• danhab99@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

    Besides this I cannot find another good reason not to use brave. Nobody point to a specific line of code that ruins privacy, not enough reasons.

    • heird@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      So you’ve read all the way up to that line and closed the article didn’t you ?

      • danhab99@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        There were 3 points:

        1. CEO is a dick: not enough of a reason

        2. Swapping ads: I have ads disabled anyways so what do I care. If I did care I wouldn’t block ads in the first place

        3.1. Promoting/friendships with crypto: ¯_(ツ)_/¯

        3.2. Privacy leak: it happens ¯_(ツ)_/¯

        3.3. Partnering with weird people: ¯_(ツ)_/¯

        3.4. IS AN ADVERTISING PLATFORM: ¯_(ツ)_/¯

    • Fish [Indiana]@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because Firefox is better.

      I don’t care what the CEO of a corporation is doing because most of them are conservative pieces of shit.

    • loutr@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      They block the website’s own ads, but inject their own instead. So the user still gets ads, but the profits go to Brave. I know that if the site’s owner is aware of that and goes through the process of registering with Brave they get a share of the profits, but this should really be opt-in. As it is, the whole scheme is shady as fuck.