Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

    (developer.chrome.com)
    552 points freedomben | 13 comments | 11 Oct 24 14:20 UTC | HN request time: 1.017s | source | bottom
    1. lemagedurage ◴[11 Oct 24 15:07 UTC] No.41810147[source]▶
    For people who want to stick with a Chrome-based browser while still using the full-featured uBlock Origin: Brave will keep supporting uBlock Origin even after Manifest V2's removal from Chromium.

    https://brave.com/blog/brave-shields-manifest-v3/

    replies(3): >>41810284 #>>41810428 #>>41810690 #
    2. the_gipsy ◴[11 Oct 24 15:20 UTC] No.41810284[source]▶
    For how long, though? And what will be the next marketing scam after crypto/tokens? Something with AI?
    3. ParetoOptimal ◴[11 Oct 24 15:38 UTC] No.41810428[source]▶
    Note that Brave's creator opposes same sex marriage, is a Coronavirus "skeptic", and his silly cryptocurrency is made to work with brave browser.
    replies(4): >>41810536 #>>41812173 #>>41812230 #>>41815517 #
    4. gabrielsroka ◴[11 Oct 24 15:47 UTC] No.41810536[source]▶
    Brave's creator, B. Eich, also created JavaScript, so I assume you have that disabled everywhere.
    replies(2): >>41813149 #>>41816015 #
    5. grounder ◴[11 Oct 24 16:03 UTC] No.41810690[source]▶
    Brave browser should probably not be trusted. They violated basic trust by redirecting URLs to their own affiliate links for those URLs. That is pretty bad. https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/8/21283769/brave-browser-aff...
    6. sunaookami ◴[11 Oct 24 18:43 UTC] No.41812173[source]▶
    >opposes same sex marriage

    That's not true, he donated to organizations supporting California Proposition 8 which banned same-sex marriage which by the way was supported by the majority back then in California. That was also 16 years ago, it's time to let it go and stop spreading misinformation. You should instead not rely on ad-hominem and critize Brave for being ridden with cryptocurrency and doing shady stuff.

    replies(1): >>41815928 #
    7. jovial_cavalier ◴[11 Oct 24 18:48 UTC] No.41812230[source]▶
    I don't care.
    8. timeon ◴[11 Oct 24 20:06 UTC] No.41813149{3}[source]▶
    Oh I wish.
    9. PKop ◴[12 Oct 24 01:16 UTC] No.41815517[source]▶
    Nothing wrong with any of those positions. And largely irrelevant to whether he's good at his job and whether Brave is a good browser which it is for various reasons, one of which being he leads the company.
    10. Dylan16807 ◴[12 Oct 24 02:40 UTC] No.41815928{3}[source]▶
    Do you have any evidence his opinion has changed? If you don't, then it's not misinformation, and no you don't get to demand people "let it go" because it was 16 years ago.

    And donating to a specific cause shows a lot more commitment and understanding than a typical vote.

    replies(1): >>41847246 #
    11. rjh29 ◴[12 Oct 24 02:55 UTC] No.41816015{3}[source]▶
    Yes, he created an absolutely terribly designed language that we're still dealing with today. That is not a good thing.
    12. account42 ◴[15 Oct 24 10:59 UTC] No.41847246{4}[source]▶
    Trying to cancel people based on their political opinions is a lot worse than even the most extreme things you could donate towards. Grow up and learn to live with people different from you.
    replies(1): >>41852579 #
    13. Dylan16807 ◴[15 Oct 24 20:07 UTC] No.41852579{5}[source]▶
    1. I didn't say to cancel him. I asked for evidence his opinion changed.

    2. What does "cancel" even mean in this situation? Calling him a jerk or deciding not to use Brave is definitely not worse than "the most extreme things you could donate towards".

    3. There are plenty of things that could be construed as a "political opinion" that are valid targets for criticism and avoiding contact over. In particular, politics are full of scapegoats, and judging someone for participating in scapegoating is entirely fair.