As someone who went from Chrome to Brave, im actually very curious. What are some of the differences between Firefox and Brave? Should I make it a priority to switch?
Both Brave and Firefox are both weakly copylefted libre software (MPLv2). However both programs are culpable to privacy pitfalls and bad practices. Brave has its infamous crypto/ad scheme and firefox has google search as its default engine (among other opt out telemetry). Both have users run nonfree javascript by default.
Use firefox instead of Brave since firefox gives you more freedom on how hardened you want your web browser to be from a very low level. Theres also Librewolf for privacy and GNU Icecat for freedom.
Also package maintainers have firefox in their repos and virtually never have Brave
On the other hand, being called not too lazy and paranoid about gaming difficulties to switch to Linux for using Firefox is overly generous towards people like me 😁
You can differentiate between GNU/Linux users and Linux users on whether they have steam installed, and differentiate further if it is installed as a flatpak or not.
As a Linux enjoyer it's definitely true that the elitist/casual ratio is higher on Linux compared to Windows or MacOS (especially Arch manual installers), but as more and more people will adopt Linux, this ratio will probably be lower and lower.
It's not differentiating between "casual Linux users" or "real Linux users," Valve's Steam does not belong in the GNU operating system (GNU/Linux) since it forces users to install a nonfree interface and also invites users to be subject to DRM (though it is optional for developers to enable or not). The problem is not Steam's role as a content distribution manager (handling payments, delivering files), but the fact that it restricts the users freedom through their steam client (which there are no viable free software solutions to).
If a discussion of free software unnerves you, I don't care. But to label this as a conflict between "casual vs real" is just unironically doing what this meme is mocking in the first place.
I think what they were specifying was the role GNU plays in that sentence. Personally I don't like calling one GNU/Linux and the other Linux, but the defining point of GNU is that it's uses only free open source software, and does not contain any non-free (as in speech, not beer) software.
Paranoid people usually will use a flatpak version of software, since that can secure the person's privacy a bit more than a non-flatpak one. (The program is isolated from the system, just like a docker container if you know what that is)
The extreme customization it offers is fun, but even on my gaming rig the updates of source packages are unbearably slow, I would never use it as a daily driver.
Previously a musk simp, until it started effecting him. he's a YouTube techfluencer who's always all in on tech. Full blown optimism even when it's obviously wrong with sudo-libertarian ideals without calling himself libertarian. Guy thinks the best of all tech companies while ignoring all faults until it's insanely in-your-face
Technically they have about the same privacy standards by default
As someone who went from Chrome to Brave, im actually very curious. What are some of the differences between Firefox and Brave? Should I make it a priority to switch?
Both Brave and Firefox are both weakly copylefted libre software (MPLv2). However both programs are culpable to privacy pitfalls and bad practices. Brave has its infamous crypto/ad scheme and firefox has google search as its default engine (among other opt out telemetry). Both have users run nonfree javascript by default.
Use firefox instead of Brave since firefox gives you more freedom on how hardened you want your web browser to be from a very low level. Theres also Librewolf for privacy and GNU Icecat for freedom.
Also package maintainers have firefox in their repos and virtually never have Brave
Being called conservative for using firefox is mean!
Yeah, after a number of people tried to go after Mozilla for hiring trans people, those kinds of people are mostly on Brave nowadays
not conservative in the political sense, just conservative with regards to tech
On the other hand, being called not too lazy and paranoid about gaming difficulties to switch to Linux for using Firefox is overly generous towards people like me 😁
The Linux circlejerk is at it again
You can differentiate between GNU/Linux users and Linux users on whether they have steam installed, and differentiate further if it is installed as a flatpak or not.
I don't get it, but I'd like to. Would you explain the difference for me?
Most Linux users on the internet are elitists.
Not much more to take away from that comment. It's essentially differentiating between "casual Linux users" and "real Linux users".
As a Linux enjoyer it's definitely true that the elitist/casual ratio is higher on Linux compared to Windows or MacOS (especially Arch manual installers), but as more and more people will adopt Linux, this ratio will probably be lower and lower.
It's not differentiating between "casual Linux users" or "real Linux users," Valve's Steam does not belong in the GNU operating system (GNU/Linux) since it forces users to install a nonfree interface and also invites users to be subject to DRM (though it is optional for developers to enable or not). The problem is not Steam's role as a content distribution manager (handling payments, delivering files), but the fact that it restricts the users freedom through their steam client (which there are no viable free software solutions to).
If a discussion of free software unnerves you, I don't care. But to label this as a conflict between "casual vs real" is just unironically doing what this meme is mocking in the first place.
Here we go.
Who are you to decide what does and does not belong on Linux?
GNU preaches free software. Steam is nonfree. I think they're just trying to point that out.
I didn't the license did :)
I think what they were specifying was the role GNU plays in that sentence. Personally I don't like calling one GNU/Linux and the other Linux, but the defining point of GNU is that it's uses only free open source software, and does not contain any non-free (as in speech, not beer) software.
Paranoid people usually will use a flatpak version of software, since that can secure the person's privacy a bit more than a non-flatpak one. (The program is isolated from the system, just like a docker container if you know what that is)
Arch US for noobs. If you don't use Linux From Scratch you may as well but a Chromebook.
The extreme customization it offers is fun, but even on my gaming rig the updates of source packages are unbearably slow, I would never use it as a daily driver.
Welcome to the rabbit hole.
A rabbit should be a mascot for a free software program, it has surprisingly not been done in my knowledge.
this is just so wrong i don't know where to start omg
start at the beginning
Luke Smith has some pretty bigoted opinions.
What has he done? I've never heard of him.
He's a far right dipshit https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/12/far-right-open-source-technology-censorship
Zorin OS + Firefox FTW. Easy, pretty, free (as in beer and speech)
At least I'm not a normie, I have no idea what MKBHD is.
Previously a musk simp, until it started effecting him. he's a YouTube techfluencer who's always all in on tech. Full blown optimism even when it's obviously wrong with sudo-libertarian ideals without calling himself libertarian. Guy thinks the best of all tech companies while ignoring all faults until it's insanely in-your-face
Here you go for when you'll inevitably fuck up
which category does NixOS belong to?
probably in between conservative and paranoid. as with Arch, imo. NixOS is great btw. Gentoo people are insane (in a good way).