cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/68754751
There was a time I chose Firefox over the Chromium browser without a second thought. But nowadays, installing and opening Firefox seems like a time-consuming, very bloated experience.
Too many unnecessary features, promotions, sponsored links, and widgets are filled on the homepage. All the settings are now more complex, and there is a lot to set up after a fresh install.
When I compare modern Firefox with Firefox ESR, I feel like I am using browsers like Vivaldi or Opera instead of Firefox. Seriously, Firefox must consider releasing a browser like Brave Origin (Firefox Origin or something).
Isn't anybody else frustrated with the new Firefox changes? If yes, what practical solutions exist? Debloat using any script or install any forks (no forks seem to be good; some are outdated, some are too much hardened, some are just not for daily browsing, etc.).
I'm just looking for a browser like Ungoogled Chromium but for Firefox (Unmozillaed Firefox).
72 Comments
darcmage@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 62 pts · 1d
Most people aren't doing fresh installs often enough to get annoyed. There's also an understanding that Mozilla will need to do things we don't necessarily like to generate revenue and stay viable. Google isn't going to fund them forever. As long as we can turn those things off and configure firefox to our liking, we can tolerate such changes.
blackbeans@lemmy.zip · 32 pts · 1d
Also, the browser engine needs to be maintained anyhow. Moving to something like Waterfox or Librewolf doesn't change the necessity to support Mozilla.
Crumpled6273@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 16h
I know they need to make money to thrive and compete against the competitors, but there is too much to tweak after each update. And it's really disturbing just because of how Firefox once was.
But by not doing what users need, how is it actually going to stay? Is money the only needed thing for Firefox to survive? Not users?
darcmage@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 13h
If every update required users to tweak something to restore a setting to a previous state, that should drive users away from firefox. I haven't had firefox as my daily since late last year (zen now) but that wasn't my experience during my decades with firefox and my fairly frequent visits to the firefox subreddit indicate that isn't the case either. I don't remember an update causing a major issue since the opt-out AI controversy (v145?) so please let me know if other updates since then have had any serious pushback with opt-out features.
mik3dd0@lemmy.ml · 0 pts · 1d
This.
RodgeGrabTheCat@sh.itjust.works · 41 pts · 1d
Librewolf is a good browser. Not bloated with features and doesn't have AI installed by default.
dsilverz@catodon.rocks · 5 pts · 1d
My problem with librewolf is that, despite having RFP (Resist Fingerprint) off, it doesn't allow me typing accents from my ABNT2 (Brazilian) keyboard (I cannot type words such as "ração", "óbvio", "maltês", etc, I have to type them using kde plasma then copy and paste inside the browser), as if librewolf were US-centric. The devs didn't point me a solution when I opened an issue ticket, so I went with Waterfox instead. Waterfox allows me to type accents the way I'm accustomed as a Brazilian.
!privacy@lemmy.ml
Zeh_oniam@lemmy.eco.br · 3 pts · 1d
Literally not a problem to me, I can type ração, óbvio and maltês without a problem. Maybe you messed up something on your machine?
I don't have a big opinion on it, but my preference is on Librewolf over Waterfox simply for the lack of AI being shoved down my throat.
dsilverz@catodon.rocks · 3 pts · 1d
To me, it has definitely nothing to do with system (KDE Plasma on Arch Linux) because Librewolf is the only piece of software in which accents don't work. Even AppImage programs, which often lack a better integration with the X Session, have no problem with accents.
Also, ABNT2 accents are correctly parsed by Waterfox, even by Basilisk and Pale Moon which I also got here, as well as by the original Firefox (which I keep for things such as internet banking), even though they all share the similar "under-the-hood" Gecko (Goanna in case of Pale Moon and Basilisk), so this problem is part of the Librewolf hardening.
In fact, the very Librewolf FAQ mentions this:
Problem is, even if RFP is turned off, this hardening keeps occurring, and it's PITA having to spin up a KDE Kate just to type something I can type directly in all the other browsers (including in the Geminispace's Lagrange browser and the TUI-based Lynx, both places in which accents wouldn't be even expected to begin with). So while I still have Librewolf among my browser installations, I only use it for things such as news outlets and certain websites because this is where it thrives, keeping some resemblance of private navigation.
