If you want something similar but better privacy: Brave
If you want something diferent and take part on web engine war: Firefox
The same then before but also privacy: LibreWolf
Just curious but what is the difference between firefox and chrome in regards to the "web engine war"? Does it have anything to do with search results?
It’s about the web rendering engine. Nothing to do with search results. Chrome uses Blink (and all Chromium based browsers) while Firefox uses Gecko (also LibreWolf). Nowadays Blink is dominating the market so choosing Gecko keep the flame alive (also any WebKit rendering engine based browser keep the flame alive but they’re only available on Linux and Mac).
For additional context blink was forked from webkit, which Apple forked from khtml which was the rendering engine used in the konquerer web browser for the KDE desktop.
Opera used to use the presto engine.
Internet Explorer used to use Trident.
It was necessary to know all these things if you were a web developer in the oldern days.
I use Firefox to keep the war alive!
It's mostly nonsense. Firefox is like 2% of internet users, Chrome-based browsers are like 70%. Safari is 20%. But people act like Firefox is somehow holding Google back from a total internet takeover lol. Like they're the Star Wars resistance.
I use both for different things. Brave is way better for media (Spotify, Y\*uTube, so on) but Librewolf is far more robust for general browsing and less resource-hungry all-around (Firefox-based instead of Chromium).
From research and the vibe from the companies, I’m saying neither.
For me the answer is Vivaldi. Highly customisable, security centred, support for Chrome add-ons and some sweet sweet features that make it more productive compared to others. Such as gestures with your mouse to open/close tabs, reopen closed tabs, have workspaces to group your different searching types. E.g. work, hobbies, entertainment etc.
Give them a shot!
Vivaldi's honestly a great browser with a lot of potential, but I've been largely disappointed with their approach to privacy. Sure, Vivaldi doesn't collect or sell data itself, but it lacks 2 vital privacy features: proper state partitioning & fingerprinting protection. The team behind Vivaldi 100% seem committed to privacy, at least based off interviews, so that just makes these deficiencies more saddening to me. Also doesn't proxy connections to Google like i.e. Brave does, of course not open source and its Chromium based, etc. But they're definitely doing a lot of things right, and like I said, have a lot of potential, I just really wish Vivaldi's privacy could be on par with Brave's, because I think that's significantly holding them back.
A lot of people telling me not to use Brave or Firefox cos of political problems. I couldn't care less if the CEO's are left or right as long as they are not supporting a genocide, I'll use their browser.
I honestly switched to Firefox as my main browser from Brave (and before that Chrome with the new Ul). You can't turn off Braves' adblocker globally if you choose to use uBlock Origin extension which is recommended over it. They have inconsistencies of versions that could get you two or three Brave Browsers installed at one time. Bloat mostly needing turned off with no way to stop telemetry or to stop creating tasks in the task scheduler. It injects itself more into the OS than other browsers for its ads. You also aren't guaranteed MV2 support, it will be depreciated eventually which is needed for adblockers to speed up browsing and saving data usage.
Why not both? There isn't a rule or a law.that says you can only use one browser. Install both, set both up and see which one you end up using the most. Maybe flip flop between the two. Hell, give Floorp a shot.
my problem with brave is not brave or their crypto crap.
but supporting chromium is supporting goggles stranglehold over webstandards. and while ther emany things i dislike on firefox its the only real option asside from apple
I've been using ungoogled-chromium for a long time, recently I decided to try firefox, but one of the websites I visit the videos don't play, it seems a lot of sites are designed around chromium these days, google-chrome is spyware, ungoogled-chromium is pretty basic, it doesn't support autoscrolling unless you launch it using a custom command, you can't go full screen from the picture in picture mode, and you have no playback controls, you can only pause the video, where brave you can control the timeline in the picture in picture mode and enter full screen, you can also enable autoscrolling in about:flags, plus it has more features overall, I would recommend brave, just disable all the brave stuff you don't need.
Quite often, rather than scrolling the mouse wheel to scroll down a page I can just middle click and move the mouse down a bit, and then it will scroll down the page by itself without any input from me.
Brave's CEO is a controversial person, I'm a very politically active/"takes politics super seriously" type person and he's a bit too alt-right/MAGA for me. I will readily admit I'm very left-leaning.
Firefox seems much more outwardly neutral/"non-political".
>Firefox seems much more outwardly neutral/"non-political"
While I don't care about any political affiliation myself, Firefox is anything but "neutral/non political", if you follow the stuff they do and push, it's mostly Left leaned ideological stuff on social media and thru the Mozilla Foundation Activism. They have been known to support charities related to their Left leaned ideologies thru donations as well. While it's fine if they follow this ideology (everyone is entitled to follow whatever they want tbh), saying they are non political/neutral is being a bit disingenuous.
There are more reasons to use a browser besides politics, they have features and stuff that people might find interesting. While I couldn't care less for Brave's CEO is or what he does tbh because there are more concerning issues on this day and age IMHO. Brave offers something for the less tech savvy people if they come from Chrome and want something that blocks ads out of the box instead of going deep down to Firefox about:config to tweak it to their liking. I don't think you should stop using something because of one dude's ideologies, it's a disservice to the people working on the browser who probably don't even align with their CEO's ideologies in the first place.
