[fault_lines]

I simply don't believe that mistakenly saying "links" instead of "URLs" is sensationalist. The author is not engaging in clickbait by substituting that word. A layman understanding of the web will not make a distinction between a URL and a link. The issue is clearly the fact that the browser deceives the user, whether it is changing a link in a page or changing the URL typed in the address bar, these are both equally deceptive from the user's point of view.

Hell, I have a reasonably good knowledge of the terminology and I will regularly ask people to "send me links" or "send me URLs" interchangeably. It's just needlessly pedantic.

[mthoms]

He's a technical writer (by profession) directing traffic to his blog dedicated to marketing his technical book. Don't be naive, he knows exactly what he's doing.

Furthermore, I responded directly to the OP when he pondered aloud why he would be accused of lying. I explained. Then you jumped on me for being pedantic and posting non-substantive comments? Okay, seriously?

Speaking of which, why did the OP post the comment to HN about Eich calling him a liar, if not to stir up controversy (and traffic)? That's highly unusual. Did you ever consider that Brave is not the only one selling something?

>The issue is clearly the fact that the browser deceives the user, whether it is changing a link in a page or changing the URL typed in the address bar, these are both equally deceptive from the user's point of view

That's simply not true. They are not equally deceptive.... at all. A web browser surreptitiously re-writing third party web-content is next level evil. The implications would be absolutely astronomical.

It's not the same and you know it.