The article states nothing but misinformation, the first heading is literally about the author’s politics, unrelated to the browser. And the 2nd & 3rd indicate that he’s never installed brave in his life, he’s simply regurgitating other people’s hate.
Brave Browser has marketed itself as a privacy-preserving web browser and has gained attention from cryptocurrency enthusiasts.
The company behind Brave, founded by Brendan Eich, faced backlash due to Eich’s previous donation in support of California’s Proposition 8, which aimed to ban same-sex marriage.
Brave initially planned to replace ads with its own ad units and split revenue with publishers, but this idea was met with legal issues and criticism from both inside and outside the company.
Brave introduced Basic Attention Tokens (BAT) as a way to reward users for viewing ads and content, but the rewards are minimal and the value of BAT is volatile.
Brave has incorporated various cryptocurrency-related features, including a full crypto wallet, but many of its crypto partners have faced controversies and scandals.
Brave was involved in a privacy scandal in which affiliate codes were added to URLs typed into the address bar, allowing the company to collect revenue from user signups or purchases.
The article concludes that Brave is a flawed software project and should not be used, recommending Firefox or Vivaldi as privacy-focused alternatives.
Never started. What have they done now?
Nothing new. It’s just an overview of how shady and scammy the browser is. I still see a lot of people recommending it without knowing the backstory.
The article states nothing but misinformation, the first heading is literally about the author’s politics, unrelated to the browser. And the 2nd & 3rd indicate that he’s never installed brave in his life, he’s simply regurgitating other people’s hate.
How is the article inaccurate? Do you suggest that we should support a company regardless of agreement with their politics? Why?
AI summary: