search

privacytools / privacytools.io

🛡🛠 You are being watched. Protect your privacy against global mass surveillance.
https://www.privacyguides.org
Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal
3.12k stars 384 forks source link

Remove Brave #161

Closed ghost closed 5 years ago

ghost commented 7 years ago

Most people want Brave removed and only a few wanted to add it, should we remove it?

KonoromiHimaries commented 5 years ago

I would say Pale Moon over Waterfox, actually.

@dm17 i recommend Basilisk Browser instead Pale Moon https://github.com/MoonchildProductions/UXP

KonoromiHimaries commented 5 years ago

Link me to the best most well-researched most logically-reasoned three places that show this. Or how about, even just one link for starters. Something you haven't already linked to please,

https://github.com/ghacksuserjs/ghacks-user.js/

five-c-d commented 5 years ago

Okay? That's mentioned in the listings. As something that advanced users might want to do, when installing firefox. How is that relevant to removing BraveBrowser from the top3, and replacing it with "other thing"?

dm17 commented 5 years ago

As for whether controlled opposition exists, sure... but you are asserting, in your conspiracy theory, that the core team of privacyToolsIO, is the controlled opposition, aka evil people out to hoodwink the world. Which is complete bollocks.

No, I'm asserting they're acting like it, not that they are. Acting like it is ignoring so many threads & evidence to the contrary over the years while they present themselves as subject-matter experts. That's a mismatch.

will not be burned by security incidents

No evidence that Pale Moon or Waterfox users were burned by security incidents.

Or how about, even just one link for starters

https://spyware.neocities.org/articles/firefox.html

You can call it "political," but that doesn't discredit it at all - stuff like this matters: https://www.activistpost.com/2017/08/mozilla-joins-george-soross-efforts-launching-strike-fake-news.html (lots of other references for this if this one irks you for some reason)

Novice users should have to do this? https://www.askvg.com/tip-disable-telemetry-and-data-collection-in-mozilla-firefox-quantum/ More explanation why they'd want to: https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/9jvxxe/what_is_wrong_with_browser_telemetry/ If a novice ends up searching for how to turn it off, then they'll likely find this at the top: https://support.mozilla.org/gl/questions/1197144 Doesn't seem exactly straightforward for a novice or "target audience."

five-c-d commented 5 years ago

Okay, we're getting closer. Now, if we can shift gears back to BraveBrowser, and keep the same approach, we might get somewhere.

You can call it "political," but that doesn't discredit it at all - stuff like this matters

Never said it didn't matter. Just said, it is not something that matters with respect to helping everyday endusers get educated about what tools will help them protect themselves from global mass-surveillance entities.

dm17 commented 5 years ago

Okay, we're getting closer. Now, if we can shift gears back to BraveBrowser, and keep the same approach, we might get somewhere.

You can call it "political," but that doesn't discredit it at all - stuff like this matters

Never said it didn't matter. Just said, it is not something that matters with respect to helping everyday endusers get educated about what tools will help them protect themselves from global mass-surveillance entities.

What about Brave? This thread is already closed, so I don't see how this is not a waste of time. Brave was launched by the very intelligent Eich, who did a scam of donating a minute $1K against gay marriage while being obviously gay himself. Not sure why so many fell for this silly plot to get him his own browser wherein the ad revenue stream is effectively usurped. Why isn't it obvious to you that Brave has shifted the incentive from the advertisers to itself for collecting data and targeting users? This is self evident in terms of the Brave-ad model.

five-c-d commented 5 years ago

I don't see how this is not a waste of time

You keep saying that word.

To me, about 70% of what we're doing here is trying to regain some friendliness so that it is not such a pain when we discuss in future threads. I expect this is not the last time we will discuss browsers.

But I also think we are not wasting time, discussing whether BraveBrowser belongs, if we are documenting actual facts rather than just bickering. That an issue is "closed" has almost zero bearing on anything; that is not some kind of final determination. Issues can always be reopened.

Brave has shifted the incentive from the advertisers to itself for collecting data and targeting users?

By comparison to firefox? By comparison to ungoogledChromium? By comparison to GoogleChromeRunningOnWindowsTen?

BraveBrowser has a specific bunch of claims on data-collection. Which you've read, but found laughable (yet did not comment on why their reasoning is incorrect). Here == https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/issues/161#issuecomment-296416663

To me, this is a place where BraveBrowser is not a good as MozillaFoundation and TorFoundation ...but I have no illusions about Foundations always being superior, there are a lot of ways that can go wrong (such as spending money and headcount on political things rather than on improving the browser-codebase). Firefox has a "business model" even if they are technically a non-profit, which is why they have EME built in, and why they have google as the default search engine, and so on. BraveBrowser does most of the same things, and intends to monetize the advertising end somewhat in a similar fashion to the way that Google-of-1998 wanted to operate: algorithmically, not putting a thumb on the scale. Sure, things might go bad on BraveBrowser's parent-entity, the same way GoogleSearch's parent-entity gradually (but increasingly quickly) lost their way on a large number of issues. Sure it would be better if the adblocker in braveBrowser was not morphing into an adRevenueTransfer type of thing.

