I've given up on the built-in bookmarks in all browsers and even the New Tab page. I wrote up a single file HTML page and checked it into my dotfiles repos. Icons are short data urls of SVG with a hover drop down (like Reddit and various subreddits). I like that it's "self hosted" and not some 3rd party site.
I have hundreds of bookmarks, all neatly categorized, compared to the New Tab page's paltry 16 or whatever. I also get the exact same page in Firefox (personal), Chrome (work), or Firefox/Android.
It sounded silly at first but now I can't live without it.
Yes but a little more complicated than that. You need an add-on, as the old "homepage" preferences seem to have gone by the wayside or don't work as expected.
Hey
I just started using Pinboard last week.
Are the Earlier/Later buttons working for you?
Clicking on Earlier only seems to take me one page back. Successive clicks(of Earlier or Later) return that same page of bookmarks.
Tried on Safari and Chrome.
Thanks
i use Raindrop.io
Freemium, u have unlimited bookmarks, tag system, folder, notes, and simple search.
With an affordable subscription, you have a nested folder hierarchy, and permanent cache of your bookmarked items
Well for one, it should save a snapshot at the page with each bookmark so that it will still be useful in the future when that site goes offline. Then add full text search through those snapshots.
None of the following stops me from using bookmarks on Firefox, but they're part of my list of Firefox annoyances:
- The bookmarks bar doesn't "fit" the current and previous two UIs. Margins/paddings are all wrong, at least on macOS. Why design a new UI if you're not going to apply it to everything?
- The bookmarks manager still opens on an old window, with small text, even though Firefox went the "Chrome way" and started using tabs, not windows for this type of content. Only recently this window started supporting dark mode.
- Bookmarks behave differently from other links. Eg: it doesn't respect the shortcut to open a link in the background.
- Bookmark icons are hard to update. While other browsers update the favicon when we visit the page, Firefox doesn't always do that. We need some hack or addon to force the browser to delete all favicons and then load each link so it gets the new favicon... why make it so hard?
- Not 100% related to bookmarks, but when opening a different bookmarks at once (eg: a folder), Firefox doesn't seem to prioritise the active tab. Chromium appears to be faster because of this.
I'm currently using Firefox, but I'll be honest: it's a mess of a browser. Old and new code, different philosophies, different UIs, all used side by side. Even more annoying is the fact that they ignore all this and use their limited resources on stuff that is mostly fine (eg: a new UI, a new search bar, etc).
> Adblock Plus is owned by Eyeo GmbH which supposedly earns millions through it's 'acceptable ads' program.
That is not wild speculation but rather the official narrative from Adblock Plus. Their main revenue stream is the acceptable ads program [1]. In order to see if they make "millions", I am also linking their financial statements from the Company Register in Germany [2]. Please note that this document is in German and I read it using machine translation software.
Still, big products rarely want to mention their smaller competitors, to not draw attention to them. That Mozilla post is a very good favor for Brave. Kudos to Mozilla!
Brave isn't a competitor with Firefox. Firefox is a browser, Brave is a crypto wallet/ethical ad aggregator/adblock/DNS/video-calling system/compensation network/social/IPFS viewer. You're welcome to choose for yourself, but I typically grab Firefox when I just want to browse the web.
That's an interesting way of viewing it. I use it because it's the best maintained Chromium fork out there that is privacy-focused and supports extensions from the store OOTB.
I don't care about nor use most of their "value-add".
I didn't expect the self-proclaimed "Brave" browser and the word "ethical" in the same sentence. At least not with a sprinkling of "investigations", "un", "challenged", or "lol".
I guess one man's ad aggregator is another's man-in-the-middle attack, and those added to the compensation network without their consent may mistake it for an extortion racket.
I have both Firefox and Brave installed (currently typing this on Firefox).
I use Brave because it's Chromium without Google's stuff, fairly fast updates, supports extensions from the official store, etc. All other stuff is disabled... I use it as a browser.
I have a similar setup, except I use Ungoogled Chromium as my Chrome browser. You could achieve similar results by stripping Brave of it's featureset, but it's easier for me since I can automate the process of installing Chromium on my desktop.
