> tracking of tor window usage via telemetry.īrave’s collection of telemetry is minimal compared to other browsers and can be turned off under brave://settings/privacy ... Also, they are not monitoring “what” you do in Tor windows, just “that” you use them (just like they monitor the usage of other features), unless you turn it off as mentioned before. If you were an intellectually honest person with an actual purpose that exceeds bashing Brave, you would give this some thought and realize that it is common industry practice and not a privacy issue. Firefox or Vivaldi automatically add (and don’t just offer by default, like Brave) static referrals whenever you perform a search in them. I don’t, I prefer the non-invasive referral instead.Īll major browsers are making use of referrals in relation to searches at least, by the way. You seem to hate it when Brave has non-invasive means of funding, perhaps you like selling out to Google (Mozilla) or selling user data better. Thanks to the referral being static (i.e., the same for all users) it also was never a privacy issue. If you did choose the referral, the sole difference to the normal link was that you helped Brave get vital funding from Binance. They didn’t “steal” links, you had the option not to choose the referral. Try again, Sponsored background images can be turned off easily and if you don’t, they make for fairly nice background images. Firefox has sponsored links on the home screen and occasionally also in the address bar, connecting to some shady proxy for reasons unknown: Not that I care, I am not even using Brave Rewards – why do you assume every Brave user makes use of this opt-in stuff? Anyway. You can’t donate BAT to people who are not registered content creators – so the answer is, if you can’t or don’t want to donate BAT, you get to keep it. They didn’t even pass that onto content creators and website owners at one point. >Mozilla’s long-term plan is to build its own revenue streams from subscription-based services and reduce its dependence on the Google search deal, which has historically accounted for between 75% and 95% of the organization’s entire yearly budget as far back as 2006 when the two companies began collaborating (with a hiatus between 20, when Mozilla signed a similar agreement with Yahoo). (developer of Firefox) receives almost its entire income from Google, the biggest ad company in the world: All users of out of date firefox represent a possible victim pool with attractively low security.Firefox is neither owned by, nor does its entire income come from, a single ad company. This needn't be specifically targeted at JUST palemoon users.
#Pale moon forum software
In effect an out of date firefox means that malware authors can use up to date firefox's security fixes to target users using old software that perforce is vulnerable to the same attacks. It's now common for malware to encrypt your files and hold them for ransom. Your browser is probably the best vector into your system and malware no longer just screws up your system. I've noticed that you didn't bother to address the technical reasons whatsoever. Instead Pale Moon devs appear to have learned nothing from the interaction. If no agreement can ultimately be reached respectfully ask for it not to be distributed but use the know how generated to add a forum post "Building on OpenBSD" not burning any bridges AND actually profiting from the experience. Can we talk about the patches that are being distributed with Pale Moon to see if they are really needed for our product to work on your OS?" "We at the Pale Moon project prefer that distributions package as close as possible to the default experience to ensure that all users have the same experience and aid in troubleshooting.
#Pale moon forum free
Normally people do a small amount of research before attacking volunteers who are providing free labor to make their package more broadly available.Īn example dialog could have been opened like so. Nothing is being distributed by the repo save instructions the end user does the fetching and building. This is kind of how multiple source based packages work. The unofficial patches are presumably by definition not copyright the project considering they are written by a third party.
#Pale moon forum license
Something cannot be subject to any copyright license insofar as it doesn't actually contain the software that is bound by said license. A set of instructions that would allow the end user to build