Even without the crypto stuff, when I installed it, it felt like an intern first eclipse plugin. Few buttons more, a different help page and that's it. Didn't inspire technical strength and quality.
That's weird, it's pretty indistinguishable from the other browsers for me. Reminds me of a cross between Opera and Firefox.
It's run by one of the principle Firefox devs (Eich) and none of the stories about it ripping people off or being insecure appear to have been well founded.
I've used all the major browsers, starting with Mosaic and Netscape, was there when FF was phoenix, have been writing websites for 20 years (only a small amount of that time commercially). YMMV but it seems trustworthy, privacy focused, fast enough (ie I can't tell if it's different in performance terms).
It's just reskinned Chrome with privacy extensions built in and a system to enable people to try and send micropayments to sites if the sites are signed up.
It's not reminiscent of Eclipse in anyway for me (mind Eclipse to me most evokes poor DE integration, I'm a long time KDE user, and having a billion settings).
Yeah I wonder if most of the Brave allegations (that are usually attached to no actual verifiable facts) are in fact hit pieces on Eich from the bully crowd
Yes it felt like a reskinned Chrome with a few unfinished parts bolted on. And coming from Eich big new project I thought it would be way more polished.
Replacing ads on sites you visit with their ads, wrapped up in a cryptocurrency scheme, like you'd expect from a literal virus, brought to you by a guy too homophobic to be on Mozilla's board.
Plus, and I have no evidence of this apart the synchronized hype they do for the browser, but I'm pretty sure Brave is secretly bankrolling those very... political... Linux YouTubers.
I do enjoy the irony that Mozilla seems to have gone downhill ever since he left / got kicked out. The people replacing him, IIRC, aren't as knowledgeable or expert as he was. But then, I am somewhat a fan of pure meritocracy.
Of course (to reply to downvoted up-comment), we don't and never did "[replace] ads on sites you visit". But when it comes to evil-me, making false claims is justified? Seems so!