I'm glad you seem to get it though. My comment wasn't intended as a jab at Brave's featureset, but rather to point out that they ship as completely different utilities. As someone who already has utilities for what it offers, it's hard to fit Brave into my life. On top of that, it's also hard to trust that they won't introduce some radical feature that I won't like, since it's current state is one hell of a precedent for what a browser should look like. At the end of the day I err on the side of simplicity and security.
Ungoogled Chromium is nice, but lacks self updates and I can't seem to be able to install extensions directly from the store.
For browser updates, I could go the binaries way, but then I'd have to use a 3rd party package manager and have to live with outdated versions (the project is on Chromium 94, but the version for macOS is still on 92). I could also build it myself, but I don't want to deal with that (I guess part of the problem is me being lazy).
The perfect Chromium browser for me would be Brave as it works right now, but without their own features. Sadly that doesn't seem to exist.
Vivaldi is an interesting browser... it's developed by some of the people that used to work on the original Opera browser. Opera was sold and now also uses Chromium, but it's closer to Chromium (and Brave) in terms of UI and features, than to Vivaldi and the old Opera.
I've tried it, but it tries to do a lot (email client, notes, very customisable, etc) and sometimes I would get overwhelmed with all the options. It also seems to use more resources and was not as fluid as other Chromium-based browsers (at least on my machine). I've heard that they rely a lot on javascript so it's easier to maintain the UI and features across all platforms, but the performance suffers a bit.
Brave is closer to Chromium and Chrome (UI, features, etc). If you try it, keep Brave Rewards off, ignore the crypto side of things, it can be a nice Chrome replacement if you don't need all the Google stuff (sync, etc).
In any case, if you're happy with Vivaldi, then keep using it. I don't think it's a bad browser, but sadly it doesn't fit my needs.
Great, thanks for the note. I'm using Firefox as my primary, so really, Vivaldi tends to be my alternate for sites that don't like Firefox (or at least the configuration I use.)
Is Brave really that much smaller than Firefox, these days? Firefox has lost a LOT of market share over the last 15 years of Mozilla basically running an "eat your vegetables" campaign for their primary product.
A screenshot of the full page at least used to be rather difficult to achieve. I know I've seen the feature recently in either Safari or Chrome, but I'm not sure if or when it became standard.
I see this kind of comparisons all the time, where the test subject associated with the author is strictly better than the rest (especially the tables). I think this discredits the product rather than helping it, as you are either too arrogant to acknowledge any merits from your competitors, or you cherry picked the criteria.
But surely the marketers know better than me, so what's going on?
And the Mozilla Firefox Best Browser award goes to… for the 15th consecutive year… Mozilla Firefox! Congratulations to the entire Mozilla Firefox team on behalf of the Mozilla Firefox awards committee!
They are not mentioning the most important reason for me. I think Firefox is better by default simply because I don't want to help contribute to Google's chromium/blink hegemony over the web.
Not disagreeing, but the question is better for ‘you’, not better for society or the internet. Lotta people (sadly) don’t know or care about rendering and JavaScript engines.
That said, the weirdest thing about Brave is that the BAT stuff could likely have been implemented as a browser extension. The changes to Chromium the Brave team must now maintain choosing to fork a browser are because Google makes changes in the code base for the good of their business, not consumers.
Not to mention, if living your ideals is an important part of your own utility function, then yeah - it can be best for you even if it comes with other compromises.
If you sacrifice yourself to have an orphan out of an Ideal of selflessness or protection of the weak, the idea of benefits doesn't make sense since you'll never reap those benefits, being dead and all.
If you look at the individual level, with a purely rational 'Homo economicus' rational actor, ideals don't make a lot of sense.
Your choice definitely won’t change the course if you choose to contribute to the current course.
“Hey, this boat is sinking. Will this one bucket of water I throw out stop it from sinking? No? Guess I’ll just do nothing then. Maybe I’ll pour some more water in. That’s the way things are going you know.“
Sure, if you regress once, it affects you. If you continue the regression analysis you'll quickly see that the ecosystem suffers if you don't participate and advocate for your preferred choice.
