Brave gets option to restore webpages that are broken or deleted
Webpages come and go; sometimes, it is a temporary thing that prevents you from accessing a webpage, at other times, it may be because a page has been deleted, redirected, or edited.
It is quite frustrating to follow a link only to find out that the resource is no longer available at all or has changed in the meantime; this happens to text-only pages but also file downloads, image galleries, and any other type of content.
Tip: find out why you cannot access a site or service.
One of the better options that users have in the case of deleted or changed resources is to check the Wayback Machine for cached copies. Extensions like Wayback Machine for Google Chrome or the 2010 Firefox extension WaybackFox (no longer available) aim to improve the process through automatic lookups. Some browser developers have tested integration of the functionality in their browsers. Mozilla ran a Test Pilot experiment in 2016 called No More 404s which provided a quick link to the Wayback Machine to search for archived copies. The feature never made it into the Firefox browser though.
Brave Browser, a Chromium-based browser that a researcher found to be the most private out-of-the-box browser recently. has now integrated such a feature natively.
The browser displays a prompt at the top when certain page errors such as 404 not found are detected. Wayne over at Betanews notes that the errors 404, 408, 410, 451, 500, 502, 503, 504, 509, 520, 521, 523, 524, 525, and 526 are covered by Brave. Check out HTTP Status Codes to look these up.
The message "Sorry, that page is missing. Do you want to check if a saved version is available on the Wayback Machine?" provides users with an option to check for copies on the Wayback Machine website.
A click on the "check for saved version" returns whether a cached copy was found. Brave either loads the cached copy right away if it has been found or returns that no cached copy was found without loading anything.
The Wayback Machine has archived over 900 Billion URLs over the years and there is a good chance that it has a copy in its archive if the page was at least somewhat popular in the past.
Closing Words
The Wayback Machine is an excellent resource to restore downloads from sites that are no longer available. I used it numerous times in the past to download a program that was nowhere available anymore on the Internet.
Native integration in the Brave browser improves usability when a user encounters dead webpages.
Now You: Do you make use the Wayback Machine?
Brave is a dangerous browser. The browser replaces blocked ads with their own, so advertising companies have more compelling justifications to claim that blocking ads is stealing. Therefore, the government might take advantage of this to outlaw adblocking!
@Samanto Hermes
That’s not what Brave does. Brave blocks ads and trackers, but it doesn’t “replace” them in the sense of injecting their own ads into websites. Brave ads are served locally via system notifications, websites are never manipulated in favor of Brave ads. Your browsing habits are being analyzed locally(!) by Brave and fitting ads of Brave partners will be displayed to you via system notifications.
What Brave does is not illegal, if it were illegal all other adblockers would also be forbidden. Because contrary to other adblockers, of which the result is that content creators and advertisers earn nothing, Brave gives advertisers and content creators another, more user-friendly method to place their ads at hand.
Disclaimer, personal opinion: I think Brave is the answer to the current situation of users feeling molested by intrusive ads, resorting to adblockers in response, and content creators locking users out of their website because of the adblocker. What we need is a privacy-friendly, non-intrusive way of serving ads that gives the users a monetary incentive to allow ads. The current system is obviously not maintainable, and we the users will continue to lose, either by being locked out of websites for not wanting invasive ads, or by our data being analyzed by advertisers on some remote server we don’t control. In both cases we do not earn any money while browsing.
Furthermore, Brave Ads are opt-in, by default the browser doesn’t display its own ads at all.
I like how it asks “Sorry, that page is missing. Do you want to check if a saved version is available on the Wayback Machine?” .. Thus giving you an option instead of just taking you there.
What I don’t like about Brave is the way Brave Shield works, as you can’t see the whitelist it makes when you allow a site. Also, you can only remove a site from the whitelist by visiting the site, which is dumb. We should be able to see and edit that list, just as normal ad-blockers do. Furthermore, that hidden whitelist is a potential privacy issue, that is if other parties can access it.