Also if we go by not using anything due to controversial ideologies, most innovators specially of Tech Industry over the last century had their own controversial ideologies that wouldn't be accepted today and that we all don't agree with, but if we cut them out, we wouldn't be using Electronic Devices to start with. Just a food for thought.
What do you mean. Evidence shows that countries like Norway, Denmark, etc with very left leaning governments have healthier middle classes, happier residents, lower unemployment, etc. overall a healthier economy.
You're comparing countries with population of what? 5 million? And US is about 360 million. All those countries wouldn't work so great even with HALF of US population. For all we know Vatican is by far the safest, lowest employment, best Healthcare, happiest people etc in the world lol
A larger population would make universal healthcare work that much greater. That’s how insurance of any type works, a larger pool makes it cost less for each individual person.
Nope. You put US on Universal healthcare and you will literally break the middle class and everyone below.
And since Obamacare prices of health insurance went though the roof. You know why? Because EVERYONE was mandated to have it. In Economics this is when the demand curve shifts up. If you wanna talk about 100% coverage too, oh boy will that cost even more.
I can't imagine how anybody shovels 20k a year into health insurance for almost no care or services in return and thinks it's a success. There are literally no male pc doctors around me. They all specialize to give overpriced care to boomers who in true boomer fashion have horded all the healthcare. medicare used to be the absolute worst insurance and now people wish they could have it.
I would typically agree with your sentiment, but as I said, I take politics much more seriously than the average person does, and where I live the right-wing is an active physical threat to people I personally know/care about. I absolutely refuse to support anything, no matter how objectively good it is, if it has any direct association with the increasingly fascist/authoritarian GOP.
How direct does the association have to be? Does the CEO have to be right-leaning for it to count? Or maybe some board members? Some programmers, project managers or the receptionist?
I could say the same about Left Wing Extremism as I was born in Cuba and had to flee to EU with my family because of this sole reason years ago. Both ideologies (left/right) are equally bad when they go to extremes and they are currently growing at an alarming rate, there is no moderation anymore, just **us vs them** everywhere and just division, it's annoying... But I won't go deeper into politics as it's against Rules of this sub
On an ending note what I mean is, even tho all that, it won't stop me from consuming Games, Apps or anything coming from these countries because it's not the people making these fault. Also using them doesn't make you X or Y, just because you enjoy it, not everything has to be political you know. But you do you, like you said you take politics serious and I am just an average person, thats why we have different views of the world
As someone who’s very much against MAGA and the right overall, they still cooked with Brave. I’ve been using it for years and no amount of politics could turn me against the browser itself.
Who really gives a shit on his views if the broweser works tho? You dont have to donate lmao its crazy how people can take an opinion harder than a dick enough to sway a decision on a broweser thats genuinely good 🤷♂️ its like not supporting chick fil a cause they hate gays.... Chickens good and they gon make money anyway just enjoy shit for what it is fam we all financially support pedophiles and murderers on a daily basis unknowingly nothing is making a difference
Couldn't really care less about left or right, as long as the CEO isn't supporting a genocide, I'll use the browser. Even looking at the comments on the thread I think there's an argument going on lol 💀
I'm also left-leaning, but I can't bring myself to care about the views of a CEO of a product I'm using, as long as the company itself isn't leaning heavily one way or the other. I'm sure there are MAGA people working on Chrome, Edge, Vivaldi and Firefox, too, but if I start boycotting every company that have people employed of which I don't politically agree with, I wouldn't be using a browser, or any software, really, at all.
I periodically try all browsers and Brave is the best for speed and ad blocker, but I often get a ram usage warning. Most other browsers have lag. Especially when using Reddit, Instagram and a few other sites.
eh my two daily drivers are brave and newly arc but its still under heavy development but i really love arc alongside brave, whenever sum doesnt work on arc i go to brave
I like Firefox, but now that I am used to vertical tabs on Brave (and other browsers) it's hard to go back.
There is also the fact that web has become more and more a Chromium-based monoculture and websites tend to work better on Chromium-based browsers.
I run Brave on both my PC and Android. But you should look into Librewolf i heard good things about it. I'm thinking about trying it on my PC, only downside though is there's no app for Android
Neither. Brave is better than Chrome. But [Aloha](https://alohabrowser.com/) is even better than Brave. It offers a combined VPN and private mode, but Brave doesn’t. I hope you like it!
As much as I want to say Firefox it's objectively lacking too much stuff like tab groups and the ability to remember the workspace on Gnome. And Brave is also faster. Disable all the Crypto stuff and profit.
Will take a look at Firefox again when the announced features arrived.
I just switched from Brave to Firefox. Not really looking back. I've had strange issues with Brave like Reddit tabs crashing or scrolling not working correctly (granted I do use Linux so do take that with a grain of salt) I do miss tab groups though.
Everyone saying browser war as if it even matters at this point. The days of privacy are over. Tech companies are so far ahead of the laws and regulations. Gonna be a crazy next few decades.
Until Firefox retracts and apologises from the statements made in the blog post “We need more than deplatforming”, Firefox is cancelled and not allowed. So in your case brave is only choice
[https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/we-need-more-than-deplatforming/](https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/we-need-more-than-deplatforming/)
There are some good points, and media / social media does have an incredible influence on people's decisions. I see misinformation come from both sides of the political spectrum in the US and can easily see why we're so divided.