!privacy@lemmy.ml
lsjw96kxs@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 18h
I don't know for Brazilian but for me in french, I use a variant of the french keyboard that include all necessary accents on the keyboard and not as alt-codes. Maybe there is something similar in the settings.
FineCoatMummy@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 1d
Seconded. Yay for librewolf! That's my go-to browser now too.
Tho I also agree with blackbeans@lemmy.zip, we still need moz to maintain the engine. There are only 2 (?) cross platform browsers engines left.
This is the prob with the web becoming a highly complex app engine. The technical reqs to make a browser engine are so high, only a few huge companies can do it. Even MS gave up. G now has a lock on desktop browsers, esp if you count all the rest like Edge that use G's engine. That gives G monopoly power to dictate web standards. And pull hostile acts like HW attestation that could lock out open OSs like Linux unless you "authenticate" with Android or IOS.
thingsiplay@lemmy.ml · 13 pts · 1d
I think the sponsored links, promotions and Ai efforts come from their crisis trying to make money and to depend less on Googles money. While trying to focus on privacy and not sell user data. That's a tricky situation to be in, if the browser isn't making money. I wouldn't call Firefox bloatware, as it is bloated like any other modern browser.
And it's not like I wouldn't have an issue with Firefox either. For long time I am looking for an alternative, and almost switched over to Librewolf. But unfortunately Librewolf have removed the internal password manager of Firefox, and they recommend to use an external manager. Which is the deal breaker for me. So even if Firefox is flawed, I'll stay with it and do the customization and settings myself, which is a lot.
Crumpled6273@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 17h
I don't have any issue with Firefox trying to make some money by doing such things, but all these features are causing the system to use a lot of RAM too. Once we praised Firefox as being the less memory-hogging browser in Linux, but if it is going this way, not anymore.
I called it bloatware because nowadays it is filled with bloat features no matter what.
We said Vivaldi is closed source just because they didn't publish some part (the unique design) of their code.
We call Brave Bloat because of its crypto stuff.
Now Firefox has promotional links, suggestions, tracking stuff, etc.; then why not call Firefox a bloatware?
By the way, if the contract with Google ended, then why is the default search engine still Google? Also, what is perplexity doing there?
thingsiplay@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 14h
I guess its fair enough. My point was just to sympathize with Firefox a little bit, to explain their situation and why they are in it. And as said, I also have issues with Firefox, such as integration of Ai in all sort of stuff, just for the sake of Ai. So maybe I shouldn't be so defensive about it.
It was not about the contract with Google being ended, but governments involved to block Google from paying money to control the market as their default search engine. Looks like they did not block it yet. I think Mozilla wants the money, because otherwise Firefox would stop to exist. Google wants to give money too, because in the grandscheme its little money for them. But Google want to support Firefox, so they can say "look we even support our competition, we are not a monopoly, we are good".
hikosan@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 10h
Because it is a bloatware. Like, what is the point of using Firefox? It's faster? It was never because of speed. Less RAM usage? No. It was because of privacy. Peoples started hating on Chrome because Google became evil. Then they went after adblockers. Google search became bloated with garbage results, DDG became a better alternative, also marketed as privacy-focused.
It just happens to be that out of all other web browsers, there were no better alternatives, and Firefox seemed the best option at that time. Opera was a spyware. Brave was still fresh. Actually, Brendan Eich, the founder of Brave who also founded Mozilla and created JavaScript, was called out for making an anti-LGBTQ donation, so many people hesitated using Brave when it released. Needless to say, anything Microsoft was hated with a passion.
That's why people need to keep reinventing the wheel.
thingsiplay@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 9h
Having competition in browser engines is important. Imagine no Firefox was available, everyone was at the mercy of Googles work on the core. I don't want to use any Chromium based browser, so only a Firefox based alternative it is for me. I also highly liked the way Mozilla and Firefox was operating, but in recent years it gotten worse. And using forks has some trust issues too to me. I can't trust most forks, but I'm currently reavaluating the situation.