That said, the only way I know how to remove that whitelist, is by completely removing Brave, as just resetting Brave still leaves some stuff behind, and Brave isn’t clear on what all that all is or isn’t.
There have been many requests asking for more control over Brave Shield, but I doubt that will ever happen.
Hmm.
Brave is the worst Chromium clone and adware to boot. The users cannot even disable auto updates. It doesn’t even have a portable version in contrast with Cent, Opera, Vivaldi. Also, it is a privacy disaster:
https://spyware.neocities.org/articles/brave.html
Compared to this buggy, ugly and half-baked monstrosity of a browser called Brave, even Firefox looks great.
@smaragdus
> The users cannot even disable auto updates.
They can’t in Firefox, either.
> It doesn’t even have a portable version in contrast with Cent, Opera, Vivaldi.
While that’s not good, it doesn’t mean that the browser itself is total garbage. Also, I am afraid hardly anyone uses portable versions.
> Also, it is a privacy disaster: https://spyware.neocities.org/articles/brave.html
This website is bollocks, not only regarding Brave, but also regarding any other browser they have “examined”. Let’s go through the bullshit they spout quickly:
> Whitelisting spyware from Facebook and Twitter
They did whitelist some trackers in Brave because Facebook and Twitter happen to misuse them for legitimate functionality. If you block those trackers, e.g. the Facebook login form totally breaks. The Brave team used to block them out of the box, but there were lots of complaints, so they had to be whitelisted. If you don’t care about Facebook and Twitter, it is easy enough to disable the whitelist with two clicks in the settings.
The website you cited makes it seem like they were whitelisted out of bad intentions, which is bollocks. Goes to show how much research the author put into his writeup: None.
> Auto-updates
That’s not privacy-hostile, and as far as I am aware, all modern browsers have forced auto-updates.
> Anti-privacy search engine by default
All major browsers use Google as the standard search engine, and so do most users unfortunately. Changing the standard search engines is achieved with one click in the settings. But then again, the search engine you use is not really an argument against any browser, since the browser can’t influence how the search engine provider handles privacy.
> Brave’s start page contains analytics
The browser itself doesn’t contain any trackers. They criticize that the “Welcome” website the browser opens upon its first start up (and only then) contains a tracker, a tracker that will be blocked by Brave Shields by default anyway. Epic fail.
> Crash reports
Useful for bug reports to the developers, and can be disabled with one click in the settings. They won’t be sent without your permission anyway. Again, epic fail.
But that’s Neocities for you, a bollocks website whose author knows little of the things he is talking about.
> Compared to this buggy, ugly and half-baked monstrosity of a browser called Brave, even Firefox looks great.
Yeah, don’t think so. Check out the myriad of connections Firefox establishes upon start up and then tell me that Brave is just as bad, lol.
I wish I could use Brave, but it has two major flaws:
1. It doesn’t sync bookmarks or their broken option doesn’t work at all
2. It doesn’t support Widevine/DRM/whatever videos so I can’t watch TV series on some websites which work perfectly fine in absolutely every other browser.
@Dumbledalf
> It doesn’t sync bookmarks or their broken option doesn’t work at all
Yes, Sync is still buggy. Looking at their GitHub page, though, they are constantly working to improve it. Give it time, it will be fixed.
> It doesn’t support Widevine/DRM/whatever videos so I can’t watch TV series on some websites which work perfectly fine in absolutely every other browser.
It does support Widevine / DRM. Have you enabled Widevine in the settings?
https://aws1.discourse-cdn.com/business4/uploads/brave/original/3X/a/5/a53fe406e65c7766866b85a50bc0ae05a22d6174.png
Once this is enabled, go to a website that needs Widevine (Netflix, Amazon Prime or whatever) and you will be prompted to install it. Then allow installation.
I know that Brave has been recommended on this site before; I am trying it for the first time now. My issues with it are first, there is no helpfile, and second, I do not like it loading a picture when I start it without specifying a website to go to.
