Comment on Brave browser blocks Windows feature that takes screenshots of everything you do on your PC

• RiQuY@lemmy.zip ⁨18⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Vivaldi is not open source, so for me it doesn’t count as a valid option.

  source
• CosmoNova@lemmy.world ⁨18⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  I‘m not even pro Brave but all that ad stuff is opt-in so it doesn‘t matter as long as you don‘t want to see ads. The arguments in this thread are starting to just loop in circles. Essentially using Brave is fine if you stick to the default. There‘s no sleazy stuff if you don‘t enable it and the CEO also doesn‘t make a dime from you if that‘s something you‘re concerned about. You could of course use a different chromium browser if you want but it‘s virtually the same thing.

  source
• sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works ⁨12⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  The only two there that bother me are the affiliate code thing (reminds me of the Honey drama) and installing extra software without consent. The first was a bad call and probably related with how their ad replacement stuff works (if anything, they should merely axe affiliate links; Firefox has that as an option), and this"solution" to the latter is pretty odd to me:

  reinstall the browser without admin rights

  Why would a browser need admin rights in the first place? I haven’t used Windows in well over a decade, so I don’t think that particular one would be an issue for me.

  The rest can be grouped as:

  • bugs - bug fixes generally don’t get prioritized until enough users complain; I would be very picky if I was an at risk person (activist or whatever) and would probably only use Tor browser
  • opt-in services
  • their marketing department

  My options for chromium browsers are:

  • something with ineffective ad blocking
  • Opera - I used it before it became a chromium browser, then it went downhill; not FOSS
  • Brave, with all its warts

  Since ad blocking and FOSS are my prerequisites, Brave basically wins by default.

  source