Browser
Brave browser is a good browser that provides all the privacy features out-of-the-box.
However, it's not as configurable as I'd like, so I've picked Firefox and hardened it.
I use a suite of adblockers on Firefox.
uBlock origin is the best one, but just like Brave, it doesn't give you much control.
AdNauseum is an adblocker which loads ads, and then clicks on every single ad, therefore increasing the clickthrough rate but dropping the conversion rate of every ad campaign.
In addition, it doesn't allow the ad-agencies to build an accurate profile on you.
FadBlock is an extension which loads and skips youtube ads, bypassing their adblock-blocker.
I prefer to use Firefox because it's completely independent.
Brave is built on the Chromium Open Source Project, which means Google still has some level of control over it.
Google could do something like abandoning the Chromium Open Source Project, which would seriously stunt Brave's development if not outright halt it.
Firefox needs to survive for a free internet, but Mozilla isn't perfect either.
There are versions of Firefox called LibreWolf and WaterFox which are more private out-of-the-box, and they keep Mozilla's scummy decisions at bay.
There is no such thing as unbiased news
There are differing levels of bias in news.
The first is bias via outright lies, where people make stuff up to push an agenda.
You've come across a lot of it in the misinformation age, but it's only popular on social media and not so much on reputed news outlets.
For good reason.
The second is bias via loaded phrasing.
The reporting may be based in facts, but it also tells you how to feel about it.
You've seen this as well, and it's the most common form of bias from reputed news outlets.
The third is bias via selective reporting.
"It's amazing that the amount of news that happens in the world every day always just exactly fits the newspaper." - Jerry Seinfeld
This is the most insidious form of bias.
You can report on facts, and offer no default emotional response to the reader, but by simply showing only one side of the story, you create bias.
And it's really hard to catch this.
To figure out selective reporting, you need to know an unselective reporter, and how do you get that?
News aggregators
Ground News is a US-based app that aggregates news from various sources, and helps you tackle the second and third forms of bias.
To get a similar result in India, I've figured the following chain of trust:
- NewsGuard is regarded as an accurate rater by news sources across the political spectrum
- Media Bias Fact Check is given a 100/100 by NewsGuard
- Media Bias Fact Check provides a list of news websites with their bias and factuality ratings to the public
I have then picked out all Indian news outlets rated by MBFC as being at least "mostly factual" and "high traffic".
This way, I can get news of all biases, but mostly factual news, from reputed sources.
I haven't actually started reading my curated list of news sites yet, but that's a problem for a different time.
Yes, DuckDuckGo is private, Brave Search is private, Ecosia is private and plants trees...
But I've just set my search engine to wikipedia lately and it's been so much better.
"But wikipedia is not a search engine"
Look I've already figured out where to go for news, so what more do I need search for?
Information on something random? What's better than Wikipedia and its citations?
Details about games I play or TV series I watch? Fandom.
Help with coding? StackOverflow.
Community help with something? Much as I hate to say it, Reddit is the best forum for a lot of things.
Why use a search engine when you're going to visit the same sites again and again?
Just pick a forum for your topic and put all related queries in said forum's dedicated search field.
When I do need search, I use Ecosia.
But I've cut down massively