usage) that is at least “the least bad” option?
I use brave because it doesn't apply chrome or edge group policies. If someone can tell me a better chromium based Browser (or firefox based) that does this, I'm all ears...
I use Brave as a secondary browser mostly for government websites because sometimes my firefox privacy settings breaks them and since many of them are poorly designed a technical issue over your account may result in hours on the phone to resolve.
I'm personally like to stop using Brave, and I will, however while LibreWolf will be what I'll switch to on desktop, I'm not sure what I would want to switch to on my Android phone. I see that LibreWolf doesn't have an Android version (and potentially never will; fine, developers will do whatever they want). I've heard about IceRaven, however, I'm not sure how good it is. Also would like an actually privacy focused search engine, but I think LibreWolf might have a good list on that front.
(Note: please do suggest in replies, not sure I made that apparent)
This is madness. How does this keep getting upvoted when the article has nothing to do with the actual code integrity and functionality of this browser.
At least it's open source, if there is something shady point it out in the code.
@whou wish someone else would build an easy to set up and use chromium browser for windows that blocks telemetry and isn't run by an asshole... something i could get friends and family to use.