Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Brave files adtech complaint against Google

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 271 posts

Re: Brave files adtech complaint against Google

#81

Post by some_account »

britch wrote: post #60
jonathansampson wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to respond, as a developer on the Brave project. We don't simply replace ads with other ads. The entire ad landscape has been co-opted by those who aim to collect as much data about you as is possible. Over 600 million devices were running some form of ad-blocking software in 2017, and that was an increase of 30% from the year prior. This number keeps growing, year over year. Something has to be done. Users…

I'm curious, do you have any evidence that most people are installing ad blockers as a privacy measure? I don't have any hard evidence, but I imagine most people block ads because they don't want to have to scroll past a bunch of banners and videos to read the article they want to read. Certainly there are many people who are concerned about privacy, but I don' think that's what's driving the popularity of ad blocker…

I use it because the web becomes usable and fast again, and also because I don't want ad companies making money from my activity and privacy.

When they pay me, they can get some of my data. I'm just waiting for their call.

Re: Brave files adtech complaint against Google

#82

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

vkou wrote: post #4
forapurpose wrote: post #2

They are arguing that the surveillance core of adtech is a GDPR violation, if I understand correctly. > The complaint argues that when a person visits a website, intimate personal data that describe them and what they are doing online is broadcast to tens or hundreds of companies without their knowledge in order to auction and place ads. It would be great if someone with real expertise in GDPR or adtech could provide…

Generally speaking, ad networks don't sell personal data. That's their secret sauce - selling it is largely counterproductive. I can't call up Yahoo, and ask to buy the personal data of "forapurpose". If I could, it would take me a few million dollars to build a clone of their most valuable asset - their user database. What they sell is ad spots in webpages, when those webpages are visited by people who satisfy some…

The trackers that generate analytics data for the ad networks do sell personal data and it is made available to anyone who wants to pay.

Re: Brave files adtech complaint against Google

#83

Post by lasmellslikepee »

jonathansampson wrote: post #54
martindale wrote: post #14

Brave's strategy of replacing ads with other ads isn't going to do anyone any good. They could've used payment channels to build a content distribution network, but alas...

I'd like to respond, as a developer on the Brave project. We don't simply replace ads with other ads. The entire ad landscape has been co-opted by those who aim to collect as much data about you as is possible. Over 600 million devices were running some form of ad-blocking software in 2017, and that was an increase of 30% from the year prior. This number keeps growing, year over year. Something has to be done. Users…

TL;DR: Brave lied about blocking 3rd party JS and I no longer trust them.

The main reason I don't use Brave anymore is because I don't trust the Brave team to be transparent about what they're doing. I remember switching to Brave a year or two ago really rooting for them and the model they were positing. I though that blocking third-party JavaScript by default was a great idea - no more Firefox plugins! Well, I soon realized that Brave did not block all third-party JS and instead let "whitelisted"(by whom?) JS through. When I asked one of the Brave team members why this was so and informed them that I found this practice misleading at best I was given a song-and-dance about "rescuing the industry" instead of a technical explanation for the issue at hand(blocking third-party JS essentially didn't work).

I can't be bothered to use a browser who's developers can't be bothered to be honest about the feature set and how they work.

Re: Brave files adtech complaint against Google

#84

Post by ariwilson »

jonathansampson wrote: post #54
martindale wrote: post #14

Brave's strategy of replacing ads with other ads isn't going to do anyone any good. They could've used payment channels to build a content distribution network, but alas...

I'd like to respond, as a developer on the Brave project. We don't simply replace ads with other ads. The entire ad landscape has been co-opted by those who aim to collect as much data about you as is possible. Over 600 million devices were running some form of ad-blocking software in 2017, and that was an increase of 30% from the year prior. This number keeps growing, year over year. Something has to be done. Users…

- Why does the publisher not get a say about how their content is paid for? - Do you have evidence that users care more about ads privacy than intrusiveness?

Re: Brave files adtech complaint against Google

#85

Post by faag36 »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #75
britch wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious, do you have any evidence that most people are installing ad blockers as a privacy measure? I don't have any hard evidence, but I imagine most people block ads because they don't want to have to scroll past a bunch of banners and videos to read the article they want to read. Certainly there are many people who are concerned about privacy, but I don' think that's what's driving the popularity of ad blocker…

I install ad blockers because I don't want to get auto redirected to a porn site which some unscrupulous ad vendors make possible. I tried going blocker free at work for 6 months. uBO got installed the day I was sent to a porn site by malicious JavaScript after clicking on an innocuous link. Google won't address the JavaScript problem with their ad network so I cut them off.

The Internet for people who don't know about ad blockers must be a horrible place, it's no wonder everybody started using apps for everything.

Re: Brave files adtech complaint against Google

#86

Post by Tomte »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #49
jimbokun wrote: post #45

"The GDPR is the first data privacy regime that foresees heavy fines for serious violations - of up to 4 percent of a company’s global turnover." What would happen if a company decided that 4 percent of turnover is much cheaper than properly securing all of their data, and just chooses to pay the fine every year?

Is it per year? Per month? Per a judge's choice? Anyone got a reference to where it's defined?

Per incident, but that's so highly theoretical as not to make sense to speak about it.

Practically: per reasonable timeframe, where a company who continues to do bad things a good time after been fined can get another fine.

Re: Brave files adtech complaint against Google

#87

Post by doublec »

Filligree wrote: post #34
Sephr wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're so admirable that they take a 5% cut of your donations to sites you visit and replace ads with their own. Call me crazy, but in no future can I imagine anyone willingly paying their browser vendor for anything. Brave isn't the future, it's yet another cash grab. The real future is fully-decentralized websites, and it doesn't require new browsers. Edit: Fixed inaccuracy pointed out by Brave developer

> The real future is fully-decentralized websites, and it doesn't require new browsers. Let's say I want to run a forum. Something equivalent to, hmm, https://forums.sufficientvelocity.com/ How do I do that as a decentralized website?

Both ZeroNet and Freenet have decentralized forums. Freenet's forum is called FMS. They have decentralized microblogging too - ZeroMe on ZeroNet and Sone on Freenet. This is a post I wrote about ZeroNet's decentralized microblogging: https://bluishcoder.co.nz/2017/10/12/zerome-decentralized-mi...

Re: Brave files adtech complaint against Google

#88

Post by 3K7m7bUZyWA1KCD »

blub wrote: post #68
tjoff wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GDPR consent doesn't work like that...

OP is working in the ad space and he's been complaining about the GDPR forever. They're still in the denial phase.

As a European I can't help but wonder if other proposed reforms, such as Article 11 and Article 13, will do more good to the end user than not, just like what happened with GDPR.

I've seen so many enraged comments related to the new copyright laws, that my instinct says it will be a good thing.

Re: Brave files adtech complaint against Google

#90

Post by akerro »

jonathansampson wrote: post #54
martindale wrote: post #14

Brave's strategy of replacing ads with other ads isn't going to do anyone any good. They could've used payment channels to build a content distribution network, but alas...

I'd like to respond, as a developer on the Brave project. We don't simply replace ads with other ads. The entire ad landscape has been co-opted by those who aim to collect as much data about you as is possible. Over 600 million devices were running some form of ad-blocking software in 2017, and that was an increase of 30% from the year prior. This number keeps growing, year over year. Something has to be done. Users…

Whether your reasons are ideological or economical, I support your work and project. I have µblock, privacy badger and container on firefox, but Shield enabled on Brave and I opt-ed in for Brave payments and Brave ads.
Post reply on HN