Brave will debounce all Google AMP cache URLs to the publishers' sites
twitter.comBrave is what Mozilla could have been but chose not to be.
Could they though? If Firefox started having giant ad images on the new tab page, sending ad notifications and pushing crypto scams, the users would be outraged.
But they aren't outraged by collaboration agreements with the largest privacy invaders on the planet?
https://www.androidheadlines.com/2022/02/mozilla-partners-wi...
Building on that [1]
[1] https://www.techtimes.com/articles/271832/20220214/mozilla-m...
But that leads to [2]
[2] https://www.prweek.com/article/1740679/mozilla-meta-collabor...
And that "privacy-preserving attribution" thing is all over the googles.
Excuse my French as a Firefox user, but what the fuck?
Firefox already shows giant ads [1]
I don't think BAT is a scam, but Brave hasn't done the best with it. Regardless, Mozilla previously pushed for crypto [2]
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30665493
[2] https://mobile.twitter.com/mozilla/status/147695103063826022...
Brave is what Mozilla used to be and the new guard expressly rejected.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Eich#Appointment_to_CE...
Is this a new usage of the word "debounce"? When I was in college, debounce is what we did to eliminate repeated inputs from clicky buttons connected directly to the GPIO pins on a microcontroller.
Here it just sounds like they misspelled "redirect".
Going to some sites you get "bounced" to an AMP page instead. The term debounce seems like a fine choice for the concept of undoing that.
Words can -- and often do -- have multiple meanings.
What if the developers made the informed choice to use AMP? Aren't they going to be hug-of-deathing a lot of sites that thought they had a caching scheme?