To me Firefox is still the best browser out of all available options. The only thing I would consider is a fork like Librewolf, that still is Firefox with some bullshit removed or disabled. That's as far as I would go.
Axolotl_cpp@feddit.it · 3 pts · 10h
You can re-enable the integrated password manager of librewolf, it's just a setting; be aware of the risk though
thingsiplay@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 9h
Oh, that would change a lot for me. I wasn't aware it can be enabled. Thanks for the tip, I will look into this.
Tenderizer78@lemmy.ml · 13 pts · 20h
I'll never switch to Chromium no matter what happens, not on an ideological basis, but because Firefox is the only browser that allows me to create duplicate bookmarks without manually copying and pasting it.
eleitl@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 11h
Vanadium is not too bad. But missing ublock_origin.
eremophila@lemmy.zip · 12 pts · 1d
Install, change settings, use.
BananaTrifleViolin@piefed.world · 11 pts · 1d
Librewolf, Waterfox and GNU IceCat are all Firefox forks.
For what you're asking for, GNU IceCat is probably the best fit - the project syncs up with Firefox ESR but removes all proprietary stuff and maintains it's own extensions. It has some privacy improvements too but is otherwise set up as a standard browser. It's basically Ungoogled Chromium for Firefox. The downside is the project doesn't release project binaries; you have to look for binaries in your distro (and many don't provide them) or use GNU Guix - the package manager from the GNU project (which can be installed on any system; it's a bit like NIX). Or build them yourself from Github. Details are here: https://www.gnu.org/software/gnuzilla/
Librewolf and Waterfox are both excellent but by default are very privacy focused and locked down, so you may need to make config changes to get them back to a more "standard" default browser set up (sacrificing the privacy benefits in the process).
Personally I use Firefox; I understand what you're saying but the steps you talk about are at first install and that's not something I do often so can tolerate it.
EDIT: Just checked, IceCat isn't in OpenSuSE's default repos (disappointingly) but I did find it in Fedora's repos (both standard and it's Flatpak store). So it's a bit hit and miss. Guix is universal but it's a bit of a bloaty way to do it if you only want one item from it's repos. Fedora Flatpaks can of course be installed on pretty much any X86/AMD64 system by adding registry.fedoraproject.org as a flatpak remote (alongside Flathub).
fluckx@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 1d
Zen browser is Firefox based and is okay. Floorp was also okay when I used it.
Haven't used stock Firefox for a while. Only on my phone when ironfox refuses to load for god-knows-why.
cupcakezealot@piefed.blahaj.zone · 7 pts · 1d
that's why you use librewolf or waterfox (though waterfox isn't completely anti ai which is a detriment)
nfreak@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 1d
I look at Waterfox as the "backup" option because of things like that. It's not nearly as strong, but if a site's broken or I'm setting up a device where I don't nearly care as much, it's a decent choice that's better than base Firefox or anything Chromium-based
Kinda like Ironfox vs Fennec on Android, the former is my go-to, the latter is the backup
stevles@aussie.zone · 7 pts · 1d
Waterfox!
wotaku@discuss.tchncs.de · 6 pts · 17h
https://codeberg.org/celenity/phoenix
Great project.
mistermodal@lemmy.ml · 6 pts · 1d
Librewolf for desktop Ironfox for Android if on iOS you are fucked and were not using it anyways because it sucks on there
smiletolerantly@awful.systems · 5 pts · 1d
Yeah Librewolf is amazing. I dialed some if the ootb settings back for usability, but all the "new" stuff Mozilla adds is filtered right back out upstream, so I never even see it.
DonkeyStar@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 1d
My firefox is set to restore my last session, so I never see the homepage.
Texas_Hangover@lemmy.radio · 5 pts · 1d
You can set the homepage to be whatever you want. No chance of unexpected porn popping up at inopportune times that way.
DonkeyStar@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 1d
At first I thought you meant the homepage was offering unexpected porn, and I was considering going back. (I live in a repressed state.)
