Linux
Welcome to c/linux!
Welcome to our thriving Linux community! Whether you're a seasoned Linux enthusiast or just starting your journey, we're excited to have you here. Explore, learn, and collaborate with like-minded individuals who share a passion for open-source software and the endless possibilities it offers. Together, let's dive into the world of Linux and embrace the power of freedom, customization, and innovation. Enjoy your stay and feel free to join the vibrant discussions that await you!
Rules:
-
Stay on topic: Posts and discussions should be related to Linux, open source software, and related technologies.
-
Be respectful: Treat fellow community members with respect and courtesy.
-
Quality over quantity: Share informative and thought-provoking content.
-
No spam or self-promotion: Avoid excessive self-promotion or spamming.
-
No NSFW adult content
-
Follow general lemmy guidelines.
view the rest of the comments
They are advertising Brave as a safe alternative in June 2025? Maybe it was fine for print to die.
I'll be honest, I thought this cover was from sometime in the early 2000s. Once you format the subjects anachronistically you realize just how long the highlights in the Linux community have been the same. Live USB, easy dual boot and Ubuntu "blasting off". That takes me back.
Not that I use Brave, but out of curiosity why do you deem it unsafe?
Beyond just being a Chromium skin my impression of it these days is that their entire business model seems to revolve around tacking on AI and crypto features, and they've been caught messing with URLs in weird ways.
I have no specific technical reasons related to privacy, but for whatever part of software privacy is trust in authoring, Brave sure seems like the same browser you already hate rebranded by the worst techbros you've ever met. It definitely seems weird to highlight it that prominently among that lineup, given some of the omissions.
And just in general their specialized feature set is entirely irrelevant to my use cases and actively annoying, so even assuming it's on equal footing with every other entry on and off that list it'd be the last one I'd choose to highlight.
Thanks for the in depth reply. I wasn't aware of the URL link redirection which definitely seems shady.
I did try it and didn't really enjoy it much tbh, but a lot of people do like it. I know the owner is fairly right wing, which for me is another point against.
Not only is the owner pretty right wing, he spend a fair amount of money helping get California's Prop 8 passed, which made same sex marriage illegal until it was nationally legalized... There's no guarantee of this but I suspect it would have failed without his involvement helping it along, so yeah, I'll never touch one of his products if I can avoid it
Good to know I should avoid it at least