• LoafyLemon@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Every few months there’s something new coming up about that browser. Here’s a non-exhaustive list of shady stuff:

    • Manipulating search results to show ads
    • Releasing Pay-to-surf with extensive tracking
    • Blocking ads from companies only when they haven’t paid them not to
    • Gathering data about other installed browsers
    • Crypto scam (yes, it was a scam, they stopped doing payouts)
    • Profiling user habits and selling that data to advertisers
    • Buying reviews

    Of course, there’s more.

    • AndrewZabar@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I haven’t used Brave for many years because I knew about all their shady shit years ago. Everyone knew if they bothered to just read about it.

  • Varyag@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Who’da thunk a browser made around crypto shit would do such a thing. I only use this browser on my phone because of the ad blocking to open links people send me, I should just get something else. Does mobile Firefox get proper ad blocking?

    • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Mozilla has also been shoehorning AI into places it doesn’t belong, namely the Mozilla Developer Network documentation. Seems like no place is safe…

      • okbin@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        there are firefox forks that might be safer? tor (overkill?), mullvad browser, and librewolf

        if you use macos, there’s also orion

        • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Firefox forks will fall behind web standards very quickly without Mozilla doing the heavy lifting. A browser isn’t useful unless the majority of websites work in it.

            • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Because Mozilla does the heavy lifting of implementing all those web platform features Google keeps pumping out. If that stops, it will not be long before you start seeing broken websites with “upgrade to Chrome” messages on them.

      • Solar Bear@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m not sure I agree. I literally can’t think of a better usage of AI than aiding development, particularly parsing documentation. If one thinks AI doesn’t belong there, then I have to assume you are just against it conceptually.

        • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I, and many others, are against using AI for this purpose because the AI is a compulsive liar. It makes up features that don’t exist, pretends that features don’t exist when they do, incorrectly describes how to use them, etc.

          Go read the thread yourself.

          Mozilla representatives have been consistently evasive and obtuse about the whole affair, which tells me that they have an ulterior motive, probably money, for pushing this useless nonsense through. It’s extremely alarming.

          And the consequences of Mozilla failing are dire. It will be the end of the open web, exactly as Microsoft once envisioned in the Halloween documents. You will be forced to choose between using an untrustworthy browser that spies on you and blasts you with ads, or being a social pariah.

          • Solar Bear@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m aware of the flaws. I don’t agree that means it shouldn’t exist. There’s certainly room for improvement, and I’m even open to the idea that it’s too early to roll it out.

            I’m not sure I understand the argument that this is somehow making them money. This is likely a huge money sink for them. I guess you could say they’re trying to court more investment, but I’d need more than just conjecture for that.

            • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I’m aware of the flaws. I don’t agree that means it shouldn’t exist. There’s certainly room for improvement, and I’m even open to the idea that it’s too early to roll it out.

              This betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of the technology on your part. Large language models do not understand anything. They have no concept of truth or falsehood. They are not intelligent. The only thing they do is predict text. They’re more complex and realistic versions of the classic ELIZA program, not real AI. They will never be capable of filling the role Mozilla has shoehorned them into.

              I’m not sure I understand the argument that this is somehow making them money.

              The behavior of the Mozilla representatives strongly implies it. I have no idea how they intend to make money with this, and they may or may not succeed, but people don’t generally act like this unless they think they can strike it rich by doing so (and don’t care about the harm they’ll cause in the process).