I think you've missed the point entirely.

The point is that if everyone is using a single browser (not just Chrome/Chromium) then that actor gets disproportionate control over the internet. That's not good for anyone.

The specific gripe to Chromium is that _Google_ gets that say, and I think they are less trustworthy than other actors. I'm not asking anyone to trust Mozilla, but anyone suggesting Mozilla is less trustworthy than Google probably has a bridge to sell you. Remember that being Chromium still means that Brave is reliant upon Google. That leads to things like this[0,1]. Remember, the chromium source code is quite large, which is why things like [0] aren't so easily found. I also want to quote a quote from [0.1]

  This is interesting because it is a clear violation of the idea that browser vendors should not give preference to their websites over anyone elses.

That wouldn't be the first time people have found Google preferencing their browser and it is pretty known this happens with YouTube. Do we really want ANY company having such control over the internet? Do we really want Google to?

  > https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/user-activity
  > https://brave.com/transparency/

I'm not sure what you're trying to tell me here. That Brave has 64% of the number of users as Firefox? That Brave users really like Gemini, Coinbase, and Uphold? That Brave users are linking their Brave account to sites like Twitter, YouTube, Reddit, GitHub, Vimeo, and Twitch? That Brave Ads is tracking via the state level? Honestly I have more questions looking at the Brave "transparency" report, as it seems to have more information about users than Firefox...

If you're extra concerned about privacy and that's your reason for Brave, then may I suggest the Mullvad browser[2]? It is a fork of Firefox and they work with Tor to minimize tracking and fingerprinting. You get your security, privacy, and out from under the boot of Google.

[0] https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/issues/39660

[0.1] https://simonwillison.net/2024/Jul/9/hangout_servicesthunkjs...

[1] https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/google/google-to-kill-...

[2] https://mullvad.net/en/browser

▲ cactusplant7374 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

> I'm not sure what you're trying to tell me here.

I'm telling you that Firefox is going to be out of business soon because users favor ad blocking and blocking trackers. That is the trend. Firefox isn't growing anymore.

> Honestly I have more questions looking at the Brave "transparency" report, as it seems to have more information about users than Firefox...

Metrics can be transmitted without revealing the user. This is well known.

You can't suggest anything. I am done with this conversation.

▲ godelski 3 days ago | parent [-]

  > I'm telling you that Firefox is going to be out of business soon

Do you not think everyone saying Firefox is going to be out of business soon plays a role in this?

Regardless, I think you've ignored the root of my argument. I'm not trying to be a Firefox fanboy here but it's not like there's many options. The playing field is Chrome, Firefox, Safari. So only one of these is not "big tech".

  > Metrics can be transmitted without revealing the user. This is well known.

This is not well known and I think you've kinda "told on yourself" here. It is fairly well known in the privacy community that it is difficult to transmit user data without accidentally revealing other information. Here's a rather famous example[0,1]. I'd encourage you to read it and think carefully about how deanonymization might be possible after just reading a description of the datasets they deanonymize.

  > You can't suggest anything. I am done with this conversation.

If you wish to disengage then that is your choice. I am really trying to engage with you faithfully here. I'm not even really attacking Brave here, as my critique is over the Chromium ecosystem. I think if you look at my points again you can see how they would dramatically shift if Brave were based off of Gecko or Webkit. Honestly, I would be encouraging Brave usage were it under those umbrella. Or even better, if it had its own engine! Because my point is about monopolization.

[0] https://courses.csail.mit.edu/6.857/2018/project/Archie-Gers...

[1] https://arxiv.org/abs/cs/0610105

	▲	3 days ago \| parent [-]
		[deleted]

▲ Awesomedonut 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I'm a loyal Brave user and I feel my loyalties being swayed right now...

▲ godelski 3 days ago | parent [-]

I really do have a lot of respect for Brave and what they're trying to do, don't get me wrong. I think they are trying to address a meaningful problem and I do not think their solution is ill-conceived. I want to be clear about that.

But I do think it is a far bigger problem that we let a single actor have so much control over the fundamental structure of the internet. The problem isn't Brave so much as it is Chromium. But criticizing Brave (and Opera, Edge, etc) is a consequence of this.

You must ask yourself which is the bigger concern?

  - If you believe the major concern is an ad based ecosystem on the internet, then choose Brave. Especially if you believe it is unlikely that data leakage "features" implemented by Google are not likely to be captured by downstream projects.

  - If you believe the major concern is the number one ad based company who's entire market is based on the erosion of data privacy, then choose *literally anything* that is not Chromium based.

I think the latter is far more damning and honestly is an upstream issue to the concern Brave is trying to address. That's why I say I would encourage Brave to move away from Chromium. I actually would encourage them to develop their own engine since I think 3 choices is far from sufficient, but I'll take a Gecko or WebKit version as a major victory.

But this is my opinion. There is no right answer here. It has to come down to you.

If you agree with me then I'd encourage you to look at Firefox. It is good by default and with a few easy to find options you can have strong privacy and installing uBlock is a trivial task. If you are more privacy conscious, I encourage you to look at the Mullvad Browser, which is a Firefox fork with strong privacy defaults (maintained by the Tor and Mullvad teams). If you want a WebKit then check out Orion. I use this on both my iPhone and iPad (my Macbook and linux desktop are still Firefox), as Orion allows add-ons, so you can get ad blocking on your phone (when I was on Android I just used Firefox mobile which supports extensions). If you really want to encourage a 4th player I believe LadyBird is the popular kid on the block, but I honestly don't know too much and last I knew it was not quite to a stable state.

You don't have to agree with me, but I just want to make people aware that they do have a say in the future. There's no solution that doesn't have drawbacks, but I think on a techie form we should be able to have a more complex discussion and recognize that there are consequences to our choices. I think it is also important to recognize our choices multiply as we tend to be the ones who inform our non-techie peers. If you've ever installed software for a friend or family member, then realize how our choices multiply.

I'd also encourage you to promote more conversations among techie groups so we can hear the diverse set of opinions and concerns. It's a complex world and it is easy to miss something critical.

	▲	Awesomedonut 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Thanks for the detailed response! I got lots of food for thought