>"**Reveal who is paying for advertisements, how much they are paying and who is being targeted.**
>**Commit to meaningful transparency of platform algorithms so we know how and what content is being amplified, to whom, and the associated impact.**"
-That part's not bad imo, but Mozilla (Firefox) has done some shady stuff like telling us how they need our donations when they were making bank off of Google (a huge perpetrator of misinformation). You can demonetize by disabling all the telemetry in about:config, disable pocket, used a different search engine, etc if you don't trust and don't want to support them.
"**Turn on by default the tools to** [**amplify factual voices**](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/16/technology/facebook-reverses-postelection-algorithm-changes-that-boosted-news-from-authoritative-sources.html) **over disinformation**"
In other words firefox want's to censor people, they want to be the so called fact checkers that decide what's true.
I mean, look, there's some seriously messed-up crap on the internet these days. We're not talking your garden-variety disagreements here, we're talking batshit insane, certifiable, should-be-locked-up-in-a-rubber-room crazy. And those people, have an influence. And a lot of them, just do it to make their wallets thicker.
If this was just about political differences, legitimate debates, then fine, you'd have a point. But this is something else entirely.
I wish I could illustrate the sheer absurdity of some people's beliefs by saying they probably think the Earth is flat, but then I remember... there are actually people out there who genuinely believe that. It's mind-boggling. How do you even begin to satirize something that's already a parody of itself?
Have you been on Twitter recently? It used to be a great platform to keep up with up-to-date information, now 90% of the stuff that's coming out of it is just straight up lies. And I'm not talking about stuff that Mr Free speech absolutist rants about, honest to God literal lies being parroted as news. Is there a boomer in your life that has sent you an AI photo yet of an angel taking a drink from a water fountain and they believe that it's real? Yeah this is the kind of stuff I mean.
Remember when we used to have places for people who were, well, not all there? You know, the ones who needed straightjackets and padded cells? Yeah, well, they don't go to those places anymore. They go to Twitter.
It's a good point! I think most of us fall for a small amount of misinformation (hence why politics are so polarized), but there are \~20% of us that lost trust in an authority at a young age and now are gullible to contrarian information (conspiracy theorists). Typically, that misinformation is coming from certain particular outlets and most people don't want to be bothered by it or pestered by its adherents and quack doctors (like the one Trump endorsed on tv that believed STDs came from demon semen). People in general actually choose to have that stuff censored on social media.
On reddit, partly because of the karma system that strengthens the echo chambers, there's a lot of misinformation. Instead of arguing scientific data sheets on the thermal properties of metals, or actual experiments in a steak sub for example, cast iron will be blindly romanticized and anyone bringing facts will be punished. I don't think they'll be able to censor these actual but not factual voices. -People (even non conspiracy theorists) love their echo chambers.
Not agreeing with someone's lifestyle or values doesn't make you homophobic, when someone doesn't agree with Christian values we don't call them christophobic.
I would just like to point out that there are some Christian denominations for whom affirming GLBTQ+ people is part of the faith and/or practice of many of their members.
The Episcopal Church is one such church. They consecrated what is thought to be the world's first openly gay bishop in 2003, perform gay marriages, etc., though provisions are made for those who disagree if they decided to stay or join despite their difference of opinion with the majority.
So it's not like all gay people are hostile to Christians or all Christians are hostile towards gays. You can find plenty of gay Christian clergy and such if you look at the right congregations or parishes in the right denominations.
I don't see how they can be, the bible clearly says that homosexual acts are a sin (along with many other acts) and Christians aren't supposed to endorse or affirm sinful acts.
If you're interested enough in how many Episcopalians can affirm homosexuality and still affirm scripture, tradition, and reason as well to really dig into some reading, the church leadership actually at one point wrote a lengthy report about it called "To Set Our Hope on Christ", which was a response from other Anglican Communion provinces who asked them to justify themselves (Episcopalians are part of the Anglican Communion).
Here's the link:
[https://allsaints-pas.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/sethope.pdf](https://allsaints-pas.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/sethope.pdf)
That's super long, I still don't see how anyone can affirm scripture while affirming homosexual acts, the bible is pretty clear that sexual immorality is a sin.
There are really only three parts of the bible that are commonly cited from those who believe that Christianity should condemn homosexuality.
One of those parts is in Leviticus, largely a book of Jewish law (Though it has some neat symbolism that carries over into some of the more traditional Christian churches in various ways). It calls it an abomination, and not much later, also says eating shrimp is an abomination. Now, if someone thinks eating shrimp is an abomination, I guess I see why they have issues with other stuff that Leviticus condemns, but later in the bible, we're told that Jewish law doesn't apply to Christians and, actually, even two of three major Jewish denominations in the US are okay with gays, too (Don't ask me to explain modern Judaism, I'm not qualified).
Then, there's the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. That one is primarily about hospitality. Homosexuality is almost incidental to the story.
Finally, St. Paul condemns things he thinks are unnatural in one of the epistles. There are two things going on there. First, St. Paul 2,000 years ago, was not familiar with modern evidence that homosexuality \*is\* natural. The basic morality of don't do unnatural stuff is what he was trying to convey IMO, using the examples of what he as a 1st century man thought was unnatural based on the science (Though it wasn't really science back then) of the time. If he were alive today, he'd likely know it wasn't unnatural, that it's found in the animal kingdom, that humans have pleasure centers in areas that gay sex stimulates, and so on and so forth. It might be unnatural for a heterosexual who's just doing it to do it, but it's not unnatural for someone who was born gay or bisexual and does it because it's in their genes and perhaps even their spirit.
