Technology
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
view the rest of the comments
Elaborate please? I'm here just for the open source project
The more you dig the weirder it gets.
They are selling an idea of a better browsing which honestly I bought into it (monetising attention is still a great thing to me) but in practicality it is just benefiting Brave.
The user experience I had was horrible, from not getting it to work, to seek for help in their community and being met with disdain... "Oh I never thought I'd see the day that people would complain of not getting adverts".. well that's the narrative you are selling isn't it? I agree to watch ads in turn to redistribute that attention to my fav creators.
They are pulling users in through all these different nice ethical values: privacy focused browsers, a fairer economy to creators, being paid for you attention.. utopic in all the ways. In practice, they are pulling the biggest number of users and investors through crypto greed.
But above all this was what personally got me out of it - just reflecting on the whole thing:
When you start using brave, you will block ads (which definetly get you a better browsing experience) but you are cutting the revenue from the creators, like all adblocking does. What brave is purposing is that you have the option to watch ads but not those you are blocking! They select ones that are 'relevant to you' - which are their partners.. win win for them. And in turn you get BAT.. so you take away the potential money from the creators to your wallet. Hum...
But still, even if you are in for the greed, the story it's not really like that- yes it is slowly filling your uphold wallet (if you get it to work, because that's another problem.. if you don't, guess where the money is sitting - with brave!) and then you can spread through your creators (again - if you can get it to work, and only for the ones that are affiliated w brave or else you can't). So it's all Brave's territory isn't it?
And in mobile you can't connect your uphold wallet until you reach 25bat of credit - which will take you a year of normal use even getting ~20ads a day. (They get a 20% cut). So all this promise of content creators being paid in a fairer way, turns out that you are spending your attention watching adverts that are only benefiting brave.
In practice you will diverting ad revenue from creators to brave while you think you are making money, or worst, making the internet a better place. Nah. Fuck Brave.
PS: you can also find dirt on Firefox. Our consumerism is a form of vote. Choose wisely, do your homework.
At this point, I don't care as long as it's open sourced and it's good to me to use. Hell, lemmy is made by communist which I am very opposed of (I really like capitalism with socialism safety net more). Political views and shit like that doesn't budge me anymore from using the product. Maybe I would value more in the way they treat their product, like microsoft's way of handling their open source project as a way to EEE.
In this comment I explain most of my issues with Brave.
You realise the guy created JavaScript eh? Are you refusing to use that too? Seems a bit hypocritical to be candid. 🙄
JS is by far the worst language I have ever used besides PHP, and yes, I tend to avoid JS a lot given how Much it is used for tracking (though disabling it entirely breaks most webaites.).
Also, as said in the other comment, using JS doesn't give Brendan Eich any money so I'm not concerned about that.
I'd argue that while PHP may be worse on a technical level, JS is a worse overall ecosystem because if you develop for the web, you're forced to use it.
It gives him free advertising to use his programs.
I don't understand what you mean by that.
Celebrity power leads to purchasing of products associated with that celebrity.
Brendan Eich is by no mean a celebrity for having invented JS. I had never heard of him before Brave.
Didn't realise the world revolved around you and that you decide who is a celebrity lol
Clearly there are many things you fail to realise
Thanks for contributing to the discussion with something valuable. Does trying to insult someone because you have nothing valuable to say make you feel like a better human? Curious what you got out of your comment.. it just makes me think you're a tool.
Well that's certainly one way to miss the point lmaooo
It's OK if you don't understand marketing theory and have a myopic view of the world. Please be more verbose lmaaaaoooo
You'll find that it's one of the most hated programming languages around here. People say (with good reason) that its implementation is terrible compared to other programming languages, and its over-adoption (being used when it's unnecessary) is commonly accused of being a major factor of the badly performing and resource hungry websites of the modern internet. It also enables the vast majority of invasive tracking tactics.
As another user also mentioned, it's a logical fallacy to directly compare a product that has clear alternatives, like brave, and a product that everyone is practically forced to use, like JavaScript, when talking about disliking the creator of those things.
Finally, as far as I know, Brendan Eich is no longer involved with the development of the JavaScript language standards, but he's currently the CEO of Brave.
Your final point is a fair point to this argument.
Using JavaScript doesn't put money in his pocket, using Brave does.
He has a permanent advertising spend for free by being the founder of the most popular web programming language.
You proved the point yourself. Not using javascript isn't gonna change a thing.
