> It doesn't seem to be anywhere (in text) in:
/Users/mark/Library/Application Support/BraveSoftware<p>Of course it's not in text. It's a SQLite3 database:<p><pre><code> $ sqlite3 ~/'Library/Application Support/BraveSoftware/Brave-Browser/Default/Top Sites' .dump
PRAGMA foreign_keys=OFF;
BEGIN TRANSACTION;
CREATE TABLE meta(key LONGVARCHAR NOT NULL UNIQUE PRIMARY KEY, value LONGVARCHAR);
INSERT INTO meta VALUES('mmap_status','-1');
INSERT INTO meta VALUES('version','4');
INSERT INTO meta VALUES('last_compatible_version','4');
CREATE TABLE top_sites (url LONGVARCHAR PRIMARY KEY,url_rank INTEGER,title LONGVARCHAR,redirects LONGVARCHAR);
INSERT INTO top_sites VALUES('https://chrome.google.com/webstore?hl=en',0,'Web Store',NULL);
COMMIT;
</code></pre>
This is actually a database inherited from Chromium, so I'm not sure if the issue is inherited from Chromium.<p>Edit: Tried this on Chromium 86.0.4185.0, top sites db is cleared after clearing all browsing data, so probably not inherited from Chromium.<p>(Btw I wasn't able to repro on Brave because however many times I open news.ycombinator.com, it simply won't register in top sites -.-)
This is a bug, have you guys seen a software bug before? What is it with the appetite for outrage? Using brave on Android devices and not planning to switch
They are an adtech company. That should be all we need to know, right? I'm willing to change my mind, so far it doesn't make sense to use Brave.
Brave Browser continues to behave in ways that are contrary to their stated principles. I dropped the browser a couple of months ago on the heels of the bitcoin affiliate link scandal and went back to Safari and Firefox.<p>I am keeping an eye on Braver Browser, a fork of Brave with the intention of removing the questionable behavior:
<a href="https://github.com/braver-browser" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/braver-browser</a>
well, compared to undisclosed affiliate marketing for trading sites[1], soliciting of donations without consent[2] or the recent redirection through affiliate links[3], this seems pretty tame.<p>[1]: <a href="https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/issues/8793" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/issues/8793</a><p>[2]: <a href="https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2019/01/13/brave-web-browser-no-longer-claims-to-fundraise-on-behalf-of-others-so-thats-nice/" rel="nofollow">https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2019/01/13/brave-web-br...</a><p>[3]: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23442027" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23442027</a>
Someone posted on the GH issue that someone posted the GH issue on HackerNews.<p><a href="https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/issues/9929#issuecomment-654154773" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/issues/9929#issuecomm...</a>
Is it fair to _ever_ say that clearing the history completely removes all traces of visited sites? I have always operated under the assumption that <i>some</i> trace will remain pretty much forever.
If you need an alternative to Brave, then see <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23708688" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23708688</a>. This comment also shares the auto-suggestions-for-profit which is another reason I'm not using it. Since I cannot use DDG nor Brave, the only alternative (besides the currently bloated Firefox -- in my biased opinion) is ungoogled-chromium.