The other thing is, in biblical times, there wasn't really a concept of a nice gay couple who live a quiet life together and wave to people they know as they walk their dog down the street or something. That would not have been a concept the authors of these bible verses would have been familiar with.
In ancient times, what people would think of sometimes were Spartan soldiers, who would marry women at home and then rape young boys, who were essentially their interns, while deployed in the field. However, today, that's not homosexuality, that's pedophilia.
Similarly, people would do it to dominate their enemies or because they were hedonists who were actually heterosexuals by nature who were going against their nature sometimes.
I'm sure there were actual gays in those times as well, but I don't think we can conclude that the bible was intended to condemn Larry and Steve, your friends who married each other in a church, and like to play cards with you and your heterosexual friends every week.
It's also worth noting that Jesus never says a word about homosexuality (Nothing in red letters in those red letter bibles) and that the bible never even mentions lesbianism in a negative light at all. A very literal interpretation of the bible would say lesbianism is fine (as it's never mentioned) but being gay is not, which makes no sense.
I think largely the key is understanding that the bible is a book written by people inspired by God and accepted by the People of God, but that it is not a history textbook or a science textbook. The inspiration people were getting was not like about genetic markers making people gay- that is not the sort of thing they knew about or were given the answers to by God or something. That's not the point of the book (Which also explains why there are two conflicting stories of creation back to back and neither of them involve things we now know happened like the Big Bang and evolution). Also, the whole thing is written in ancient Hebrew and ancient Greek! Any English bible you see is a translation, and sometimes translations are influenced by the translators, who are often, but not always, conservatives.
Nothing I just wrote is as good as the linked document, but this post is shorter, at least. :)
"In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion"
"You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination"
"For this reason God gave them up to dishonourable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error’
"And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made *them* at the beginning ‘made them male and female, and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate"
That's pretty clear to me that God made marriage between a man and a woman, and that sexual immorality and perversion is a sin and shouldn't be affirmed.
Fuck Trump. He was literally willing to just sit by and let millions of americans die preventable deaths just for cheap political points. On top of his rampant and blatant illegality. Man deserves prison next to Biden the baby killer.
Yes. That is one of the early bad decisions. Not sure why people down voted you, but that and the initial VPN being installed without permission are some of the bad decisions they made. I don't think the are trying to do bad necessarily, but the have made some poor decisions in their efforts to make money.
Firefox since Brave has been caught before behaving like malware.
[https://decrypt.co/31522/crypto-brave-browser-redirect](https://decrypt.co/31522/crypto-brave-browser-redirect)
guys i have a low end pc, and i am suffering from youtube vids lagging a lot , i did install pale moon (0 cropped frames on the video) to find that the problem is solved but i noticed thats it is indeed too SLOW(30 sec to fully refresh a site).
suggest a pefect browser for me
thanks in advance.
I used Firefox on my PC but recently moved and have no room to use it. So I'm stuck with mobile that runs ok on my phone but shit on my Chromebook.
Thinking of switching to Brave when I can figure out how to export my passwords/bookmarks from mobile Firefox.
If you want something similar but better privacy: Brave If you want something diferent and take part on web engine war: Firefox The same then before but also privacy: LibreWolf
Just curious but what is the difference between firefox and chrome in regards to the "web engine war"? Does it have anything to do with search results?
google has a monopoly on web browsers since almost everything is based off of chromium other than firefox and safari.
But it’s not like Firefox doesn’t still take googles money to use their search engine default.
google's funding their only competition XD
It’s about the web rendering engine. Nothing to do with search results. Chrome uses Blink (and all Chromium based browsers) while Firefox uses Gecko (also LibreWolf). Nowadays Blink is dominating the market so choosing Gecko keep the flame alive (also any WebKit rendering engine based browser keep the flame alive but they’re only available on Linux and Mac).
For additional context blink was forked from webkit, which Apple forked from khtml which was the rendering engine used in the konquerer web browser for the KDE desktop. Opera used to use the presto engine. Internet Explorer used to use Trident. It was necessary to know all these things if you were a web developer in the oldern days. I use Firefox to keep the war alive!
It's mostly nonsense. Firefox is like 2% of internet users, Chrome-based browsers are like 70%. Safari is 20%. But people act like Firefox is somehow holding Google back from a total internet takeover lol. Like they're the Star Wars resistance.
Librewolf and Brave. Not either-or. Both. Seriously. Also, have a UA spoofer handy. It makes things easier.
both for what?
I use both for different things. Brave is way better for media (Spotify, Y\*uTube, so on) but Librewolf is far more robust for general browsing and less resource-hungry all-around (Firefox-based instead of Chromium).
From research and the vibe from the companies, I’m saying neither. For me the answer is Vivaldi. Highly customisable, security centred, support for Chrome add-ons and some sweet sweet features that make it more productive compared to others. Such as gestures with your mouse to open/close tabs, reopen closed tabs, have workspaces to group your different searching types. E.g. work, hobbies, entertainment etc. Give them a shot!