It's like buying on Amazon/Walmart while you see local stores shutting down when prices are more are less equivalent. Buy local if you want those stores sticking around.
Brave isn't implementing Google's "Manifest v3". Microsoft Edge replaced all Google services and telemetry with their own. Turns out, Chrome is mostly open source and Google doesn't have absolute power over anyone forking it.
Having a commonly shared implementation is not a problem. Quite the opposite. It solves a lot of problems.
The Linux kernel is in every Linux distro and nobody is calling that a "hegemony". SQLite is used by phones everywhere and that's not a problem.
Mozilla offers an unbiased comparison ? I call BS.
. . ."Overall, Brave is a fast and secure browser that will have particular appeal to cryptocurrency users. But for the vast majority of internet citizens, Firefox remains a better and simpler solution."
> There are a few security features in Brave worth highlighting, such as its automatic HTTPS connection upgrades (which Firefox also offers by extension)
This information is a bit outdated, Firefox has offered HTTPS mode built-in for a few versions now.
Quoting from the page: "The comparisons made here were done so with default settings and across browser release versions as follows:
Firefox (81) | Brave (1.14.81)
This page is updated semi-quarterly to reflect latest versioning and may not always reflect latest updates."
This is for sure not true, Firefox 81 was released more than a year ago
They should be. I'd be happy to see more desperation from them if it means more users, more investment (not from Google), and more chances at staying afloat.
Probably the best feature, imo, along with dev tools. I still use Brave and Safari Technology Preview on occasion, but reach for FF periodically because of the dev tools.
I actually ended up using profiles (the way Chromium-based browsers do isolation) over containers. For my purposes it is nicer to have separate windows. For many sites I create a profile, then open that site in it, and "install as app" for even more convenience.
The only thing I used containers for was mixing personal and work stuff in one window.
Brave always looked shady to me.
Even inoring that I don't like Brendan for personal reasons. There is something nauseating about using "privacy" and other nice-sounding words to pump your own crypto-currency.
I may be misunderstanding things here, I'm open to positive arguments about this.
You had a bad experience or have a negative view of X, therefore everything associated with X is automatically bad?
Brave is a browser. You can use it as a Chrome replacement without Google stuff. Optionally, you can also enable the crypto stuff if you want to see ads and be paid a few bucks for that.
Brave Rewards for sites/creators... you don't have to claim the money (I do, eg: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27598202 ). Any manual or automatic donations are refunded if you don't claim the money (after 3 months, I think). They don't keep that money.
Some will say that blocking ads and then using Brave Ads is "blackmail". Well, the adblocking part isn't anything new. Firefox, Edge, Opera, and... Brave block ads by default. Users are already blocking ads, so I see this a different way to get revenue from users that block ads, but want to support me.
Now, the crypto currency itself. I don't care about it. I receive BAT, convert it to my local currency and then use it to pay for stuff. It's the same as receiving a payment in a different currency. Of course you can go on and play with crypto on some exchange, just like you can do the same with currencies that you trust, but that's unrelated to the browser and the cryptocurrency itself.
It may change in the future, but right now, I don't see any scam here.
(I use Firefox as my main browser and Brave as backup/when there's a compatibility issue.)
> You had a bad experience or have a negative view of X, therefore everything associated with X is automatically bad?
That is literally how human brains are wired by default. You touched fire and burnt you hand - fire bad. Big person hit you and took your food - big person bad.
> There is something nauseating about using "privacy" and other nice-sounding words to pump your own crypto-currency.
To be fair, this statement seems to be relying on mind-reading. You seem to be making a guess that Brendan's motives are to pump his token, rather than privacy.
I view Brave as a very interesting experiment that could be very much in defense of privacy.
Here's the chain of logic, as I see it.
We all realize that data is a commodity that businesses are desperate for.
This is bad because it ultimately leads to privacy being wrecked, among other issues. We can see Google and Facebook operating here as an indication of this.