You can disable the image, but instead it loads one even more horrible orange/purple gradient on a blank page that looks even worse.
@ Seth R When you click on ‘about Brave’ in the settings there is a link to “Help bij Brave”(Dutch version). It means something like Help for/by Brave.
@Seth R
> I do not like it loading a picture when I start it without specifying a website to go to.
What do you mean?
>>> What do you mean?
This is what he means:
https://brave.com/wp-content/uploads/files_2020-2-12/image1.png
Btw.
>>>Good luck with the Google-funded spyware Firefox.
Have a closer look at the URL-bar … does Brave displays google search engine without any contract? Just for free? Ah, maybe they are just close friends ;~)
And what it is all about … bait for the user to choose Brave Rewards.
https://brave.com/sponsored-images-now-available-on-all-brave-platforms/
@99
> This is what he means: https://brave.com/wp-content/uploads/files_2020-2-12/image1.png
And? The background wallpapers are present locally, nothing is fetched from any server in this case.
> Have a closer look at the URL-bar … does Brave displays google search engine without any contract? Just for free? Ah, maybe they are just close friends ;~)
Google is not Brave’s default search engine (contrary to Firefox, lol), as far as I know. And my problem with Mozilla is not that it includes Google as one of out of many included search engines, my problem with them is that Google provides them with over 80% of their overall income. They are financially dependent on Google, contrary to Brave.
> And what it is all about … bait for the user to choose Brave Rewards.
Brave Rewards are still opt-in rather than opt-out, last time I checked. Nice try anyway.
>>> Google is not Brave’s default search engine
You see?
Just have a look at brave.com and this hero screenshot they use and take a closer look at the URL-bar:
https://brave.com/wp-content/uploads/files_2019-11-home/images/hero-screenshot-min.webp
“Search Google or type a URL”
Somebody at the Brave team seems to dislike their default search engine ;~)
>>> as far as I know
Humble Question:
Have you ever used the Brave browser or are you surfing secretly with Mozilla Firefox?
@99
> Just have a look at brave.com and this hero screenshot they use and take a closer look at the URL-bar:
That doesn’t prove anything. Brave doesn’t come with the same default engine in all countries. And even if Google was their default engine in all countries, what of it? That’s not why I criticize Mozilla Firefox. I criticize Mozilla because they are fully dependent on Google financially. This is not the case with Brave.
> Have you ever used the Brave browser or are you surfing secretly with Mozilla Firefox?
Why would I use Google Chrome’s fake competitor Mozzarella Firefox? Seriously, there is many kinds of spyware out there, but most of it at least performs better than Firefox.
It’s kind of primitive, but thats the Brave world. Adware with a few dumbed-down stolen features. Do the investors who keep trolling here really think it will change the fate of their darling?
On Firefox I have the Resurrect Pages and Web Archives extensions, works.
They don’t really matter. Brave is doomed to stay irrelevant and below %0.1 marketshare forever.
@Anonymous
Sure, sure:
https://brave.com/brave-passes-10m-mau/
I’d rather say that Firefox is headed towards irrelevance. They used to have approx. 30% market share in their heyday, now they don’t even have 5%:
https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share
You realize that when MozCo cultists like you pollute threads it has the opposite effect?
Guess not eh…….Thanks for contributing to Firefox’s downfall.
lol “out of the box safer” after Chrome had been completely firewalled, and the local database building and sporadic transmission by Brave was graciously ignored. Never tested for something like curl-style phoning home either. “Rigged” doesn’t even describe this kind of reporting, it’s completely corrupted.
But, I love these salty-sour investor trolls with their constant ad-homs. Face it guys, “Brave” was just another startup that loved to take your money😉
@Emil
> lol “out of the box safer†after Chrome had been completely firewalled,
This sentence of yours has already been debunked, but that doesn’t stop you from repeating it, or does it?
https://www.ghacks.net/2020/02/25/study-finds-brave-to-be-the-most-private-browser/#comment-4454927
> and the local database building
LOCAL(!!!) database building = not a privacy threat. It’s Brave’s goal to make ads more privacy-friendly. Plus, Mozilla does the exact same thing for Pocket in FF, yet you graciously ignore it.