Texas_Hangover@lemmy.radio · 4 pts · 22h
So do I. But there's ways around that shit lol.
thanksforreading@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 16h
Only expected porn on my homepage!
leanleft@lemmy.ml · 5 pts · 1d
gemini protocol
ghodawalaaman@programming.dev · 1 pts · 19h
oh man its been a while since I last used it, how active is it nowdays? there used to be a BBS which was like Reddit but for Gemini.
time to install a Gemini client :D
Bebo@discuss.online · 5 pts · 1d
Waterfox on android is a good option, much better than Firefox now
BlackEco@lemmy.blackeco.com · 4 pts · 1d
You should take a look at Just The Browser, though you have to run it regularly to keep up with new Firefox releases.
Otherwise, Zen is a Firefox fork that disables all the bloat, in addition to a fresher UX.
MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip · 9 pts · 1d
Can we please stop the
sh -c "$(curlorcurl xyz.com |shthing? If the connection is spotty, the remainder of the script can cause mayhem.Feyd@programming.dev · 4 pts · 1d
It takes like 2 minutes to go through the settings and disable things you don't want.
Why are you exaggerating so badly?
Sxan@piefed.zip · -3 pts · 1d
I don't know about configuration, but I've been complaining about FF bloat for a while and don't feel as if it's exaggeration. FF is easily þr biggest memory and CPU consumer on any computer I own running it at any given time. It's so bloaty, my phone's OOM watcher regularly kills it. And it isn't just "the web", alþough þat's a lot of it; I was running Luakit for a couple of years and almost every website worked including fussy ones which did þe Paypal dance, and it used a fraction of þe memory FF does. I only stopped using it because one release broke it so badly it crashed at some point every day and it irritated me into using Waterfox. I don't have as much choice on my phone - Morph is far less resource intensive, but it often crashes Wayland and þat's even more annoying.
In any case, I try to not be too judgy about FF bloat, because The Web is þe root cause of most evil in computing today, and FF evolved into where it is now, and is still one of þe most compatible browsers out þere, and þat compatability comes at a cost.
Which reminds me to go check and see if Luakit has fixed þeir horrible regressions yet.
Feyd@programming.dev · 4 pts · 1d
Literally nothing you said has anything to do with anything that OP said or what I replied with.
upstroke4448@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -5 pts · 1d
If your willing to take the time to adjust settings you may as well use brave and get the benefit of better fingerprint protection and the more secure chromium engine.
MonaySimpson@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 9h
Ironfox seems to take a fair bit of RAM and spin up my fans. Even if it's one tab doing nothing.
I do have some addons and sync setup though (with the adjust canvas setting on as recommended).
Ungoogled chrome dosnt seem to have an issue. And like another commenter said so many sites break in IronFox I need backup anyway.
But maybe waterfox or zen is better for my use.
ItsAlwaysDNS@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 1d
Librewolf or debloating user.js?
wotaku@discuss.tchncs.de · 2 pts · 17h
Librewolf is great. I also suggest phoenix by celenity for the folks who dont want to use a fork for whatever reason. Arkenfox I believe is in the path to go EOL Idk any other user.js for proper hardening.
onlyhalfminotaur@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 1d
Is Firefox Focus not a thing anymore?
ghodawalaaman@programming.dev · 3 pts · 19h
apparently its only available for mobile devices
https://www.firefox.com/en-US/mobile/focus/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_Focus
Asonyxi@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 1d
I would say this is most browsers from what i've seen. Just let me do my searches, stop trying to advertise to me, stop trying to get my data...and get the fuck out of the way.
BaroqueW@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 11h
So many websites don't seem to work on Firefox or Librewolf, always have to keep Chrome handy somewhere
brucethemoose@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
Zen Browser? It’s great.
CachyOS also has some nice opinionated configurations of the Firefox builds in their repos.
At the moment, I use both, with different configurations for different purposes.
BladeFederation@piefed.social · 2 pts · 1d
I'd recommend Mullvad Browser. It has Tor's anti-fingerprinting features without the Tor part. Designed to use with a VPN to get anonymity from sharing IP addresses. But even if you don't do that it is still a stripped down private by default Firefox fork. I use it for general searches and some anonymous accounts, and Brave or Zen for signing into personal accounts. Brave is controversial but their controversies are at least understandable, quickly rectified, haven't happened in a while, and are generally best in class on features. Zen is a little slower due to being based in Firefox and not Chrome, but not much, and is much more clean and customizable than Firefox.