One possible solution to this is to come up with a new business model for advertising that does a far better job protecting people and giving people ultimate control: which is what Brave is attempting to do. Who knows what direction Brave will take? BAT is just an ERC-20 token that can be moved by any Ethereum wallet even apart from Brave. If this succeeds, the advertising market online in the next few years may move in a positive direction.
Assuming Android is the most common usage platform for FF, one can't even use their choice of DNS. The DoH feature uses cloudflare and overrides system configs and without about:config, there's no way to change it. This isn't good compared to anything. It just sucks.
FF's concept of user benefit is restriction. How many users are now enjoying a better world because they can no longer save a webpage to PDF?
According to Mozilla, they have 200 million monthly active users. According to Google Play Store, there are 100 million installs. How many Android installs are used? Half? I'd suggest there are 2 or 3 times more desktop users of Firefox than Android.
Correction accepted. Throwing 1/3 of the population to the gutter seems in alignment with the American way. Assuming once again, you appear to disagree not with my principles, but with a numerical error. I guess it's standard collateral damage in the quest for easy money. I sometimes forget that this is praiseworthy to many here.
I've just created a new Firefox profile here, let's record my experience:
1. Oh great, [x] sponsored shortcuts
2. How helpful, Mozilla ticked the following boxes for me:
[x] Allow Firefox to send technical and interaction data to Mozilla
[x] Allow Firefox to make personalized extension recommendations
[x] Allow Firefox to install and run studies
3. Wait, what is this pocket icon thing on my interface?
Right click / customize toolbar / drag it out of the way
4. Oh nice, customization menu! It allows me to change the UI density that, honestly, is too big for my 720p screen.
Ouch, there's no way to make things smaller, only increase, I guess.
5. Let's continue to dig deeper into the settings:
[x] Recommend extensions as you browse
[x] Recommend features as you browse
It's an uphill battle against the only player worth(?) supporting.
Both Firefox and Brave are pretty terrible out of the box. Firefox with it's Pocket integration and promoted stories on a new tab by default has always urked me. Brave has always rubbed me the wrong way with it's BAT crypto.
However, despite these issues, I use Firefox as my daily browser for personal stuff and Brave for work (I need a Chromium-based browser).
87 comments
[ 3.5 ms ] story [ 159 ms ] threadI have hundreds of bookmarks, all neatly categorized, compared to the New Tab page's paltry 16 or whatever. I also get the exact same page in Firefox (personal), Chrome (work), or Firefox/Android.
It sounded silly at first but now I can't live without it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinboard_(website)
Desktop site: https://pinboard.in/
Mobile site: https://m.pinboard.in/
iOS/iPadOS/macOS app: https://get-pins.app/
- The bookmarks bar doesn't "fit" the current and previous two UIs. Margins/paddings are all wrong, at least on macOS. Why design a new UI if you're not going to apply it to everything?
- The bookmarks manager still opens on an old window, with small text, even though Firefox went the "Chrome way" and started using tabs, not windows for this type of content. Only recently this window started supporting dark mode.
- Bookmarks behave differently from other links. Eg: it doesn't respect the shortcut to open a link in the background.
- Bookmark icons are hard to update. While other browsers update the favicon when we visit the page, Firefox doesn't always do that. We need some hack or addon to force the browser to delete all favicons and then load each link so it gets the new favicon... why make it so hard?
- Not 100% related to bookmarks, but when opening a different bookmarks at once (eg: a folder), Firefox doesn't seem to prioritise the active tab. Chromium appears to be faster because of this.
I'm currently using Firefox, but I'll be honest: it's a mess of a browser. Old and new code, different philosophies, different UIs, all used side by side. Even more annoying is the fact that they ignore all this and use their limited resources on stuff that is mostly fine (eg: a new UI, a new search bar, etc).
