Is this an ad for Brave?
Hell nah Brave is awful
Brave had a massive bug where Tor sessions were leaked to ISPs. Ain’t no way im trusting something like that in 2026
How come Brave can interfere with Tor sessions?
What about waterfox?
Librewolf is the GOAT.
I am so very happy that the header is sticky, I was prepared to need to scroll back up
Brave is a crypto scam disguised as a reskinned version of Google Chrome
Serious people use literally anything else. At least Google is honest about its spyware
Why does Firefox have an ❌ next to “Insecure website setting”? It very much does warn you. There’s even an “HTTPS-only” setting that allows you to completely block insecure websites from loading.
I think it’s because you have to enable it first?
It’s an ad for Brave. They are going to lie about their competition.
But… It shows brave with an x too…
Firefox and Safari both have insecure website warnings, don’t know why they have X’s there
This is an ad for Brave. The creator of this site is Arthur Edelstein who is employed by Brave. 🙄
I am so sick of “privacy guides” that subtly try to push a crypto bro ad company browser.
Brave is a crypto bro run ad company who’s CEO is openly anti LGBT+.
I find it hilarious when people call brave, a browser by an ad company basically, a good private browser.
I followed all their shenanigans over the years. No one should touch this bloated browser.
The CEO is not openly anti LGBT+. He made a single $1000 to a prop 8 campaign back in 2008, way before Brave was even a thing.
That’s it. That’s the controversy. A miniscule donation at a very different time. I know a lot of people here were infants back in 2008, but the levels of LGBT support at that time were WAY less than now. It even looks like he later apologized and said he regretted his actions. I’m not going to call the guy a saint, or even a good person; it was still a shitty thing to do, but in context, that’s a far fucking cry from being “openly anti LGBT+” by today’s standards.
That said, there are some valid criticisms of Brave as a whole. I just wish people would focus on the valid criticisms rather than parrot bullshit they heard others say that makes them look like uninformed idiots.
What’s prop 8 campaign? Why does it matter whether the donation was done before or after Brave was started? Why does it matter that support for LGBT was lower when he made the donation?
You’re attempting to make it seem like it’s fine because of all these arbitrary rules you’ve place and by hiding what he donated to (most people won’t look up what prop 8 is, and you know it), but why not hold people accountable no matter when or how big the issue is?
You can also hold them accountable on all the issues, not just the issues you care about. Just because you care about issue x, doesn’t mean someone else caring about issue y is invalid.
And they say “the levels of support were way less than now” trying to imply everyone was like that than, it was the social sentiment. Why is that stupid argument used to try and normalise vile things, everyone thought like that, bullshit bullshit bullshit.
What are you talking about? Donating $1000 to an anti human rights campaign was bigoted then and now. And since when is $1000 considered a “small” donation? It’s like donating to the Israeli military. Don’t matter if it was in 2008 or 2026. You support genocide either way.
Being sorry is a good start. But being sorry does not excuse the action. But yes there are other critiques you can choose to do in addition to the CEO donating to an anti human rights campaign I will concede.
Again, it was a shitty thing to do. But I want you to REALLY ask yourself: given it was almost 20 years ago, he has publicly apologized, and that he has not done anything besides that one instance, do you really think he fits the definition of being “Openly anti LGBT+”?
Like shit man, Obama was against gay marriage when he first entered office. Does he get the title of being “openly anti LGBT+”?
he has publicly apologized
He said he was sorry for “causing pain”, he didn’t apologize for making the donation or for being against same-sex marriage.
and that he has not done anything besides that one instance
He has also not donated to pro-LGBTQ+ causes or expressed support for same-sex marriage since then either.
do you really think he fits the definition of being “Openly anti LGBT+”?
Yes.
If Obama gave a “minuscule” $1000 donation to prop 8 I would say the same. Having an opinion and being wrong, admitting it is different than giving $1000 to repress people even if you apologize.
(Obama has major issues aside this for the record but that is out of scope.)
But if you donated $1000 to repress people in 2008 or now yah you should be called out. Being sorry makes it better but does not undo the harm.
In 2008 I donated $20 to HRC to oppose people like the CEO of brave. He could have done the same or just done noting. He openly chose to repress LGBT+ people threw action.
There it is… Firefox and DuckDuckGo… unbeatable combo.
This is also about who has the most checkmarks, not whether or not the checkmark is good or bad.
I just use plain Firefox, and don’t use my real name for anything. What I lack in privacy, I try to make up for in anonymity.
Use the ublock origin extension for general safety
Librewolf 😍
Mullvad’s browser seems to be even better. They’re the only VPN I trust, so if their browser is Gecko-based, I might just have to switch from Firefox.
On June 26, 2026, Swedish left-wing newspaper Flamman reported that founder and co-owner of Mullvad Daniel Berntsson had made a five million Swedish krona (~$500,000 USD) personal donation to the populist Örebro Party. (Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullvad#Donation_to_the_Örebro_Party)
Said political party support far-right policies such as so-called “ethnic cleansing”.
So this is Brave’s new ad campaign then?
Librewolf
not crazy about chromium, but i’m curious where a browser like helium/cromite/bromite or vanadium on gOS stack up (i get that’s not mainstream android)
ironfox, too. i just like comparison tables and as little privacy invasion as possible
Vanadium is very secure but has a weak content blocker and no fingerprinting protections.
Helium has uBlock Origin but may have canvas fingerprinting protections (inherited from ungoogled Chromium). It also inherits the security issues present in upstream ungoogled Chromium.
Cromite has an alright built-in content blocker (ABP engine) and supports adding uBlock Origin, and has decent fingerprinting protections. Cromite doesn’t have good default settings for its ABP blocklists or important anti-fingerprint settings.