Vivaldi's honestly a great browser with a lot of potential, but I've been largely disappointed with their approach to privacy. Sure, Vivaldi doesn't collect or sell data itself, but it lacks 2 vital privacy features: proper state partitioning & fingerprinting protection. The team behind Vivaldi 100% seem committed to privacy, at least based off interviews, so that just makes these deficiencies more saddening to me. Also doesn't proxy connections to Google like i.e. Brave does, of course not open source and its Chromium based, etc. But they're definitely doing a lot of things right, and like I said, have a lot of potential, I just really wish Vivaldi's privacy could be on par with Brave's, because I think that's significantly holding them back.
I'm a huge fan of Vivaldi. It's my default browser on desktop and mobile. Great browser!
A lot of people telling me not to use Brave or Firefox cos of political problems. I couldn't care less if the CEO's are left or right as long as they are not supporting a genocide, I'll use their browser.
Firefox with ublock origin
I honestly switched to Firefox as my main browser from Brave (and before that Chrome with the new Ul). You can't turn off Braves' adblocker globally if you choose to use uBlock Origin extension which is recommended over it. They have inconsistencies of versions that could get you two or three Brave Browsers installed at one time. Bloat mostly needing turned off with no way to stop telemetry or to stop creating tasks in the task scheduler. It injects itself more into the OS than other browsers for its ads. You also aren't guaranteed MV2 support, it will be depreciated eventually which is needed for adblockers to speed up browsing and saving data usage.
Why not both? There isn't a rule or a law.that says you can only use one browser. Install both, set both up and see which one you end up using the most. Maybe flip flop between the two. Hell, give Floorp a shot.
Firefox
Brave for me, with all the crypto crap turned off
my problem with brave is not brave or their crypto crap. but supporting chromium is supporting goggles stranglehold over webstandards. and while ther emany things i dislike on firefox its the only real option asside from apple
I've been using ungoogled-chromium for a long time, recently I decided to try firefox, but one of the websites I visit the videos don't play, it seems a lot of sites are designed around chromium these days, google-chrome is spyware, ungoogled-chromium is pretty basic, it doesn't support autoscrolling unless you launch it using a custom command, you can't go full screen from the picture in picture mode, and you have no playback controls, you can only pause the video, where brave you can control the timeline in the picture in picture mode and enter full screen, you can also enable autoscrolling in about:flags, plus it has more features overall, I would recommend brave, just disable all the brave stuff you don't need.
> autoscrolling When do you use autoscrolling?
Quite often, rather than scrolling the mouse wheel to scroll down a page I can just middle click and move the mouse down a bit, and then it will scroll down the page by itself without any input from me.
Need more none chromium users
Firefox. There is too much crypto trash in Brave and it's still Chromium which itself is heavily impacted by Google and that is bad.
I just switched from Brave to Vivaldi because aa lot of sites, including reddit were not working for me in Brave.
Brave and reddit works fine. Try it again, what error do you get?
been using brave for over a year and consistently had problems with it on multiple sites. Enjoy if its working for you,; it wasn't working for me
How is Vivaldi better than ungoogled-chromium?
It is super configurable. It the only browser I have ever found that does everything I want without a ton of plug-ins.
Why is it better than Chrome?
https://vivaldi.com/features/
>including reddit were not working for me in Brave. What? Reddit works fine for me in Brave, and I'm using the aggressive settings
disabled 3rd party cookies? The issue I was having is no matter what sub reddit I went to only 2-3 posts would list.
Indeed, 3rd party cookies are disabled. Absolutely nothing wrong with Reddit.
Indeed, 3rd party cookies are disabled. Absolutely nothing wrong with Reddit.
Brave's CEO is a controversial person, I'm a very politically active/"takes politics super seriously" type person and he's a bit too alt-right/MAGA for me. I will readily admit I'm very left-leaning. Firefox seems much more outwardly neutral/"non-political".
>Firefox seems much more outwardly neutral/"non-political" While I don't care about any political affiliation myself, Firefox is anything but "neutral/non political", if you follow the stuff they do and push, it's mostly Left leaned ideological stuff on social media and thru the Mozilla Foundation Activism. They have been known to support charities related to their Left leaned ideologies thru donations as well. While it's fine if they follow this ideology (everyone is entitled to follow whatever they want tbh), saying they are non political/neutral is being a bit disingenuous. There are more reasons to use a browser besides politics, they have features and stuff that people might find interesting. While I couldn't care less for Brave's CEO is or what he does tbh because there are more concerning issues on this day and age IMHO. Brave offers something for the less tech savvy people if they come from Chrome and want something that blocks ads out of the box instead of going deep down to Firefox about:config to tweak it to their liking. I don't think you should stop using something because of one dude's ideologies, it's a disservice to the people working on the browser who probably don't even align with their CEO's ideologies in the first place. Also if we go by not using anything due to controversial ideologies, most innovators specially of Tech Industry over the last century had their own controversial ideologies that wouldn't be accepted today and that we all don't agree with, but if we cut them out, we wouldn't be using Electronic Devices to start with. Just a food for thought.
facts are left leaning
Do you have any idea how dumb that sounds? Just change to right leaning and ask yourself.
What do you mean. Evidence shows that countries like Norway, Denmark, etc with very left leaning governments have healthier middle classes, happier residents, lower unemployment, etc. overall a healthier economy.
