I had a small mountain of BAT they locked me out of due to shoddy linking with their banking affiliates and out of date DRM practices locking me out of my account due to too many devices being logged in (each OS update counted as its own device).
I noticed you didn’t have that linked, that’s because not every shitty move a company makes gets news coverage. Sorry I don’t fit into your narrow view on what constitutes a valid reason.
The banking backend that grifted me is called uphold and at the time that was the ONLY way to move BAT out of their wallet.
The device limit was a known issue for years and I left before they fixed it.
While I was still a user I would try their forum for support. Big shocker, LOTS of other users had the same issue and reports got ignored or muted by the mods there.
Another issue is that Strict mode is used by roughly 0.5% of Brave’s users, with the rest using the default setting, which is the Standard mode.
How are they getting this data? If it’s with telemetry this data doesn’t seem reliable, I doubt that people who change the fingerprint setting don’t disable telemetry.
I have encountered a handful of sites that it broke as well. I use the strict protection option and manually add exceptions to the few sites it breaks - then I never have any other issues with them
I’ve been having a pretty good experience with Mullvad, however I don’t hear many people talking about it. I wonder why is that, IIRC it’s being developed with Tor Foundation, and is basically a Tor browser for clear web, and that sounds perfect. So far, I didn’t run into any issues, so is there a catch, or are they just not well enough known yet? Or, maybe people are turned away by their optional VPN?
Probably because LibreWolf is most of the way there, and the Mullvad branding + proprietary VPN is more than a bit much. I use(d) the VPN alongside it and found the add-on “hints” regarding the correct DNS settings more frustrating than helpful, too.
I was using LibreWolf before, but I really like the idea of bundling VPN + Browser, and also the way they handle payments - not only is Mullvad VPN kind of cheap, I can just pay with crypto and don’t need any account (kind of - you just generate username that also serves as an password, without any other contact information required).
But what I like the most about it is the idea of making a browser with the goal of having the same fingerprint between users (as much as possible), and offering it with a VPN - becuase that means that most of other users of the VPN will probably also have the same fingerprint from the browser, so you will blend in with them. I wasn’t really sold on the idea of VPN before that and didn’t use one, but this was what convinced me.
But tbh I haven’t done much research into the company, or into the effectivness of their implementation. I’m kind of betting on their cooperation with Tor Browser, which should have most of this stuff already figured out. But it’s possible that other browsers are just better at it, I never checked.
I do however still use LibreWolf for the occasional site that breaks with Mullvad, but it’s not something that happens too often.
I use(d) the VPN alongside it and found the add-on “hints” regarding the correct DNS settings more frustrating than helpful, too.
Hmm, I don’t think I’ve ever noticed anything about DNS. I think I’ve actually never click on the browser vpn extension, though :D Is it the encrypted DNS hint?
EDIT: Found this, apparently it’s doing pretty well privacytests.org
I’d ask why they don’t make it optional (I’m not a Brave user) but it seems it was.
Another issue is that Strict mode is used by roughly 0.5% of Brave’s users, with the rest using the default setting, which is the Standard mode.
This low percentage actually makes these users more vulnerable to fingerprinting despite them using the more aggressive blocker, because they constitute a discernible subset of users standing out from the rest.
Given that, I’m inclined to agree with the decision to remove it. Pick your battles and live to fight another day.
Strict mode is used by roughly 0.5% of Brave’s users
Based exclusively on whether a user had not gone through the Brave’s browser settings and disabled the “Send statistics about my behavior to the Brave corporate HQ” flag.
In other words, the number is useless.
This low percentage actually makes these users more vulnerable to fingerprinting despite them using the more aggressive blocker, because they constitute a discernible subset of users standing out from the rest.
This argument could be used to tell people to avoid using the Brave browser too. After all, only a minority of people do. The best way to blend in would be to use Google Chrome on Windows 11, and improve no privacy settings.
Unless someone wants to argue that using Brave makes you an acceptable degree of unique, but using advanced tracking blocking makes you unacceptably unique.
Please don’t tell me you wear adidas (founded by a Nazi), or drive a Ford (made by an antisemite), or listen to Wagner, (a racist), or drive a Volkswagen, or play Minecraft, or use wix, or eat at Chick-fil-A, or…etc etc
He wasn’t fired. He voluntarily left. And thus Mozilla is left with an incompetent CEO whose only aim is to increase her paycheck year after year, despite pathetic market share results for FF. Enjoy that.
That said, nobody cares about your “friendly remainders”. We’re talking about software here, not politics.
And, to stay on topic, yes, it happened to me that Strict FP broke some website, in particular those displaying a frame with a map or similar stuff. So I’ve resorted to use “standard” FP myself.
I’m not a shill for Brave. It has its fair share of technical issues but it’s the less worse browser for my use case (better than FF, anyway). Your (or mine) opinion on the CEO has nothing to do with the technical issue discussed in OP’s link.
And no, what MAGA are you talking about? I’m not even 'murican. Take your meds, dude.
Yawn… I’m tired of this shit. You people are really ridiculous. I’m going to just block you. Enjoy your cognitive dissonance and your virtue signaling.
Technology and ethics and politics are not airgapped magically distinct things. Pretending that they are is a strategic political choice you are actively making.
Ok. I’m a bad person because I enjoy using a given browser. I get that.
This is a straw man argument; no one said you’re a bad person for using a certain browser.
nobody cares about your “friendly remainders”. We’re talking about software here, not politics.
This is what they are criticising you about. You could be using Edge or Chrome, it wouldn’t matter here, that wouldn’t make you a bad person. The point is that pretending there is no connection when there is clearly a huge relevance here is massive.
Add comment