14 comments

  • footy 0 minutes ago
    I too am surprised anyone uses Chrome, but I will admit to feeling similarly surprised by how many people use Brave. The company seems so sketchy to me, and I wonder why people who presumably care about web standards are so willing to use Chromium-based anything too.
  • SunshineTheCat 1 hour ago
    I know that I'm in a bit of a bubble with this one, but I am surprised there is still anyone using Chrome instead of Brave. I get the dependency on Gmail other Google-specific tools, but the built-in ad blocking and Google-free aspects of it made me switch instantly and haven't look back after years.
    • plopz 1 hour ago
      Brave started off incredibly sketchy and with terrible reputation, for example https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18734999

      I haven't ever considered it since and I assume many others are in the same boat.

    • ifh-hn 1 hour ago
      I'm similar but instead of brave, which I don't trust, prefer Firefox.
    • skocznymroczny 22 minutes ago
      I switched to Firefox when Chrome started messing with the ad blockers. Haven't really had any issues. I prefer developer tools on Chrome but I rarely need to use them anyway.
      • xacky 9 minutes ago
        The trouble is that Mozilla has admitted they can't survive without Google's revenue. You are basically using Google by proxy unless you use a truly independent browser engine of they get blocked by Cloudflare for not having enough fingerprinting tech.
    • vehemenz 44 minutes ago
      Ok, why Brave though? There's Safari, Chromium, LibreWolf, Ladybird, and plenty of others.
      • fg137 22 minutes ago
        Not everyone is on Mac. In fact, most people use Windows. So Safari and Ladybird are out of the question, that's two gone.
      • nazgulsenpai 38 minutes ago
        They mentioned the built-in adblock
      • rolymath 38 minutes ago
        Brave is has pre-configured as block that works on everything, also a polished sync experience.
    • amatecha 56 minutes ago
      I'm just surprised people use Chrome at all. Google has proven over and over they can't be trusted and will exploit you every chance they get.
      • e40 20 minutes ago
        Because some things only work in Chrome. It's a fact. It's terrible.

        We're the frogs being boiled, over the last decade. People sounded the alarms, but they were looked at like they had tin foil on their heads. Now, it's clear they were right.

        I'm speaking generally, of course. I use Firefox for all my personal stuff, except for those situations where it doesn't work.

        • tcp_handshaker 5 minutes ago
          >> Because some things only work in Chrome.

          What things? Looks like an urban myth.

    • maxloh 30 minutes ago
      I find Brave's UI uglier than Chrome's.

      Unfortunately, there is no way to switch back to the stock Chromium look.

    • jeffgreco 1 hour ago
      I was very vehement about needing to stay in Chromium — until I tried Zen browser and it turns out I didn’t! (Unless I wanted to watch Prime Video)
    • afavour 41 minutes ago
      You’re definitely in a bubble. Google advertises Chrome on TV. Most users haven’t even heard of Brave.
    • shevy-java 49 minutes ago
      Well, why would I want to use Brave?

      Brave is the Google empire aka chromium.

      I use thorium, which also belongs to the empire, so it is not really any different to Brave - but I can use ublock origin still, so that's better. I think we are all in the Google empire here. Praising Brave as alternative, simply does not make a whole lot of sense really.

      Firefox is a bit outside of it but it basically got rid of most of its users. When I use firefox, I can not play audio on youtube videos. It works fine with thorium. I tried to convince the firefox developer who said everyone on Linux must use pulseaudio (I don't) but there is no reasoning with Mozilla hackers here. He thinks he knows better than everyone else does. (I could recompile firefox from source, but Mozilla uses mozconfig still: https://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/svn/xsoft/firefox... - they are too incompetent to transition into meson or cmake. A failing project, no wonder it lost most of its users. Titanic got nothing on the Firefox team.)

    • Markoff 1 hour ago
      why would you use brave with annoying crypto and no customization over superior Vivaldi?
      • tcp_handshaker 3 minutes ago
        Why did I had to come so much down this thread, before seeing a mention of my favorite browser?
    • RobRivera 1 hour ago
      I have never heard of Brave, please tell me more

      Edit: downvoting a request for insight on something? Mediocre

    • bix6 47 minutes ago
      +1 for Brave. Been on it for years and it’s fantastic. Strongest security settings without issue.

      O no they gave you BAT for visiting websites. Ahhh crypto everyone run!

    • newsoftheday 1 hour ago
      My theory is that, since I'm going to do things like banking in my browser, I want one that has a lot of skin in the game. Chrome being backed by Google has trillions of dollars on the line should they ever do anything truly evil. Though this sneaky 4GB download comes close.
      • bix6 48 minutes ago
        Google is not liable for your banking.
      • SecretDreams 57 minutes ago
        There's no skin in the game if they do not think they'll be meaningfully punished by government or consumers for their wrongdoings.
        • AlecSchueler 37 minutes ago
          And they have trillions riding on milking you for all your data and ad impressions.
          • SecretDreams 4 minutes ago
            Which they seem to think they'll get, regardless of the quality of their web browser. Most people are entrapped by Android anywho.
      • iAMkenough 20 minutes ago
        Edge and Chrome could both be eliminated tomorrow and those trillions would be safe.