> and sporadic transmission by Brave
Provide proof or I have to name it for what it is: Your usual bullshit.
> “Rigged†doesn’t even describe this kind of reporting, it’s completely corrupted.
You don’t like the end result, so it has to be “corrupted”. LOL, sure thing.
> But, I love these salty-sour investor trolls with their constant ad-homs.
Yeah, Brave’s investors take the time to write stuff on gHacks. Ridiculous does not even begin to describe it.
> Face it guys, “Brave†was just another startup that loved to take your money😉
Care to elaborate? Because Brave never took the money of any user, quite the contrary, users have the chance to earn money via BAT. It’s just your usual BS once more.
>>> Because Brave never took the money of any user,
The user never had any chance, because Basic Attention Token (BAT) was sold out within blocks, or under 30 seconds. One buyer went so far as to purchase 20,000 ETH (or about $4.7m) worth of token.
Another buyer paid more than $6,000 in ethereum mining fees to almost guarantee their place at the top of the line.
Only around 130 people were able to buy the tokens, with five buyers scooping up about half of the supply. The top 20 addresses in the token sale control more than two-thirds of all BAT, according to Joseph Lee, founder Magnr bitcoin exchange, who conducted a post-sale analysis.
Let’s see:
The company published details of the pricing structure
Oooops … No Results Found! A glorious example of “Financially Transparency”
@99
Nothing of what you said has anything to do with Brave, whatsoever. There are, however, cryptoscams and also cryptominers, nobody denies that. One can create a malicious cryptscam with any cryptocurrency, be it BAT, Bitcoin or whatever else. BAT is being used in other products apart from Brave. That BAT was chosen in this case says nothing about its basic trustworthiness, at all. That’s like real world money being used in some shady business, and you would draw the conclusion “money bad!”… What the hell? Not the money is bad, the action of these people was bad. Nothing of what you said has anything to do with Brave as a browser or a company.
Please show me where the company behind Brave has supposedly scammed anyone, showing that BAT – or any other cryptocurrency for that matter – can be misused by malicious third parties for cryptoscams says nothing.
It seems you are desperately trying to throw dirt at Brave, in a meager attempt to fool unsuspecting readers. That is revealing of a character which is very unpleasant to deal with, to say the least.
>>> Nothing of what you said has anything to do with Brave, whatsoever.
Nothing to do with Brave?
The digital token that fuels the network is called a Basic Attention Token (or BAT), and was scheduled to be released in may 2017 in a sort of ‘air-drop’ to those signing up, as well being apportioned to investors and the Brave team.
The BAT team created Brave, an in-house native browser which is integrated with the Bat system. BAT tokens are the native currency that will be used by the system.
>>> BAT is being used in other products apart from Brave.
Noop!
Not yet, that’s what they still dream, pardon envision about:
Quote:
“Given the open-source nature of the project, however, we also envision that as we develop the BAT protocol, third-party developers may come up with new and novel uses for the token.”
https://basicattentiontoken.org/faq/#where-used
>>>It seems you are desperately trying to throw dirt at Brave,
C’mon man!
Publicly available facts provided by the BAT TEAM and his Founder Brendan Eich are declared now as “trying to throw dirt at Brave”[sic!]?
I agree, this seems to be one of your many >>> meager attempts to fool unsuspecting readers.
Last but not least
>>> That is revealing of a character which is very unpleasant to deal with
This is the “unveiling of a character”, who finds it very uncomfortable to deal honestly with publicly available facts.
@99
> The BAT team created Brave, an in-house native browser which is integrated with the Bat system. BAT tokens are the native currency that will be used by the system.