[1] https://nitter.mailstation.de/gorhill/search?f=tweets&q=%22e...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adblock_Plus
[3] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
Edit: Just use 'Ublock Origin' instead.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UBlock_Origin
That is not wild speculation but rather the official narrative from Adblock Plus. Their main revenue stream is the acceptable ads program [1]. In order to see if they make "millions", I am also linking their financial statements from the Company Register in Germany [2]. Please note that this document is in German and I read it using machine translation software.
[1] https://adblockplus.org/en/about#monetization
[2] https://www.unternehmensregister.de/ureg/result.html;jsessio...
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1733948
-- Mozilla
Yes. But to most people, they're both browsers. So it really doesn't matter.
I guess one man's ad aggregator is another's man-in-the-middle attack, and those added to the compensation network without their consent may mistake it for an extortion racket.
I use Brave because it's Chromium without Google's stuff, fairly fast updates, supports extensions from the official store, etc. All other stuff is disabled... I use it as a browser.
I'm glad you seem to get it though. My comment wasn't intended as a jab at Brave's featureset, but rather to point out that they ship as completely different utilities. As someone who already has utilities for what it offers, it's hard to fit Brave into my life. On top of that, it's also hard to trust that they won't introduce some radical feature that I won't like, since it's current state is one hell of a precedent for what a browser should look like. At the end of the day I err on the side of simplicity and security.
For browser updates, I could go the binaries way, but then I'd have to use a 3rd party package manager and have to live with outdated versions (the project is on Chromium 94, but the version for macOS is still on 92). I could also build it myself, but I don't want to deal with that (I guess part of the problem is me being lazy).
The perfect Chromium browser for me would be Brave as it works right now, but without their own features. Sadly that doesn't seem to exist.
For Brave on Android I wish they deviated from Chrome by adding a no-autoplay option for videos.[1]
[1] https://community.brave.com/t/where-is-the-disable-video-aut...
I've tried it, but it tries to do a lot (email client, notes, very customisable, etc) and sometimes I would get overwhelmed with all the options. It also seems to use more resources and was not as fluid as other Chromium-based browsers (at least on my machine). I've heard that they rely a lot on javascript so it's easier to maintain the UI and features across all platforms, but the performance suffers a bit.
Brave is closer to Chromium and Chrome (UI, features, etc). If you try it, keep Brave Rewards off, ignore the crypto side of things, it can be a nice Chrome replacement if you don't need all the Google stuff (sync, etc).
In any case, if you're happy with Vivaldi, then keep using it. I don't think it's a bad browser, but sadly it doesn't fit my needs.
-Mozilla ;)
I know that it used to be a PITA to take a screenshot on Windows but surely they solved that issue?
But surely the marketers know better than me, so what's going on?
That said, the weirdest thing about Brave is that the BAT stuff could likely have been implemented as a browser extension. The changes to Chromium the Brave team must now maintain choosing to fork a browser are because Google makes changes in the code base for the good of their business, not consumers.
If you look at the individual level, with a purely rational 'Homo economicus' rational actor, ideals don't make a lot of sense.
It's so programmed in we think baby lions are cute.
Lets say he has no global reach his choice may change opinions of the people around hom. It may even change minds on here.
“Hey, this boat is sinking. Will this one bucket of water I throw out stop it from sinking? No? Guess I’ll just do nothing then. Maybe I’ll pour some more water in. That’s the way things are going you know.“
It's like buying on Amazon/Walmart while you see local stores shutting down when prices are more are less equivalent. Buy local if you want those stores sticking around.
Same dynamic in the browser market.
Having a commonly shared implementation is not a problem. Quite the opposite. It solves a lot of problems.
The Linux kernel is in every Linux distro and nobody is calling that a "hegemony". SQLite is used by phones everywhere and that's not a problem.
This information is a bit outdated, Firefox has offered HTTPS mode built-in for a few versions now.
This is for sure not true, Firefox 81 was released more than a year ago
And giving they don't care about they use opiniouns they should just shutdown the telemetry.
(It's funny to see a download link for Firefox at the end of this article, look like they are desperate.)
They should be. I'd be happy to see more desperation from them if it means more users, more investment (not from Google), and more chances at staying afloat.
The only thing I used containers for was mixing personal and work stuff in one window.
