this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2023
1061 points (85.1% liked)

Firefox

17880 readers
107 users here now

A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 145 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

TL;DR: The article claims that the Brave web browser is bad and should not be used.

The author points out that Brendan Eich, the creator of JavaScript, co-founder (and ex-CEO) of Mozilla, and founder of Brave, donated 1,000 USD in support of a proposition to ban same-sex marriage. Along with making the claim that Brave's goal is not to act as an ad-blocker, but instead to build and grow their own advertisement network, and he also believes that the network has several flaws:

  • Brave Ads paysout in a form of cryptocurrency, called BAT (πŸ¦‡).
  • As BAT is a cryptocurrency there is high volatility.
  • BAT can not be redeemed for fiat ("actual") money directly from within the Brave Wallet.
  • The author also believes that "it [the network] has largely failed" but that it "has generated a lot of revenue for Brave," via the ICO (Initial Coin Offering; IPO for crypto).

In addition to these key points the author also:

  • Claims that Brave prompted FTX, before the scandal.
  • Cites the The Brave Marketer Podcast where ex-CMO of Crypto.com Steven Kalifowitz shares an ambitious goal of being a "'brand like Coke and Netflix.'" The author then mentions that:
    • In 2023 there was a report from The Financial Times that Crypto.com traded against their customers.
    • In 2022 the company try to hide the severity of its layoffs.
  • Mentions Brave's integration with Gemini, and how the crypto exchange is under investigation for lying about FDIC insurance.
  • Mentions a partnership with the the 3XP Web3 Gaming Expo where they sponsored the Esports Arena and rewarded contestants with the BAT token.
  • Claims that Brave added affiliate/referral codes to URLs, such as "binance.us."

Finally, the author lists Firefox and Vivaldi as alternatives to Brave, and ends the article with "Brave Browser is irredeemable, and you should not use it under any circumstances."

I am human, please let me know if I've made a mistake.

Edit: Fixed bat emoji and typo.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The author points out that Brendan Eich, the creator of JavaScript, co-founder (and ex-CEO) of Mozilla, and founder of Brave, donated 1,000 USD in support of a proposition to ban same-sex marriage.

My impression was Brave got started after he got hoofed out of Mozilla or left on his own accord after the backlash for showing his ass to be a homophobe. Redditor types were of course very angry about this blatant disregard for frozen peaches and jumped onto his new venture in droves

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

afaik he was pushed out of mozilla over the same 1k dono

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago (2 children)

As BAT is a cryptocurrency there is high volatilability (I don’t know if I spelled that right :/ ).

Volatility :-)

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago (2 children)

But Volatilability sounds cool

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

Very volatibable word

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

Thank you, I fixed it!

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

These guys tried to get a previous employer of mine to advertise with them. It works great if your entire audience is tech bros. Ours was not.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

If he's bad, shouldn't everything he touches be bad? Why web site that uses JavaScript should be just as bad. Any browser based on Mozilla should be bad. Why is it just Brave that's bad for what he did in 2008?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

As I understand it, the argument isn't so much "if you use a thing made by a bad person, you are a bad person by association" but rather that using a commercial product made by a bad person, who spends his money on bad causes, is directly helping him spend more money on said bad causes. Since he has never apologized or shown any indication that he has become a better person, not wanting to monetarily support him is a valid reason to not use his product.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

It's really hard for the creator of Javascript to make money off of javascript, and it's unlikely he has any financial interest in the Mozilla corporation anymore since they're a nonprofit and thus don't have share holders. However, he directly profits off of Brave.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Because it is cool thing to cancel everything in 2023.