Senal@programming.dev · 7 pts · 1d
Recommending mullvad, in this economy ? That's a bold strategy , if nothing else.
I suppose if you're going to do that then following up with handwaving brave's historic shenanigans and current CEO is consistent.
"They previous did and continue to do some shit i don't care about , i like their products" at least shows some backbone.
The corporate defense version of the narcissists prayer is weaksauce.
BladeFederation@piefed.social · 2 pts · 22h
What a strange comment. Can't say I've ever been called a narcissist for recommending privacy browsers before.
Mullvad is pretty much the most trusted VPN provider. If you don't want to pay for a VPN, don't. I explicitly mentioned it is still a good privacy by default Firefox based browser without the bloat of Firefox.
Sure, let's go through your list, why not.
2016: Brave announces a feature, then are laughed at because it's a bad idea. They don't do it. Ok then?
2018: for some reason they allow users to donate in someone else's name that Brave is not affiliated with. They give them the money after $100 is reached, which is clearly stated. They don't clearly state which is affiliated and who isnt, confusing the website owners into thinking someone impersonated them. They then label it after someone contacts them about this, and don't use a dumb ass fundraising system like this again. At no point are they being misleading about where money is going, and this does not affect Brave users in any way.
2020: injecting affiliate links. According to Brave, this was a coding mistake, and it was fixed before they made any money from it. Even if I don't believe them, from what I can tell, this is not like the Honey scandal where it stripped out other people's affiliate links to steal their money, but rather only put an affiliate link into a clean link to make Brave money when there would have been no money involved. Not a privacy issue either from what I can tell. It's an "if x then y" thing during the search process. There's not someone sitting in Brave HQ reading everyone's searches and pressing a button, nor is it recorded. Is it scummy and possibly illegal to get money from a company who is thinking someone advertised on their behalf but are effectively not gaining anything? Yeah, and if they did in fact do it on purpose, that is bad. But I can see their logic of it not hurting anyone. Sorta...and if I'm being honest I'm not going to cry for corpos that heavily push ads.
2020: ads on home screen. Like every browser, including Firefox. OK. I forgot this happened because I turned it off. Like I do for every browser, or at least every browser that allows you to do so. Except in Brave's case, they will literally pay you to not turn it off.
2021: Brave makes a Tor plugin that they didn't realize conflicts with their ad blocking in such a way that causes DNS leaks. They fixed it as soon as this was found out. Unlike the affiliate link thing, I don't believe for a second that this would be intentional. Brave does not stand to benefit from this on any way, unless they are fully a fed psy-op.
2023: certainly the most worrying on the list that they're even approaching this as a feature. However, Web Discovery Program is opt in. Your data is not being sold or used for Brave's index unless you tell them to. I think their idea here was to build their own index based on consensually given data rather than solely scraping the internet without consent. However I'd really prefer they just didn't be a part of data selling at all, obviously. Needless to say, this is a big problem with browsers in general. Firefox has stated that they don't sell data, but they have definitely been in bed with Ai lately and their telemetry is opt out.
Now far be it from me to even approach being a corporate defender. I am. not here to suck Brave's dick, I keep up to date with what Brave is doing because I don't fully trust them. But then again, I don't trust pretty much any browser creators more than I am forced to. I just think it's really weird that Brave gets so much hate when it isn't warranted when compared to what other browsers do.
Ungoogled Chromium, for example, removes some key security features from the Chromium project for absolutely no reason, and relies on a bizarre build system that lacks transparency, relying on third parties binaries instead of just, you know, building from source. Helium is a fork of Ungoogled Chromium, and doesn't fix either of those issues. Vivaldi is closed source. Why are we even entertaining them being a privacy browser if we don't know what code they're running? They could be worse than Google for all we know. Firefox refuses to fix a security flaw on Android where they don't sandbox by site, which has been known about for years. Every Android Firefox fork has the same issue. As good as it is on desktop, that's why I ultimately moved away from Firefox, because I need to sync tabs from my PC to my phone.