And? That doesn’t mean that BAT can’t be used by other parties for cryptoscams, just like any other cryptocurrency out there. You can freely trade BAT just like any other cryptocurrency, and with that freedom comes the potential of misuse. What you do is analogous of blaming the central banks printing the money, for any crime that involves money. It’s stupid beyond belief.
> Noop!
You can freely trade BAT, buddy. Look it up.
Also check out the “Ecosystem” support section here:
https://fitznerblockchain.consulting/basic-attention-token-bat/
> Publicly available facts provided by the BAT TEAM and his Founder Brendan Eich are declared now as “trying to throw dirt at Braveâ€[sic!]?
You want to make it seem like Brendan Eich had just declared that Brave is non-private, when he said quite the contrary. How is that not smearing? You are grossly misrepresenting what another person has said, dear Firefox fanboy. Well, that or your reading skills are just lackluster.
> This is the “unveiling of a characterâ€, who finds it very uncomfortable to deal honestly with publicly available facts.
You have yet to bring up “facts”, buddy. All you did so far is smearing Brave, with zero substance behind it.
Just as an example one of your countless smoke screens raised out of thin air and without any basic knowledge.
>>>And? That doesn’t mean that BAT can’t be used by other parties for cryptoscams blah blah and so on …
Spot the difference:
Ethereum’s Initial Coin Offering (ICO) in 2014 as an early pioneer, raised $18 million over a period of 42 days and had over 11,860 different investors … a truly decentralized ICO.
Brave’s etherum-based Basic Attention Token (BAT) initial coin offering generated about $35m under 30 seconds in May 2017 and only around 130 people were able to buy the tokens. With five buyers scooping up about half of the supply.
As a gentle reminder:
The *topic* is your brazen statement >>> “Because Brave never took the money of any user”
To participate in an ICO, you will usually need to purchase a digital currency first and have a basic understanding of how to use cryptocurrency wallets and exchanges. It’s obvious that a user never had any chance and Brave had never any interest to let them participate on the fundraising.
Your remark was that of a hypocrite …
… and the topic was never – as you are eager and quickly start to fantasize – about crypto scams!
@99
> Just as an example one of your countless smoke screens raised out of thin air and without any basic knowledge.
No, it’s not just “smoke screens”. “Smoke screens” is what you do, you are trying to make a perfectly legal sale seem like something bad. I just said that BAT can be used for illegal stuff just like any other cryptocurrency, but the example you brought up was not even illegal in nature.
> Brave’s etherum-based Basic Attention Token (BAT) initial coin offering generated about $35m under 30 seconds in May 2017 and only around 130 people were able to buy the tokens. With five buyers scooping up about half of the supply.
And? There were a few whales involved, and lots of people refused to go all in. It’s also fairly normal that there are only a handful of big investors, and lots of smaller investors. And cryptocurrency is a big deal these days, much bigger than it used to be in 2014. That it only took them 30 seconds to sell a promising cryptocurrency in an ICO is not surprising. Everybody had the opportunity to invest, but only a few did invest big time. End of story.
> To participate in an ICO, you will usually need to purchase a digital currency first and have a basic understanding of how to use cryptocurrency wallets and exchanges. It’s obvious that a user never had any chance and Brave had never any interest to let them participate on the fundraising.
???
Are you really blaming Brave for a lack of knowledge of the small investors? That’s not their problem, buddy. And it might have escaped your attention: There WERE smaller investors, they just refused to invest substantially or didn’t have the financial capacity to do so.
> Your remark was that of a hypocrite …
Don’t think so, lol.
> … and the topic was never – as you are eager and quickly start to fantasize – about crypto scams!
What was the topic in your opinion? You were citing an example of absolutely legal activity, not sure why. I said that BAT can also be used for illegal activity, your example wasn’t an example of illegal activity though. Your point being?
A typical example of distorting words and phrases in order to burry a truth:
>>>and lots of people refused to go all in blah blah and so on …
âš ï¸ Attention Smoke Screen Ahead âš ï¸
refused
refused to go all in
just refused to invest substantially
didn’t have the financial capacity to do so
How do you know?
