[bad_user]

Blocking ads is one thing, lets just say for the sake of argument that users have a right to not execute stuff on their own computer.

But replacing ads on websites is quite another. I don't understand how this wouldn't be downright copyright infringement made for profit reasons. And if they share that revenue with users, then users can get sued as well.

I also think such a business model is incompatible with what it says on the box. On one hand, this browser is advertised as being more privacy friendly, on the other hand users would be willing to submit their browsing history to yet another third-party for ads targeting.

Mozilla was harshly criticized on HN for wanting to include ads in Firefox with an implementation that was never communicating with any Mozilla servers, all the targeting being done offline.

I surely hope HN isn't guilty of double standards.