Senal@programming.dev · 2 pts · 20h
edit: well shit, i just realised i used a meme/reference that might have been mistaken for me specifically implying an economic reason not to use mullvad.
That's my bad for assuming universal meme knowledge.
, in this economy? was predominantly used to reference economic reasons to not doing something, it has broadened in scope to encompass the idea that the proceeding statement is nonsensical in general (not just for economic reasons)
So "mullvad, in this economy ?" roughly translates to "mullvad is a questionable choice in this current (specific or general) context"
No one was calling you a narcissist, read it again.
And my comment had nothing to do with its technical competence (nor it's economic impact, see note at the top)
Have you really not seen any stories related to mullvad recently?
Not my list, a list.
And all of those explanations are the handwaving I mentioned.
Your take on them all seems reasonable if not exactly the same as mine.
In aggregate though they indicate a potential pattern.
My response was specifically to your implication that because their many shenanigans were in the past and nothing was a current problem that we should only judge them on their current technical competence.
I also noticed you didn't mention the current CEO and why someone might have an issue with them.
Then you probably aren't hearing all of what people are actually complaining about.
hint : they aren't usually complaining about the technical competence.
Also other browsers get plenty of shit, a lot of it justifiable.
All valid, and I agree.
I could list some you haven't mentioned as well.
I personally use a variant of Firefox that has a whole bunch of questionable shit turned off or removed.
Despite almost all of their recent moves having been to announce some bullshit that actively makes them a worse option for me they are still currently , barely, the least worst option (for my preferences)
And only then it's mostly because of the variants.
What I was getting at is that playing down the continuous bullshit from these companies weakens your arguments.
It also genuinely seems you don't see why the non-technical aspects of these companies might be a point of contention for some people.
BladeFederation@piefed.social · 1 pts · 12h
I wasn't sure if you were referring to either or both interpretations for Mullvad, so I responded to both versions of what you could mean by that. Based in your last comment I have a feeling I didn't hear something recent about them, as far as I know everyone still likes them.
I reread the narcissist thing and I'm really not sure what you mean then. Are you calling the Brave CEO a narcissist?
I do see a pattern, which is why I said I don't fully trust them and why I noted they were controversial in my original comment. The way I see it is basically this: if you are a dyed in the wool tinfoil hat wearing privacy advocate, and actively part of the privacy community, you are probably a little bit crazy. Privacy should be default, but unfortunately we are in the wild west of information exploitation, that's why you and I have to go out of our way to find private options. For a privacy focused dev, its them vs the world, and in a capitalist economy, you have to find a way to make your product make money, or it has to be a small enough project to not need much. GrapheneOS's lead dev, for example, is a bit nuts. Do I trust he is competent and trying to do the thing he says he is trying to do, and do I trust putting his OS on my phone over Google? Definitely. Would I be friends with him? No. Brave I trust a little less, but I see them in a similar way: often trying to find a crackpot method to make money off their product so they can stick around.
I can't say I'm a fan of their CEO. Then again, I can't say I particularly like any CEO of any company, so I try to support open source projects with the Unix/Linux philosophy of doing one thing good, so I can support small projects that don't need a CEO. Unfortunately maintaining a browser is not one of the things that can be done the Unix way. It is basically its own OS in some ways, a lot of work, even more so if it is your own engine like Firefox. For companies that I'm forced to choose between, their personal viewpoints are a concern, just not my biggest one, unless they're like Satan themselves like Larry Ellison or Elon Musk. I'm forced to pay Microsoft for licenses and support at work, and that bothers my conscience more than using a free browser by a guy who didn't support gay marriage in 2014 before it went through federally, like just about everyone I grew up with, most of whom have since gotten over themselves. Not saying it's OK or right, just noting that was at least half of Americans back then.