FF is still the least bad.
[1] https://github.com/lobsters/lobsters/issues/761
[2] https://github.com/lobsters/lobsters-ansible/issues/45
[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18734999
[4] https://web.archive.org/web/20181221180137if_/https://twitte...
[5] https://web.archive.org/web/20181221231556if_/https://twitte...
[6] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27549604
[7] https://slate.com/technology/2014/04/brendan-eich-why-mozill...
Brave is a browser. You can use it as a Chrome replacement without Google stuff. Optionally, you can also enable the crypto stuff if you want to see ads and be paid a few bucks for that.
Brave Rewards for sites/creators... you don't have to claim the money (I do, eg: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27598202 ). Any manual or automatic donations are refunded if you don't claim the money (after 3 months, I think). They don't keep that money.
Some will say that blocking ads and then using Brave Ads is "blackmail". Well, the adblocking part isn't anything new. Firefox, Edge, Opera, and... Brave block ads by default. Users are already blocking ads, so I see this a different way to get revenue from users that block ads, but want to support me.
Now, the crypto currency itself. I don't care about it. I receive BAT, convert it to my local currency and then use it to pay for stuff. It's the same as receiving a payment in a different currency. Of course you can go on and play with crypto on some exchange, just like you can do the same with currencies that you trust, but that's unrelated to the browser and the cryptocurrency itself.
It may change in the future, but right now, I don't see any scam here.
(I use Firefox as my main browser and Brave as backup/when there's a compatibility issue.)
That is literally how human brains are wired by default. You touched fire and burnt you hand - fire bad. Big person hit you and took your food - big person bad.
To be fair, this statement seems to be relying on mind-reading. You seem to be making a guess that Brendan's motives are to pump his token, rather than privacy.
I view Brave as a very interesting experiment that could be very much in defense of privacy.
Here's the chain of logic, as I see it.
We all realize that data is a commodity that businesses are desperate for.
This is bad because it ultimately leads to privacy being wrecked, among other issues. We can see Google and Facebook operating here as an indication of this.
One possible solution to this is to come up with a new business model for advertising that does a far better job protecting people and giving people ultimate control: which is what Brave is attempting to do. Who knows what direction Brave will take? BAT is just an ERC-20 token that can be moved by any Ethereum wallet even apart from Brave. If this succeeds, the advertising market online in the next few years may move in a positive direction.
FF's concept of user benefit is restriction. How many users are now enjoying a better world because they can no longer save a webpage to PDF?
Fellow frogs, you're being boiled.
1. Oh great, [x] sponsored shortcuts
2. How helpful, Mozilla ticked the following boxes for me: [x] Allow Firefox to send technical and interaction data to Mozilla [x] Allow Firefox to make personalized extension recommendations [x] Allow Firefox to install and run studies
3. Wait, what is this pocket icon thing on my interface?
Right click / customize toolbar / drag it out of the way
4. Oh nice, customization menu! It allows me to change the UI density that, honestly, is too big for my 720p screen. Ouch, there's no way to make things smaller, only increase, I guess.
5. Let's continue to dig deeper into the settings: [x] Recommend extensions as you browse [x] Recommend features as you browse
It's an uphill battle against the only player worth(?) supporting.
Let's do the same with Brave:
1. Hide Widgets {FTX,crypto,binance,Brave Rewards}
2. Customize [ ] Show sponsored images
3. [ ] Automatically send daily usage ping to Brave
4. Settings [x] Hide Brave Rewards button
To be fair, Brave doesn't have telemetry enabled by default on my system, but that's about it.
I'm more and more alienated by the web and web browsers. Which is a good thing as it annoys me out of these infinite pool’s portals.
However, despite these issues, I use Firefox as my daily browser for personal stuff and Brave for work (I need a Chromium-based browser).
"This product doesn't come the way I want it, so its bad"
Then change it once and thats it. I have my firefox like I want it, saved profile and now even on new machine i can have my firefox experience.
Why dont people complain that their IDE doesnt come with the font and colour scheme that they like?