At the risk of being downvoted to oblivion, trying to understand better here.
How does the CEO’s anti-LGBTQ stance reflect in the Brave Browser product’s quality?
How does the CEO’s anti-mask stance reflect in the Brave Browser product’s quality?
In all honesty, I wish the association with cryptocurrency is not there. Business choices, unless there’s a new way to run business, will bring these things onboard. Not defending the business choices in anyway. Merely stating my understanding of them.
The way I use Brave is, delegate it pages that absolutely cannot be viewed through Dillo browser with all CSS and images disabled. Though on mobiles, Brave is my default. On any week, I find myself reaching for Brave less than a handful of times.
To help you better understand, the way I see it, every time I do something that financially benefits <Company>, I assume I am giving money to the executives/owners/etc.
For example, if I spend $30 on a Harry Potter book, I assume JK Rowling gets $0.10 of that (i dont know how it works, but lets assume), and she spends a substantial portion of her income on anti-trans rights. If we assume anywhere near 10%, then me giving her 10 cents is the same as donating 1 cent to anti-trans rights. Is Harry Potter a good enough book that I am willing to donate money to hate groups to obtain it? Personally no. Other people may look at it and say “It’s only $0.01, and I really like the story!” and think it is worth it. That’s up to you where your threshold is for when the good outweighs the bad.
Contributing legitimacy to something can financially benefit it. Even if I never spend any money on Firefox (for example), user metrics allow them to make bargains with Google to get more money in exchange for default search status. So me using Firefox gets money for Mozilla. And if Mozilla was spending that money on hate groups, I wouldn’t want to be involved in that.
Yes, I am aware that basically every company out there is super shitty. And giving money or support to almost any major corporation is basically funding hate groups in some way. But when the CEO is loudly outspoken about these things, I’d very much rather just swap to a brand that at least isn’t outwardly proud of it’s stupidity. Unless the other options are just as bad and I need a thing: if my local ISP was run by murderers, I still need internet. That’s not something I’m willing to compromise on. But I do have other choices in browsers and Brave doesn’t have any features I can’t live without.
So to answer your question: it does not reflect on the product quality, but it does impact how much quality I demand from a product.
At the risk of being downvoted to oblivion, trying to understand better here.
How does the CEO’s anti-LGBTQ stance reflect in the Brave Browser product’s quality?
How does the CEO’s anti-mask stance reflect in the Brave Browser product’s quality?
In all honesty, I wish the association with cryptocurrency is not there. Business choices, unless there’s a new way to run business, will bring these things onboard. Not defending the business choices in anyway. Merely stating my understanding of them.
The way I use Brave is, delegate it pages that absolutely cannot be viewed through Dillo browser with all CSS and images disabled. Though on mobiles, Brave is my default. On any week, I find myself reaching for Brave less than a handful of times.
To help you better understand, the way I see it, every time I do something that financially benefits <Company>, I assume I am giving money to the executives/owners/etc.
For example, if I spend $30 on a Harry Potter book, I assume JK Rowling gets $0.10 of that (i dont know how it works, but lets assume), and she spends a substantial portion of her income on anti-trans rights. If we assume anywhere near 10%, then me giving her 10 cents is the same as donating 1 cent to anti-trans rights. Is Harry Potter a good enough book that I am willing to donate money to hate groups to obtain it? Personally no. Other people may look at it and say “It’s only $0.01, and I really like the story!” and think it is worth it. That’s up to you where your threshold is for when the good outweighs the bad.
Contributing legitimacy to something can financially benefit it. Even if I never spend any money on Firefox (for example), user metrics allow them to make bargains with Google to get more money in exchange for default search status. So me using Firefox gets money for Mozilla. And if Mozilla was spending that money on hate groups, I wouldn’t want to be involved in that.
Yes, I am aware that basically every company out there is super shitty. And giving money or support to almost any major corporation is basically funding hate groups in some way. But when the CEO is loudly outspoken about these things, I’d very much rather just swap to a brand that at least isn’t outwardly proud of it’s stupidity. Unless the other options are just as bad and I need a thing: if my local ISP was run by murderers, I still need internet. That’s not something I’m willing to compromise on. But I do have other choices in browsers and Brave doesn’t have any features I can’t live without.
So to answer your question: it does not reflect on the product quality, but it does impact how much quality I demand from a product.