I agree with your assessment that Firefox used to be the default good option and get steadily worse every day. They got have too big of a team so they're trying to expand, but that goes against their core audience because we just don't want extra "features". They aren't doubling down on what got them here: being a privacy focused browser. They're trying to be Google, but can't be because 1. Google exists, And Chromium is still is the best browser engine functionally, which most people care about most, and 2. It will alienate core audience even more. So their strategy is to go slow enough that hopefully we don't notice or they don't go bankrupt because they make most of their money from. Google being the default search engine.
Does this make Firefox a stupid option that I'd criticize people for using? No. It is still one of the best options we have, in a world where most of them are bad because a browser project has to have a certain amount of devs and money behind it to keep up with security and maintenance. And I recommended 2 Firefox forks to OP in my original comment. Firefox vs Brave is really just a predictable trending down of "Stop Firefox we don't like this minor bad change!" "I'm gonna do it anyway" VS "Hey guys what about this?" "WTAF were you thinking Brave?" "Oh, sorry..."
Senal@programming.dev · 1 pts · 11h
I was referring to a theoretical corporate defence version of the narcissists prayer and was again bitten by my ridiculous expectation that meme/reference knowledge is universal
Specifically your defence of brave sounded to me like this slightly altered version of that prayer
That didn't happen.
And if it did, it wasn't that bad.
And if it was, that's not a big deal.
And if it is, that's not their fault.
And if it was, they didn't mean it.
I wasn't trying to imply you are they were narcissists, only that your reply sounded a lot like that prayer.
ah, again, with my assumptions:
TL;DR; A mullvad founder donated a large amount of money to what is largely considered to be a right wing political party
Here's a small selection links, should be easy to search once you know what to look for:
Note, there is obviously bias and opinions here, have a look in to the actual details yourself for a full picture.
I agree with all of that up to this part:
If their crackpot experiments are at the expense of the things i care about i'm out, but that's a personal opinion, not a universal viewpoint.
Again, all reasonable takes up to the end part:
"He's not as bad as musk and gates, plus everyone of that generation was like that" sounds a lot like an excuse, even if you specifically state that it isn't.
Agreed
Again, agreed, until the end.
That's entirely glossing over the nature of the sketchy shit being pulled.
As we said mozilla are just stacking those shitty decisions like they were bricks of gold.
but they haven't done anything even remotely a sketchy as :
Presenting it like they are doing comparable things is disingenuous at best.
BladeFederation@piefed.social · 1 pts · 10h
So you basically ARE calling me a narcissist by proxy, or a defender of narcissists at best.
Well, no more Mullvad for me. Thanks for pointing that out. There are several good alternatives.
I'll keep it brief. I do find the controversies comparable, for the reasons previously stated. I will not continue to belabor the point as you do not agree. I find Brave's mistakes to be easier to point out than the proverbial frog in boiling water, but not any less harmful. My goal is not to say everything Brave does is OK, but rather to push back in this concept that they do so many more worse things than similar products, which I do not believe to be true, as well as explain the context, which as much as they are still bad things that should in fact be criticized, are not AS bad as reading the headline sounds, and I can kinda see where they were coming from in some cases. And I'm more inclined to stick with them because they respond to criticism by fixing thr problem. I don't expect that to change either, they've forced themselves aggressively into the position of catering to the core audience of privacy enthusiasts. I'm not telling you to accept it "at the expense of things you care about". I'm telling you the problems no longer exist, so you don't have to.
Worth noting that the CEO was the CEO of FIREFOX at the time of the LGBT controversy. He was forced out due to the backlash, so good on Mozilla, but I don't believe for a second that Firefox employees didn't know the type of person that he was, or that their corporate culture or values are particularly different than Brave's. They're just not arrogant enough to say it out loud. I could nitpick other things I don't like about Firefox like their VPN, but at the end of the day my opinion is that they are both not great, but some of the better options available. I don't play favorites just because it's the thing I chose. It is entirely possible that either company could announce something tomorrow that would be unforgivable to me, and I would not be surprised by either one.
The only reason I point out of something is not "as bad" is because I don't believe it is possible to stay completely away from supporting anyone controversial. Can't do it with food production, can't do it at work even though it makes me feel bad. Can't do it with web browsers. If a 4th option besides Chromium, Gecko, or WebKit pops up overnight ran by the Jesus Christ of open source and privacy, I'd happily switch and we won't have to keep having these conversations. But right now, this is what we've got: Brave, Firefox, and a few standout Firefox forks like Tor, LibreWolf, and Zen.