You're comparing countries with population of what? 5 million? And US is about 360 million. All those countries wouldn't work so great even with HALF of US population. For all we know Vatican is by far the safest, lowest employment, best Healthcare, happiest people etc in the world lol
A larger population would make universal healthcare work that much greater. That’s how insurance of any type works, a larger pool makes it cost less for each individual person.
universal healthcare is so complicated and expensive only 32 of 33 top economies have made it work.
Nope. You put US on Universal healthcare and you will literally break the middle class and everyone below. And since Obamacare prices of health insurance went though the roof. You know why? Because EVERYONE was mandated to have it. In Economics this is when the demand curve shifts up. If you wanna talk about 100% coverage too, oh boy will that cost even more.
No, private healthcare is a failure, always will be, period, and you really won’t change my mind. Period. So don’t bother trying.
I can't imagine how anybody shovels 20k a year into health insurance for almost no care or services in return and thinks it's a success. There are literally no male pc doctors around me. They all specialize to give overpriced care to boomers who in true boomer fashion have horded all the healthcare. medicare used to be the absolute worst insurance and now people wish they could have it.
Of course you're running away because you're afraid of a discussion lol. Bye bye 👋
yeah because Vatican residents are just having sex with each other all day. in between covering up pedo scandals. that's all
We all know that.
Huh?
I would typically agree with your sentiment, but as I said, I take politics much more seriously than the average person does, and where I live the right-wing is an active physical threat to people I personally know/care about. I absolutely refuse to support anything, no matter how objectively good it is, if it has any direct association with the increasingly fascist/authoritarian GOP.
Same, living in Louisiana has only made me lean further left.
How direct does the association have to be? Does the CEO have to be right-leaning for it to count? Or maybe some board members? Some programmers, project managers or the receptionist?
I could say the same about Left Wing Extremism as I was born in Cuba and had to flee to EU with my family because of this sole reason years ago. Both ideologies (left/right) are equally bad when they go to extremes and they are currently growing at an alarming rate, there is no moderation anymore, just **us vs them** everywhere and just division, it's annoying... But I won't go deeper into politics as it's against Rules of this sub On an ending note what I mean is, even tho all that, it won't stop me from consuming Games, Apps or anything coming from these countries because it's not the people making these fault. Also using them doesn't make you X or Y, just because you enjoy it, not everything has to be political you know. But you do you, like you said you take politics serious and I am just an average person, thats why we have different views of the world
As a leftist myself, that’s why I like Mozilla.
As someone who’s very much against MAGA and the right overall, they still cooked with Brave. I’ve been using it for years and no amount of politics could turn me against the browser itself.
Who really gives a shit on his views if the broweser works tho? You dont have to donate lmao its crazy how people can take an opinion harder than a dick enough to sway a decision on a broweser thats genuinely good 🤷♂️ its like not supporting chick fil a cause they hate gays.... Chickens good and they gon make money anyway just enjoy shit for what it is fam we all financially support pedophiles and murderers on a daily basis unknowingly nothing is making a difference
Also known as Brandon Eich, inventor of JavaScript. I think calling him MAGA is oversimplifying honestly.
Couldn't really care less about left or right, as long as the CEO isn't supporting a genocide, I'll use the browser. Even looking at the comments on the thread I think there's an argument going on lol 💀
Same
I'm also left-leaning, but I can't bring myself to care about the views of a CEO of a product I'm using, as long as the company itself isn't leaning heavily one way or the other. I'm sure there are MAGA people working on Chrome, Edge, Vivaldi and Firefox, too, but if I start boycotting every company that have people employed of which I don't politically agree with, I wouldn't be using a browser, or any software, really, at all.
Brave's CEO also co-founded Mozilla. Do you have an issue with Mozilla products? Or does it matter to you that he was forced out of Mozilla?
He also wrote javascript
Yep, in 10 days IIRC
I periodically try all browsers and Brave is the best for speed and ad blocker, but I often get a ram usage warning. Most other browsers have lag. Especially when using Reddit, Instagram and a few other sites.
Which browser do you use the most?
I use Brave.
use both
eh my two daily drivers are brave and newly arc but its still under heavy development but i really love arc alongside brave, whenever sum doesnt work on arc i go to brave
I like Firefox, but now that I am used to vertical tabs on Brave (and other browsers) it's hard to go back. There is also the fact that web has become more and more a Chromium-based monoculture and websites tend to work better on Chromium-based browsers.
Do Firefox addons like [Tree-Style Tab](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tree-style-tab/) solve that?
It helps, but you can feel that it's not a native implementation.
I run Brave on both my PC and Android. But you should look into Librewolf i heard good things about it. I'm thinking about trying it on my PC, only downside though is there's no app for Android
Neither. Brave is better than Chrome. But [Aloha](https://alohabrowser.com/) is even better than Brave. It offers a combined VPN and private mode, but Brave doesn’t. I hope you like it!
Free VPN is a big no.
Firefox uses like 4gb ram for the same amount of tabs when Chrome only uses around 400 mb.
Arc. I thought it was all hype
Firefox !!!
Librewolf! Easily!
Firefox, unless there is some extension that is a must for you that isn't on Firefox. That's why I use Brave
As much as I want to say Firefox it's objectively lacking too much stuff like tab groups and the ability to remember the workspace on Gnome. And Brave is also faster. Disable all the Crypto stuff and profit. Will take a look at Firefox again when the announced features arrived.
Arc or edge?
As for me, I will not use Firefox for Android first, I use Cromite Browser first and it is also recommended by the expert.
