I'm fairly certain that I was not the only person in the world who thought to himself, "Did they just yoink the entire Internet and bundle it together

From the article:

"I know for a fact that Wikipedia operates under a CC BY-SA 4.0 license, which explicitly states that if you’re going to use the data, you must give attribution. As far as search engines go, they can get away with it because linking back to a Wikipedia article on the same page as the search results is considered attribution.

But in the case of Brave, not only are they disregarding the license - they’re also charging money for the data and then giving third parties “rights” to that data."

  • DeadGemini@waveform.socialEnglish
    4·
    1 year ago

    tsk tsk tsk. When will people learn to just use Firefox or Librewolf? Do you want a web browser, or an AI training crypto wallet?

    • zingo@lemmy.caEnglish
      1·
      1 year ago

      I read ya.

      I was always skeptical about Brave with their side projects of crypto etc. Its funny because privacytools.io recommends them till this day.

      I have been using Librewolf for some time now and I am happy with it.

        • Solar Bear@slrpnk.netEnglish
          0·
          1 year ago

          Brave still is a great browser just disable a few settings as recommended in the guide

          Brave is still Chromium in a new coat of paint and you’re still aiding Google in their domination of web standards.

          • dngray@lemmy.oneMEnglish
            1·
            1 year ago

            Brave is still Chromium in a new coat of paint and you’re still aiding Google in their domination of web standards.

            That is a little unfair tbh, they do quite a lot, such as their privacy shields, including the script blocking one which is basically like NoScript.

            They also do some work on anti fingerprinting tech and other things along that vein.