gab-dissenter-extension VS frontend

The now abandoned Dissenter browser started out as a page you could paste in URL's and comment on them (https://archive.fo/qiMZo), then it became an extension (https://github.com/gab-ai-inc/gab-dissenter-extension), and finally a browser.

Somebody needs to pick up this ball and get it rolling again.

r📷Donald J Trump@realdonaldtrump17m·"The Fake News Media cannot stand the fact that so many people in our Country know the truth, that the 2020 Election was rigged and stolen, yet almost every article written contains the words the “Big Lie” or “unsubstantiated facts,” etc., always trying to demean the real results. I am willing to challenge the heads of the various papers or even far left politicians, who have perpetuated the Real Big Lie, which is voter irregularities and fraud on a massive and determinative scale. This includes members of the highly partisan Unselect Committee of Democrats who refuse to delve into what caused the January 6th protest—it was the Fake Election results! While I am willing to do it, they will never agree because they cannot argue that facts in states including Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, New Hampshire, and others such as New Mexico, where the Democrat Secretary of State changed the voting laws without legislative approval just prior to the Election, making it virtually impossible for the Republican presidential candidate to win. If anyone would like a public debate on the facts, not the fiction, please let me know. It will be a ratings bonanza for television! "

Dissenter browser adds a comment section to every URL to solve this problem.

I would recommend getting Dissenter Browser for sure (https://dissenter.com/), Dissenter IIRC sets your default search engine as Duck Duck Go. Obviously one could change that to Google or whatever they like.

This actually already existed and it was (is) called Dissenter (https://dissenter.com/). It is built by Gab, a pro free speech social network that has been maligned by the political left and anti free speech crowd.

In an absolutely shocking affront to the neutrality of web browsers, Firefox banned Dissenter from their extension stores (https://reclaimthenet.org/firefox-rejects-free-speech-bans-f...) because they disagree with an exceedingly small number of offensive comments made on there. Chrome later did the same and Dissenter has its own browser now (https://reclaimthenet.org/dissenter-free-speech-browser/). But obviously being removed from those browsers’ extension stores seriously limits its reach.

There are many HN comments saying “you can just discuss these articles elsewhere”, but when tech companies are censoring/deplatforming any views they disagree with in unison, there aren’t ways to have honest and open discussions unless you align with a certain worldview (progressive views) or have incredibly limited reach. You simply can’t speak freely on controversial topics like gender identity or critical race theory or illegal immigration on Reddit, Twitter, on your own apps in App stores (see bans of Gab or Parler), or even our web browsers. I will be not at all surprised when it comes down to browsers or phones blocking which websites you can visit.

Like how does any of this make any sense? There's a picture of a guy running holding a woman in Ukraine trying to save both of them, and then I look over on theguardian.com and we have developed the technology for men to get pregnant.

Weird. I don't know anyone in my entire family, extended family or social circle who watches TV in 2023. The most I've seen of "coronation" is the odd bit of Union Jack bumf in Waitrose and some extra nonsense to scroll past on theguardian.com (which is of course 92% shite anyway, but it's free.)

Users viewing this page through Google Amp may experience a technical glitch. If the table below does not appear correctly, click here to reload the page on theguardian.com, which should fix the problem.

theguardian.com - 73.9m

I understand not reading articles if you already have a bias the headline supports, like some here have. But I don't get the few that don't read the article but instead decide to toss out their candles... just based on a headline... from theguardian.com

theguardian.com › world › 2022 › nov › 30 › new-zealand-parents-refuse-use-of-vaccinated-blood-in-life-saving-surgery-on-baby

Sample, Ian. “Harvard University Says It Can’t Afford Journal Publishers’ Prices.” The Guardian, April 24, 2012, sec. Science. theguardian.com.

"Twitter has admitted it amplifies more tweets from rightwing politicians and news outlets than content from leftwing sources." [theguardian.com]