As the title suggests. I want community opinions on the Arc browser.
You must log in or register to comment.
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn’t great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don’t promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
Chat rooms
-
[Matrix/Element]Dead
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
- 0 users online
- 57 users / day
- 383 users / week
- 1.5K users / month
- 5.7K users / 6 months
- 1 subscriber
- 2.45K Posts
- 57.9K Comments
- Modlog
https://privacytests.org/
PS for all the haters of open source facts : Even librewolf references this site for browser testing.
https://librewolf.net/docs/testing/
An employee of Brave runs that website.
If that doesn’t scream conflict of interest, I don’t know what does.
And yet the results are still fact and brave still isn’t the best.
Are you saying the information presented is somehow incorrect?
They’re saying they don’t understand open source at all. They’re saying someone must stop the highly regarded and useful personal project they’ve been working on for years prior to being hired by evil corp (it is because Peter Thiel). They’re saying they don’t know how to read the results of the tests. Etc.
Well first, let’s stay on the topic of a huge ethical conflict of interest. Do you understand why that’s a problem, and how conflicts of interests have been abused throughout history?
Well, first, let’s stay on the topic of fact versus your possible issue of possible conflict.
K thx bye.
The source code is freely available for you to run all the tests yourself. On any browser you like.
Brave sucks. Peter Thiel can suck the corn out of my shit.
But, the tests and results are still accurate. *based on fresh install and no config changes. (FF can be hardened well beyond what’s shown)
As you can see in the results tor/mull/mullvad/librewolf are basically the best for all around privacy and security.
They’re all based on FF.
Ps: The guy was doing this long before he went to work at brave. (Maybe that’s why they hired him? Hmmm)
Well, there’s a good chance that most people who present technical information publicly are probably involved somewhere in the tech space. Pretty sure the owner of that site also has a disclaimer stating that he in fact works for Brave.
More directly, is the information on that website inaccurate? Could any other person create a similar website with the same information? Has anyone?
True facts don’t change based on who presents them. Every time I see this “oh don’t trust the Brave employee” it’s usually someone who is mad that FF isn’t the best in whatever category.
You just nailed it lmao.
How do you feel about ethical conflicts of interest?
There is none. This is a personal project. It has been long before brave. The source code is there. All previous results are there. All methods used are there. They make it well known their current employment.
Oh, did I mention you can run the same tests because the whole thing is OPEN SOURCE.?
removed by mod
This doesn’t address my question about how to rationally think about conflicts of interest.
Seems like a bad assumption. Do you trust a scientist paid by BP to tell you how safe BP fuel is for the environment? Do you trust Mark Zuckerberg to tell the United States how private Facebook is?
And after you employ some critical thinking there, maybe your responses will dictate how you would see the presentation of statistics, and whether a dishonest paid actor would be likely to overstate things that make their employer look good and understate things that made their employer look bad, while technically not lying as far as the law is concerned.