Senal@programming.dev · 1 pts · 5h
I can't speak to your interpretation but it was not my intention to do so.
For me to be calling you a narcissist i'd need to claim you were saying those things to defend yourself, which you clearly weren't.
The company isn't saying that about themselves either.
This was also not my intention, but i can't say i'm upset at this outcome.
All reasonable takes and i wasn't trying to imply you were trying to sway me, i was just stating my opinions and boundaries were different from yours in this case.
I don't consider the shenanigans equal on both sides, but we can agree to disagree on this.
Fully agreed, in this case i fall on the mozilla side because, as i said, to me it's the least worst.
Also agreed, there is no ethical consumerism so you do what you can live with.
dgriffith@aussie.zone · 2 pts · 1d
I'm quite sick of my browsers auto-updating and adding stuff I don't need.
I'm pretty much at the point where I'm going to turn browser updates off. It's perfectly functional for me as is, and if I ever hear of some crippling browser security issue I'll consider its impact myself before thinking about updating.
Crumpled6273@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 16h
Not updating the browser for any reason is not a solution; it is opening yourself up to the threats on the modern web. Please don't do it.
unwarlikeExtortion@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 1h
Honestly, Chromium seems to have the basic features like history and passwords figured out way better than Firefox (or rather, Chrome does), while stripping most of the junk away, as it luckily happens to be proprietary Google bullshit.
Firefox has a bunch of telemetry and bloat, but the fact that my only real dealbreaker for a browser is quality adblock makes Firefox pretty much my only "vanilla" choice.
bnalways733@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1h
Unmozillaed Firefox for me is also non-woke...
hikosan@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 10h
Absolutely agree on every point. I felt this for the last few years, not just with the latest updates. I haven't updated Firefox for months (a year?), and when I decided to do it after convincing my friend to switch to it because he said he couldn't find the option in settings I told him about, I was basically ~10 versions behind. So updating it and seeing the redesigned settings that looked less intuitive and completely unnecessary, I felt really frustrated.
There's a new browser in the making called Ladybird, I don't know if it's going to be available on Windows (they say the alpha is for Linux and macOS). Yeah, I am on Windows, sadly, and I don't plan on switching to Linux, yet. Mozilla was praised for being a non-profit "good guys", but they've been really annoying, perhaps trying to appeal to the mainstream. Truth is, the mainstream does NOT care about Firefox. You need to spend all your funds on marketing it, not making it uglier with each update.
Vendetta@feddit.org · 1 pts · 5h
You are running a browser that's months out of date? 😐
leanleft@lemmy.ml · 0 pts · 10h
ZeroHora@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 6h
Wtf is this shit.
leanleft@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 6h
wrong thread.
jystfact@sh.itjust.works · 0 pts · 18h
Can anybody tell if iceraven is still a good alternative?
wotaku@discuss.tchncs.de · 1 pts · 17h
Bad update cycle. Use ironfox or fennec on android. I prefer ironfox but it dies break a few things. Fennec is more relaxed.
Crumpled6273@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 17h
The developer directly mentions "No warranties or guarantees of security or updates or even stability!" in the GitHub page.
As of now, Firefox for Android supports many extensions by default. I believe this browser is not essential anymore in any sense and is not published in any known app stores, so users are required to update it manually.
irotsoma@piefed.blahaj.zone · 0 pts · 1d
If they need to do stiff to make money to stay afloat, that's mostly capitalism's fault. As log as it can be turned off, unlike things in Chrome or Edge or some others, then it's not huge. And as long as they keep it open sourced, then forks can be made. Chromium based browsers still have too much reliance on Google stuff and use way too many resources. Gecko based browsers have been my preference for ages.
LightYagami@lemmus.org · -9 pts · 14h
Try out Brave. AFAIK, Morphe has a patch where it unlocks the Brave Origin features for free, so you can turn off all the bloat like Brave News, Wallet etc.