You asked what parts aren’t compatible, and one answer is everything bought for Apple computers, iPhones, iPads, etc. Apps, media, anything that isn’t subscription based.
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.
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’m guessing they want to cover their butt in case their server is used for something illicit. But even in searching for something as locked down as, say, a Minecraft server, I ran into the same issue.
It’s strange, because generally you can use a fake identity and a masked card to purchase… just about anything, really.
Different use case. Those are containers, which have a similar color… But in Chrome, everything is in one container, the colored tabs are just grouped together and those groups can be collapsed to save horizontal space in the tab bar.
For those posting suggestions, do the providers also require KYC at some point?
I know for a fact that Vultr, Digitalocean, and Namecheap (and a few others people have mentioned to me before) will need your identity at time of purchase.
I can understand why verifying a customer’s identity is important to these providers, but at the same time, I’m mostly worried that they will be the victims of some data breach in the future.
We were talking about the definition of privacy, and I was giving an example to bolster my definition of it. We can switch to a different topic if you want, but first I want to cement this definition.
For example, privacy settings on Facebook are available to all registered users: they can block certain individuals from seeing their profile, they can choose their “friends”, and they can limit who has access to their pictures and videos.
So regarding an open, public digital space like Twitter, how do you feel about people having the ability to lock their accounts and instantly hide all their tweets from the public?
Mastodon doesn’t have that, but it could.
My reaction to adding something like that will always be “that would be rad” regardless of previous assumptions about how public an app should be, or truisms like “the Internet is forever”, because I believe strongly that trying to fix issues is better than letting them languish unchecked.