But this is not about "what is the most private X" this is about, what are the alternatives that the everyday readership might be able to cope with? Is Chrome better for their privacy, than BraveBrowser? Definitely not, and it isn't even close. Is ungoogledChromium better for their privacy than BraveBrowser? Maybe... but it strongly depends on how tech-savvy the enduser in question is, right? Teamsize very small, longetivity uncertain, patch-cadence not as speedy, etc. Will there still be a BraveBrowser in 2022, and will it still be a decent amount of privacy for an everyday enduser, without much hassle/risk, between now and then? Yes, probably 70% chance. Will there still be an UngoogledChromium in 2022, and will it still be a decent amount of privacy for an everyday enduser, without much hassle/risk, between now and then? Maybe, but the chances are considerably worse, because of small teamsize, slower patch-cadence, uncertain trademark risks, etc. I also think the privacy-differential between BraveBrowser-with-some-tweaks, and UngoogledChromium-with-some-tweaks, is pretty tiny compared to the difference between TorBrowser and BraveBrowser, for instance.

dm17 commented 5 years ago

There will obviously need to be prioritization between "how long will the browser exist" and "how much does the browser reduce privacy." PTIO implies the prior is much less important than the latter - doesn't it?

five-c-d commented 5 years ago

It is a hard question to answer. It depends on whether you think fighting global mass-surveillance-entities, is a game which can be won. To me it is more like an ongoing struggle, and therefore, I don't want something that might disappear a couple years later. Waterfox seems to pass that test, albeit with some risk because of the centrality of the key developer on the project. PaleMoon/Basilisk/etc, definitely not. UngoogledChromium, probably not but a bit tougher of a call. BraveBrowser, very likely survives. TorBrowser, almost certainly survives.

It always helps my thinking when I split into everyday-endusers versus advanced endusers willing to go the extra mile though: firefox+ghacks is only for advanced users... in which case, they don't need waterfox. TorBrowser with noscript is for advanced users, and I would say is flat out better than firefox+ghacks, but it depends on if anonymity is more valuable than adblocking to the advanced enduser in question. But when I think about normal endusers, ghacks is out of the question, and chromium-based-engine more critical, and longetivity/stability of the software FAR more important. Same with patch-cadence, it is not as critical for advanced endusers that know that they are doing, as it is for mainstream folks.

ghost commented 5 years ago

It's not the best option, but it's the best chrome-a-like option nowadays, methinks.

How though? It's more fingerprintable than Chrome.

five-c-d commented 5 years ago

Privacy stuff:

Tossup stuff:

Usability stuff:

This is my couple-hours-of-peeking-around list. Should not be considered definitive. But I agree for the most part with the tooltip on the current https://privacyTools.io/browsers listing: "if you want a chromium-based browser then pick brave, though be aware is not as good as max'd-out-firefox"

More to the point of this thread though, I don't think that UngoogledChromium is a suitable replacement in the top3 -- not aimed at everyday endusers. No opinion on #973 which is IridiumBrowser ... never heard of it. And by default, any browser not well-documented enough to make this list, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_web_browsers , should not be in the WorthMentioning on privacyToolsIO -- let alone the top3. The pickings are slim for libre-licensed Blink browsers; there are some webkit-ones like GnomeWeb-fka-Epiphany and KdeFalkon-fka-Qupzilla from the firefox-is-too-bloated factions in linux-land, but that is it.

Thus, like I say, my analysis is that Brave is the best chrome-a-like at the moment. It has pretty sane settings for normal everyday endusers, out of the box giving them better privacy than they have with chrome+windows10+bareIP+gmail ... if they switch to brave+qubes+mullvad+tutanota that is a significant upgrade in privacy. The won't likely run screaming back to their bad old ways, either. It works on all their devices they use now, with all their websites they use now, minimal hassles for a modicum of privacy.

Mikaela commented 5 years ago

I propose locking this old thread

five-c-d commented 5 years ago

locking this

Or you could, just ask that we please open a new thread, if there is anything left to say :-)

BraveBrowser is in the listings, if somebody has new information though why it ought to be demoted to WorthMentioning (info that hasn't already been discussed upthread here), should they open a new thread rather than reviving a closed older issue? Actual question, since I don't know what privacyToolsIO core team prefers in such a situation.

Mikaela commented 5 years ago

should they open a new thread rather than reviving a closed older issue? Actual question, since I don't know what privacyToolsIO core team prefers in such a situation.

I can only say that personally I would prefer a new issue rather than dozens of very long comments after issue is closed and I didn't see anything new appearing in those comments (or it was lost to their length). And now that this issue was actually locked, new issue would be preferable if there are new very heavy arguments or if there is more to say I think our forums would be even more preferably place.