Are you pretending, that you can read the minds of people you even have no freak’n idea who and where they are, let alone how many they are and if they had any “financial capacity” or not?
You are kidding, lots of people never ever had any chance “to go all in” in that short 30 second sale. Check the numbers againand google the outrage of some folks in that cryptocurrency bubble … mon petit foufou.
@99
> A typical example of distorting words and phrases in order to burry a truth:
Sure thing, buddy. Except there is no truth to burry here. All facts are on the table and perfectly visible to anyone interested.
> How do you know?
I know because I am capable of thinking logically. There WERE small investors involved. How does one become a small investor? You become a small investor by not investing a substantial amount of money. And why do people not invest substantial amounts of money? Either because they are unwilling to, or unable to. There is no “third” possible option.
> Are you pretending, that you can read the minds of people you even have no freak’n idea who and where they are, blah blah blah and so on.
No, I am capable of thinking logically, see above.
> You are kidding, lots of people never ever had any chance “to go all in†in that short 30 second sale.
Cryptocurrencies are sought after these days, the sale was never expected to last beyond a few minutes at most. Anyone who invests in cryptocurrency, especially a new kind of cryptocurrency, knows that. Don’t play dumb.
> mon petit foufou.
You write lots of text with no substance, mon fou pathétique.
>>>I know because I am capable of thinking logically.
LMFAO>>>How does one become a small investor? You become a small investor by not investing a substantial amount of money.
Thanks you for this thought-terminating cliché, one of your many brave examples of your lionized tautological analytic truths.
>>>There is no “third†possible option.
Hear! Hear!
The Baroness Margareta Thatcherovás law
»I don’t waste time arguing!«
But wait a minute …
… the “fourth” possible option is, if unfortunately only a few crumbs are left. And the only chance for a potential “big investor” that exists → become one of these “many smaller investors”.
>>> Cryptocurrencies are sought after these days
»The problem with all cryptocurrencies is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.«
— common parlanceListen, no further proof of your logical thinking skills is required. It is already way off topic. It gets boring.
— end —
Oooops … the missing link
https://basicattentiontoken.org/pricing-the-bat/index.html
@Emil
> It’s kind of primitive, but thats the Brave world. Adware with a few dumbed-down stolen features.
Second rate trolling…
> Do the investors who keep trolling here really think it will change the fate of their darling?
…paired with paranoia.
It’s kind of primitive, but that’s the Emil world.
PS: The “Brave hate hard on” that you have developed ever since I pointed out that it is more private than Firefox out of the box is about as amusing as it is bizarre. Good luck with the Google-funded spyware Firefox.
Good Morning Brave
>>> it is more private than Firefox out of the box is
And this is how the “more Privacy-by-Default” operates:
— Brave CEO Brendan Eich on a Privacy-by-Default Future for Digital AdvertisingI see, an “in-browser agent” of course is more private, almost intimate. What a Brave new Trojan Horse!
@99
> I see, an “in-browser agent†of course is more private, almost intimate. What a Brave new Trojan Horse!
Ad matching happens locally, no user browsing data ever reaches the Brave company or any middle men. I have explained that a thousand times already, and even your Brendan Eich quote says so, but don’t let the facts get in your way.
And “trojan horse” is utterly ridiculous. Brave’s ads, contrary to user-hostile anti-features in Firefox, are fully opt-in. If someone uses it, then said someone has consciously decided to do so.
It seems that you are perpetually stuck at 99%, maybe leveling up your understanding to 100% will fix it, I don’t know.
>>> And “trojan horse†is utterly ridiculous. Brave’s ads,[…], are fully opt-in.
If someone uses it, then said someone has consciously decided to do so.
Exact what the Trojans did, they consciously decided to “fully opt-in” and pulled the horse into their city.