        You’re the product, not the browser.

  • wafflemaker 15 minutes ago
    Since the thread evolved into browser comparisons, I'd like to endorse a better uBlock ('s fork) - AdNausem.

    It doesn't block ads. It clicks them first, and then blocks them.

    I don't want websites to loose revenue because of my adnlocker. I want them to make extra money because of it!

    I'm not affiliated, but would like the project to get more followers. This can stop ads once and for all.

    • BrenBarn 12 minutes ago
      How will it stop ads if it rewards them with money?
      • stronglikedan 3 minutes ago
        It rewards Google with the advertiser's money, and the advertisers don't like paying for extremely low conversion rates.
      • tcp_handshaker 6 minutes ago
        You question is the answer to your query
  • avdelazeri 2 hours ago
    • baq 1 hour ago
      Taken completely by surprise, no one could have predicted this /s
  • Fairburn 25 minutes ago
    Use anything BUT Chrome or Edge.
    • stronglikedan 2 minutes ago
      I've tried them all but nothing so far beats the UX of Chrome.
  • jeffcox 1 hour ago
    As soon as "don't be evil" became a topic for debate it was over, if you're surprised you haven't been paying attention.
  • ScoobleDoodle 1 hour ago
    For someone with more knowledge than me: How does this affect other Chromium based browsers?

    I did some web searches and see Brave has its own AI thing “Leo” that is intended to preserve privacy. But I don’t think that is on device. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

    I use Firefox myself but have family and friends who use various Chromium based browsers.

    Thank you.

    • sheept 23 minutes ago
      My guess is that this falls under a Google service and the models themselves wouldn't be added to open source Chromium. Even if it were, Chromium forks would likely exclude it like they did for FLoC because of its unpopularity.
    • josefcub 51 minutes ago
      Brave's "Leo" AI is configurable enough to specify local endpoints for processing, instead of going wherever they want it to go. I've set it up to use my own systems, and it works just fine like that.

      If you have a beefy enough device, then yes this can be done on-device.

    • pier25 1 hour ago
      Also, does this affect Chrome for iOS, Android, and iPadOS?
  • arian_ 24 minutes ago
    "on-device" is doing a lot of heavy lifting when the device is a thin client to Google's servers wearing a trench coat.
  • shevy-java 53 minutes ago
    What we learn: we can not trust Google.
    • Zambyte 32 minutes ago
      Everything made by Google is a liability.
  • greenavocado 1 hour ago
  • ChrisArchitect 1 hour ago
    Al or AI?
    • ulfw 1 hour ago
      It's Google. It's AIs
  • ChrisArchitect 1 hour ago
    Google weighs in on Chrome's weights.bin controversy https://www.androidauthority.com/google-chrome-weights-bin-f...
  • askonomm 2 hours ago
    I mean to be expected of Google. Even their Google Pay sends data to their servers whenever you use it to make payments, effectively also making it so you can't even use it without service. Apple Pay does not, runs the whole thing on-device, and not only is private, but as a result also enables payments entirely offline.
    • acheong08 41 minutes ago
      > Apple Pay does not, runs the whole thing on-device, and not only is private, but as a result also enables payments entirely offline.

      Apple Pay still does send a lot of telemetry about your payments though. https://duti.dev/randoms/wip-location-services/

    • fsckboy 1 hour ago
      >Apple Pay does not, runs the whole thing on-device

      so when I use the physical card that is also on Apple Pay, and Apple Pay tells me I just made a transaction as if I had used Apple Pay, that is all happening on my device? what online service is my phone using to track my account with Visa or my credit card issuer, and it's polling or push?

      • Hamuko 55 minutes ago
        You get a notification from Apple Pay when you pay with your physical card? Because I only get a notification from my bank's app whenever I use my physical card. Apple Pay notifications only pop up when using Apple Pay itself.
        • cyberax 37 minutes ago
          > You get a notification from Apple Pay when you pay with your physical card?

          I do. Which is sometimes annoying if somebody else is looking at my screen.

    • jazzypants 1 hour ago
      I'm willing to bet that it's just for telemetry, but this kind of stuff just lends credence to the crazies claiming Google wants to create some kind of absurd botnet with people's devices.
    • newsoftheday 1 hour ago
      Wow...that seriously may change my long standing anti-Mac disdain to pro-Mac advocacy, very interesting, even Gemini confirmed what you're saying.
    • gchamonlive 1 hour ago
      Maybe it sends the payload after coming back online, but for I can for instance leave with only my galaxy watch 6, which doesn't have esim, and I'm able to make payments as long as I connect it with my phone before leaving the house.
      • waterloser 1 hour ago
        If your phone doesn't have connection does it still work on your galaxy watch? Or if you leave the phone behind?
        • iamjackg 1 hour ago
          I think the comment's saying that they leave the phone at home, and the watch works by itself as long as it was connected to the phone before leaving the house.
      • Hamuko 54 minutes ago
        Google Pay works for a limited amount of uses in offline mode.

        https://9to5google.com/2023/12/20/google-wallet-without-inte...

  • jcgrillo 1 hour ago
    They're probably doing some degenerate form of [1].

    [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasitic_computing