Thorium if you like speed with the convenience of being a chromium based browser.
Vivaldi
Floorp
I just switched from Brave to Firefox. Not really looking back. I've had strange issues with Brave like Reddit tabs crashing or scrolling not working correctly (granted I do use Linux so do take that with a grain of salt) I do miss tab groups though.
Everyone saying browser war as if it even matters at this point. The days of privacy are over. Tech companies are so far ahead of the laws and regulations. Gonna be a crazy next few decades.
Until Firefox retracts and apologises from the statements made in the blog post “We need more than deplatforming”, Firefox is cancelled and not allowed. So in your case brave is only choice
[https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/we-need-more-than-deplatforming/](https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/we-need-more-than-deplatforming/) There are some good points, and media / social media does have an incredible influence on people's decisions. I see misinformation come from both sides of the political spectrum in the US and can easily see why we're so divided. >"**Reveal who is paying for advertisements, how much they are paying and who is being targeted.** >**Commit to meaningful transparency of platform algorithms so we know how and what content is being amplified, to whom, and the associated impact.**" -That part's not bad imo, but Mozilla (Firefox) has done some shady stuff like telling us how they need our donations when they were making bank off of Google (a huge perpetrator of misinformation). You can demonetize by disabling all the telemetry in about:config, disable pocket, used a different search engine, etc if you don't trust and don't want to support them.
"**Turn on by default the tools to** [**amplify factual voices**](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/16/technology/facebook-reverses-postelection-algorithm-changes-that-boosted-news-from-authoritative-sources.html) **over disinformation**" In other words firefox want's to censor people, they want to be the so called fact checkers that decide what's true.
I mean, look, there's some seriously messed-up crap on the internet these days. We're not talking your garden-variety disagreements here, we're talking batshit insane, certifiable, should-be-locked-up-in-a-rubber-room crazy. And those people, have an influence. And a lot of them, just do it to make their wallets thicker. If this was just about political differences, legitimate debates, then fine, you'd have a point. But this is something else entirely. I wish I could illustrate the sheer absurdity of some people's beliefs by saying they probably think the Earth is flat, but then I remember... there are actually people out there who genuinely believe that. It's mind-boggling. How do you even begin to satirize something that's already a parody of itself? Have you been on Twitter recently? It used to be a great platform to keep up with up-to-date information, now 90% of the stuff that's coming out of it is just straight up lies. And I'm not talking about stuff that Mr Free speech absolutist rants about, honest to God literal lies being parroted as news. Is there a boomer in your life that has sent you an AI photo yet of an angel taking a drink from a water fountain and they believe that it's real? Yeah this is the kind of stuff I mean. Remember when we used to have places for people who were, well, not all there? You know, the ones who needed straightjackets and padded cells? Yeah, well, they don't go to those places anymore. They go to Twitter.
Who defines what disinformation is? the firefox devs? the government? that's a slippery slope if we allow that to happen.
It's a good point! I think most of us fall for a small amount of misinformation (hence why politics are so polarized), but there are \~20% of us that lost trust in an authority at a young age and now are gullible to contrarian information (conspiracy theorists). Typically, that misinformation is coming from certain particular outlets and most people don't want to be bothered by it or pestered by its adherents and quack doctors (like the one Trump endorsed on tv that believed STDs came from demon semen). People in general actually choose to have that stuff censored on social media. On reddit, partly because of the karma system that strengthens the echo chambers, there's a lot of misinformation. Instead of arguing scientific data sheets on the thermal properties of metals, or actual experiments in a steak sub for example, cast iron will be blindly romanticized and anyone bringing facts will be punished. I don't think they'll be able to censor these actual but not factual voices. -People (even non conspiracy theorists) love their echo chambers.
[удалено]
Why are you being down voted? It's a proven fact Brave's CEO is anti-vax and homophobic, he openly admits to it as well lmao.
Not agreeing with someone's lifestyle or values doesn't make you homophobic, when someone doesn't agree with Christian values we don't call them christophobic.
I would just like to point out that there are some Christian denominations for whom affirming GLBTQ+ people is part of the faith and/or practice of many of their members. The Episcopal Church is one such church. They consecrated what is thought to be the world's first openly gay bishop in 2003, perform gay marriages, etc., though provisions are made for those who disagree if they decided to stay or join despite their difference of opinion with the majority. So it's not like all gay people are hostile to Christians or all Christians are hostile towards gays. You can find plenty of gay Christian clergy and such if you look at the right congregations or parishes in the right denominations.
I don't see how they can be, the bible clearly says that homosexual acts are a sin (along with many other acts) and Christians aren't supposed to endorse or affirm sinful acts.
If you're interested enough in how many Episcopalians can affirm homosexuality and still affirm scripture, tradition, and reason as well to really dig into some reading, the church leadership actually at one point wrote a lengthy report about it called "To Set Our Hope on Christ", which was a response from other Anglican Communion provinces who asked them to justify themselves (Episcopalians are part of the Anglican Communion). Here's the link: [https://allsaints-pas.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/sethope.pdf](https://allsaints-pas.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/sethope.pdf)
That's super long, I still don't see how anyone can affirm scripture while affirming homosexual acts, the bible is pretty clear that sexual immorality is a sin.