The outcome of this “fully opt-in” is known since homeric days …
@99
> Exact what the Trojans did, they consciously decided to “fully opt-in†and pulled the horse into their city.
Except that the Brave ads do not do any harm, as they are being processed and served locally.
Next time you attempt to draw parallels, make sure that the reasoning behind them is at least somewhat sound.
great. archive.org is important.
ps: “re-post” from last year :
https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/wiki/Deviations-from-Chromium-(features-we-disable-or-remove)
I have two bookmarklets in my Favorites Bar:
Google Cache
javascript:void((function()%7Bvar%20a=location.href.replace(/%5Ehttp%5C:%5C/%5C/(.*)$/,%22$1%22);location.href=%22http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:%22+escape(a);%7D)())
Wayback
javascript:location.href=’http://web.archive.org/web/*/’+document.location.href;
Yes I use Wayback sometimes. Usefull option added to Brave. Not to forget I can donate to ghacks net with Brave BATðŸ˜
That’s handy, not very often for me but once in a while. There is a current extension for ff by the same people as the chrome one, internet archive
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/wayback-machine_new/
Gosh, I get anxiety now whenever I see an article about web browsers because I know what the comments will be like… “MY web browser can beat up YOUR web browser!”
Anyway…. I’ve been going through a phase in the last month trying out different browsers and I think I’ve finally been won over by Brave. I had installed ChromEdge when it officially launched and it’s been pretty fine- I’ve used it interchangeably with Firefox. Then on my Android phone I switched from Chrome to Firefox- I wasn’t terribly impressed with Firefox mobile itself but I loved that I could use uBlock Origin with it so I kept it. Then a few days ago after reading one of the articles about Brave, I decided to try THAT on my phone and I’ve just been thoroughly impressed. It feels snappy, I like the interface, and the built-in adblocking and privacy features are great. Today I finally decided to change to Brave for my desktop and it just feels right. At this point I think I’m done with my experimentation and I’m going to just stick with Brave for the foreseeable future. I’m looking forward to people replying and telling me why I’m wrong for switching to Brave… (Just kidding! Nobody wants to talk to this weird loner)
@Ryan F
Coming from Firefox and Opera, I too have been testing the new Edge and Brave. But note that this is just the desktop versions.
What I found is, as for performance and ease of use, Edge and Opera are the best, but not by much over Brave.
As for Chrome and Vivaldi, I haven’t tested those in years.
What I like most from Brave is the better privacy it’s said to have. What I don’t like is being nagged to use BAT/Brave Rewards, and the limited control of Brave Shields.
In the end, the lack of control over Brave Shields is a near deal breaker for me, as I don’t like the idea of making a hidden whitelist as it does when you allow sites. Regardless, I’ll keep using Brave for now.
In the future I think Edge will keep getting better, but I think Opera may get worse.
As for privacy, there’s still the Tor browser.
Ryan I use it for a quite a time and it is good enough for me. The built in adblocker won’t be afffected when Manifest V3 is implemented as far as I know.
I rather would like to use Iridium, but their updates are lagging.
Their support/help is not that great I think. Although it is quite a time ago since I visited it. And their web torrent support is can be risky. You can disable it but still why do they offer that?
If a site is inaccessible I proceed as follows:
1- Check site availability with “https://www.uptrends.com/tools/uptime”
2- If site is available I check my PeerBlock application’s log to see if that’s the culprit
3- If not my PeerBlock I check my Acrylic application’s log to see if that’s the culprit (I use Acrylic together with DNSCrypt-Proxy but my blocklists are handled only by Acrylic).
If reason is (2) or (3) I’ll consider making an exception for the site.
Otherwise I’ll have a look at either archive.org either at archive.is, archives I may happen to visit even if site is available, just to discover a past article/page. Seldom.
some cdn may still have those pages, like yahoo (and surely others).
Good for Brave! Contrary to some competitors, the Brave devs actually add useful features and have the needs of the community in mind when developing the browser.