Also no one really thinks about that guy when they hear javascript lmao
Apparently it's acceptable to use anecdotal evidence to support one's argent here (based on other retorts on this thread), so I will refute your point by saying that I do think of Brendan Eich when I think of JavaScript in the same way I think of Guido for Python and Linus for linux.
You haven't refuted anything since my point was in the first sentence I wrote, not the second one.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
This isn't whataboutism...
It's an appeal to hypocrisy. "But what about JavaScript!?", while completely ignoring the vast world of differences between what has became an essential web technology over the last 25 or so years (not always loved by everyone), versus a gimmicky web browser.
Ahh. I was referring to the whataboutism fallacy from the perspective of it's use to attack third world countries on claiming double standards. You're pointing out that me raising a potential double standard hurts my argument, which if you read that wikipedia article is in of itself, a fallacy. Whataboutism is a lame logical fallacy and by lame I mean it doesn't hold a lot of legitimacy in discourse.
You're going to great lengths to try to find some way to defend a piece of shit human being. You can stop at any time, but I'm sure you'll keep going. I hope you manage to find the bottom of the hole you're so vigorously trying to find, hopefully you'll find it before you realize how dumb you're presenting yourself as being.
Not really. You're acting quite emotional calling Brendan Eich a piece of shit human being without ever having read his arguments or listened to him speak. I believe you're apart of the "woke" mob, that piles on people before reading up on them and making your own judgement. Ie. You seem to be a victim of cancel culture. I have a good understanding of the issue and I'm enjoying pointing out the silliness of the arguments being presented in this thread that seem to be trying to invoke cancel culture on Mr. Eich. Wait till you find out that the lead developer of LibreOffice is a devout Christian that has different views than you and I. Or you know, 99% of the people outside of your american bubble with different cultural views than you. What goofs the Americans have become going through your weird zeitgeist.
His homophobia is very well documented and yes, with direct quotes of what he said. Do those not count as hearing his arguments?
Plenty of horrible people, from Trump to Hitler, had moments of making valid points in some areas, but none of those moments should detract from the fact that they are horrible people with horrible beliefs and actions.
Lol, mob? Not wanting to use a browser owned by homophobic counts as a mob? I've also never gotten the outrage with this thing called "cancel culture" with things like these. Are people not allowed to dislike known homophobic covid deniers?
You're moving the goalposts here. We're talking about using an open source browser or not because of the founder's personal religious views, not whether they are Hitler or Trump.
Yes mob, suggest looking up what it means in this context. And yes, cancel culture is a really really dangerous development in western civilization that threatens our ability to survive because it's focus is on distracting from class consciousness. Not sure why you're defending it if you're a socialist.
Do you judge a bridgemaker for his baking? Why is it OK for multinationals to not pay a living wage but we should attack a small business owner for not wanting to wax a pre-op trans woman's asshole and dick? This seems like an insane question but these are the boundaries the media have created. You're in BC I'm sure you remember that person.
Religious views are personal views. Hating non-Germans or non-Americans are also personal views. What's your point?
Merriam Webster says it means "a large and disorderly crowd of people; especially one bent on riotous or destructive action." When were we destroying or rioting? We don't have street rallies against the use of Brave either.
Unless you meant the informal definition, "a large number of people ", which means you're just trying to demonize the large number of people who dislike a homophobe by using that word. So is any movement to boycott anything a mob? Are vegans a mob? Nestle/BP/Amazon/Facebook haters? What about people campaigning for a ban on fossil fuels? What about the people who were against the Iraq or Vietnam Wars?
Because as not just a socialist but a person in the 21st century, I'm very much for human rights being given to people of the LGBTQ+ community?
I don't like the guy and therefore won't use his company's product, plain and simple. I have not harassed him or otherwise taken any action to harm him. I don't know of anyone, on or off this platform, who have done that either. I also dislike Musk and therefore Teslas aren't on my list of cars that I might buy. Am I not allowed to have those opinions because they're cancel culture?
You're too woke for me man. It's laborious to have discourse with your superficial interpretation of my arguments. A bunch of attempted gotcha's in bad faith means you're just trying to pick apart what I'm writing rather than the principles of the argument, so I'm not going to be able to convince you against cancel culture being problematic. When the pendulum swings against it and you start reading articles in CBC about it please remember your shallow uncritical thoughts here. ✌️
I made a post on r/browsers over on reddit and someone said to go back to firefox, they are wokies like me. Plus a couple other comments as well.