
Besides, if community lists can accept that alleged load of “countless support issues” for free (like ublock origin filters, and easylist filter lists before they sold out to Brave), why could not those lists under corporate control with lots of money ? Ublock origin developed by one person as a hobby without even accepting donations -> proactively pro-user nuisance blocking (alas with the only exception of Mozilla ads, of which the removal was denied).Īs for the “Brave did it partly for us, not just for themselves” argument of linuxfan, no, if a user is advanced enough to add filters himself, it’s his responsability to be able to unbreak false positives by disabling what he added, depriving all users of this freedom just because of this “risk” is anti-user and a rationalization for badly motivated corporate behavior.

It is similar to the excuse given by Mozilla to reject bundling ublock origin, “but false positives bad for you !”, when blocking ads would still do far more good than bad for the users, and if they really cared about this problem they could very easily contribute to the unbreaking effort in the community lists.
