I'm just wondering, if Mozilla keeps talking so much about taking your privacy seriously, that you need to stay secure and private on the internet, then why do they have settings that they could use to track you enabled by default? Don't make no sense.

Also if people bash Brave so much, then why is it the browser that doesn't? I have to admit I didn't do thorough research here, but it does indeed appear that way. Am confused.

Show thread

@talon I use (and love) Brave. It's basically the Google Chrome for mentally-functioning people. I guess people hate Brave because of their BAT token.

Justified? No. But it's always cool to hate on things just for the sake of it.

@0x07 @talon mmm, if you are going to choose a chromium based option and can't access to ungoogled-chromium (or you are annoyed to being to update it manually) and you want mostly all features than just the minimum provided by other like falkon or similar, brave should be considered the best option. last year i recommended it to some people.

@ELR @0x07 fair enough. The main point wasn’t about brave though. I can see why people are polarized. But how come people love Mozilla and chant their privacy songs when their default isn’t even private?

@talon @0x07 idk, last year I recommended to use the tweaks recommended in privacytools.io
Follow

@ELR @0x07 what a mess. But this clearly still shows my main point. In order to be private and secure with Firefox you still need user mods, according to them.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
The Dragon's Cave

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!