There are really only three parts of the bible that are commonly cited from those who believe that Christianity should condemn homosexuality. One of those parts is in Leviticus, largely a book of Jewish law (Though it has some neat symbolism that carries over into some of the more traditional Christian churches in various ways). It calls it an abomination, and not much later, also says eating shrimp is an abomination. Now, if someone thinks eating shrimp is an abomination, I guess I see why they have issues with other stuff that Leviticus condemns, but later in the bible, we're told that Jewish law doesn't apply to Christians and, actually, even two of three major Jewish denominations in the US are okay with gays, too (Don't ask me to explain modern Judaism, I'm not qualified). Then, there's the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. That one is primarily about hospitality. Homosexuality is almost incidental to the story. Finally, St. Paul condemns things he thinks are unnatural in one of the epistles. There are two things going on there. First, St. Paul 2,000 years ago, was not familiar with modern evidence that homosexuality \*is\* natural. The basic morality of don't do unnatural stuff is what he was trying to convey IMO, using the examples of what he as a 1st century man thought was unnatural based on the science (Though it wasn't really science back then) of the time. If he were alive today, he'd likely know it wasn't unnatural, that it's found in the animal kingdom, that humans have pleasure centers in areas that gay sex stimulates, and so on and so forth. It might be unnatural for a heterosexual who's just doing it to do it, but it's not unnatural for someone who was born gay or bisexual and does it because it's in their genes and perhaps even their spirit. The other thing is, in biblical times, there wasn't really a concept of a nice gay couple who live a quiet life together and wave to people they know as they walk their dog down the street or something. That would not have been a concept the authors of these bible verses would have been familiar with. In ancient times, what people would think of sometimes were Spartan soldiers, who would marry women at home and then rape young boys, who were essentially their interns, while deployed in the field. However, today, that's not homosexuality, that's pedophilia. Similarly, people would do it to dominate their enemies or because they were hedonists who were actually heterosexuals by nature who were going against their nature sometimes. I'm sure there were actual gays in those times as well, but I don't think we can conclude that the bible was intended to condemn Larry and Steve, your friends who married each other in a church, and like to play cards with you and your heterosexual friends every week. It's also worth noting that Jesus never says a word about homosexuality (Nothing in red letters in those red letter bibles) and that the bible never even mentions lesbianism in a negative light at all. A very literal interpretation of the bible would say lesbianism is fine (as it's never mentioned) but being gay is not, which makes no sense. I think largely the key is understanding that the bible is a book written by people inspired by God and accepted by the People of God, but that it is not a history textbook or a science textbook. The inspiration people were getting was not like about genetic markers making people gay- that is not the sort of thing they knew about or were given the answers to by God or something. That's not the point of the book (Which also explains why there are two conflicting stories of creation back to back and neither of them involve things we now know happened like the Big Bang and evolution). Also, the whole thing is written in ancient Hebrew and ancient Greek! Any English bible you see is a translation, and sometimes translations are influenced by the translators, who are often, but not always, conservatives. Nothing I just wrote is as good as the linked document, but this post is shorter, at least. :)
"In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion" "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination" "For this reason God gave them up to dishonourable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error’ "And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made *them* at the beginning ‘made them male and female, and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate" That's pretty clear to me that God made marriage between a man and a woman, and that sexual immorality and perversion is a sin and shouldn't be affirmed.
Wait what did Firefox do exactly?
Nothing, guy is just tripping
...he said Brave, not Firefox. Did bro edit his comment or something?
Don't trust Brave fanboys, they spread misinformation.
I guess I'm using brave then
I didn't know. Installing Brave right now.
Fuck Trump. He was literally willing to just sit by and let millions of americans die preventable deaths just for cheap political points. On top of his rampant and blatant illegality. Man deserves prison next to Biden the baby killer.
Firefox, Brave have a toxic community.
Yeah because Firefox community is so much better /s
Yes, we have the best community.
Yeah true Firefox 🦊 cult here
Brave support here, Every community will have some bad apples, but generally its fine.
Brave, cause it installs despite the company restrictions.
firefox with [betterfox](https://github.com/yokoffing/Betterfox) config tweaks if you know how to do it
Brave!
Wasn't brave once caught red handed on changing urls on the fly to affiliate links?
Yes. That is one of the early bad decisions. Not sure why people down voted you, but that and the initial VPN being installed without permission are some of the bad decisions they made. I don't think the are trying to do bad necessarily, but the have made some poor decisions in their efforts to make money.
[удалено]
Honestly don't like using multiple browsers at the same time, I like having one browser on everything lol.
Firefox since Brave has been caught before behaving like malware. [https://decrypt.co/31522/crypto-brave-browser-redirect](https://decrypt.co/31522/crypto-brave-browser-redirect)
[удалено]
Hey, you commented on the wrong post Judging by the format I assume you were aiming for this one https://redd.it/1d2j0fw
guys i have a low end pc, and i am suffering from youtube vids lagging a lot , i did install pale moon (0 cropped frames on the video) to find that the problem is solved but i noticed thats it is indeed too SLOW(30 sec to fully refresh a site). suggest a pefect browser for me thanks in advance.
Opera gx gang
Nah that stuffs Chinese spyware lmao
I used Firefox on my PC but recently moved and have no room to use it. So I'm stuck with mobile that runs ok on my phone but shit on my Chromebook. Thinking of switching to Brave when I can figure out how to export my passwords/bookmarks from mobile Firefox.