Recently, I've noticed that CVn seems to randomly/unpredictably forget the address I've specified for rewards, after a few days. It even happens while I'm actively watching and completing those pesky CAPTCHAs that are one of the banes of my existence. It happens on both BRAVE and Firefox, although it is definitely more prevalent on Brave.
According to one of the users on CVn (and confirmed by reading Brave's "Privacy Protection Policy", linked below), Brave has recently updated the browser to intentionally clear all cookies seven (7) days after they are issued. According to the CVn user, there is no way to configure/over-ride this, either globally or for specific sites. It'll just wipe them at a predetermined/scheduled time, regardless of if someone's actively on a page/site that uses one of the cookies in question. WTAF? Firefox, by default, will wipe cookies periodically. (I've set it to do so on exit, but I'm sure I can configure site-specific exceptions). However, at least FF doesn't do it while a cookie is actively being . That's somewhat ironic, since Eich used to work for Mozilla, which makes Firefox. Do the developers of Brave not understand how cookies work or do they think users are too lazy/stupid to? There are legitimate uses for cookies that have lifetimes longer than a week, and they are than tracking and advertising. Why is there no option to configure this duration, even if at a site-specific or per-cookie level (or whitelist certain sites)? Do these folks not understand the purpose of configuration, the reasoning behind it (id est, choice and flexibility)?
Brave has been getting shittier and shittier since I first started using it. I've been tempted to give up on it entirely before (so much so that I only use it for CVn now, but it doesn't even work for me for that any more.) At this point, I have no faith in Eich and company, no reason to believe that they really know what they are doing. I'm evidently not alone in that.
To me, the sensible choice is to abandon something that no longer serves a useful purpose and see what I can do to further configure/customise Firefox. In hindsight, I should probably have done that in the first place. Take your BAT and shove it!
Don't misunderstand me here. I know/understand full well that more configurable options means more paths through the business logic, which means more code and complexity, which means more likelihood of bugs. Reducing the user's choices means reducing all that and successful software development in the real world requires compromises, time to market and budgetary constraints often being two of them. However, anything that artificially reduces my choices (particularly if the developers appear to not be thinking about the impact on the users as well as themselves) is going to be something I reject on some level. That's just the way I'm wired. It's probably why GNU/Linux appeals to me. Even if I will never set it up and configure it the way I want it due to practical constraints on my knowledge, energy, resolve and time, at least I know that I potentially
