Venmo has been doing this forever: https://help.venmo.com/hc/en-us/articles/217532047-I-paid-a-...
Brave taking cryptocurrency donations “for me” without my consent
91–100 of 354 posts
Re: Brave taking cryptocurrency donations “for me” without my consent
#92> they said "we'll see what we can do" and that "refunds are impossible". If a judge finds they've established themselves as a trustee, this argument won't fly. In fact it will make a quite spectacular and expensive thudding sound. The trustee-beneficiary relationship arises from the situation and does not require a contract to be formed. If you are the legal owner of assets "for the benefit of" someone else, congrat…
By way of disclaimer, I've watched this segment for years because I've sometimes intended to enter it myself on a similar-but-not-identical business model. But being aware of the concept of a trust, I've avoided this idea entirely and watched previous failed attempts (eg Readability) with great interest.
Re: Brave taking cryptocurrency donations “for me” without my consent
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh apparently they understand Twitch channels too, huzzah, ugh.
So I typed my domain into the setup thing and I got this: "Hello. It looks like you are using WordPress!" "Your domain is NOT using HTTPS.Uh oh! Your domain is NOT using HTTPS. You will need to fix that before continuing." "The following error was encountered: SSL_connect returned=1 errno=0 state=SSLv2/v3 read server hello A: sslv3 alert handshake failure" Why do I need to be using HTTPS before you'll think about pay…
We're always trying to make the verification process better. On the one hand, it's a pain. On the other, we don't want to let someone other than you pass themselves off as you. The DNS and HTML snippet methods are similar to how verification works for many of Googles publisher and advertiser services, for what it's worth. Sorry this has proven frustrating but I hope DNS updates for you soon!
Re: Brave taking cryptocurrency donations “for me” without my consent
#94Brendan Eich's defense of this scheme [0] seems a bit weak to me. Do you really think the solution is to make creators opt out? What in the world makes you think it's okay to represent people who have not asked for your assistance and take donations on their behalf? Why is it their responsibility to ask you nicely not to use their name to solicit donations? [0] https://twitter.com/BrendanEich/status/10761873167486156…
This must be against some kind of law, I'm not sure which though.
IA-definitely-NAL, but I can't see a way that opt-out can be legal here.
Maybe the legal defense applies the same logic of consent in third-party tracking (third-party provides the service in behalf of the first-party, to whose terms you agreed by using its service. Even that may clash with laws like GDPR):
Brave, third-party, is providing a service to the first-party – the browser's user – who contracted it as a way to provide a best-attempt donation for the creator.
(If it's not obvious, I'm not privy to the details AND US federal and states' law)
The only legal way I can see to do what Brave currently does is to spam the hell out of creators (ah, growth hacking) when someone attempts a donation, but only take the money after the creator signs up.
Re: Brave taking cryptocurrency donations “for me” without my consent
#95I'd been really loving Brave and using it as my daily driver for a few months now, until that I noticed that little "Brave Ads" icon at the end of the address bar. That's when I realized their entire business model is just in the usurpation of existing Google ad revenue, dressed up with "privacy concerns" for the good PR. This sent me on a journey to find a really solid, free, Chromium based browser that is totally d…
Brave is open source where Vivaldi is not. Vivaldi seems to have some performance issues as well. Aren't the Brave ads opt-in?
Brave ads will be 100% opt-in.
Re: Brave taking cryptocurrency donations “for me” without my consent
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honest question. Why not Firefox? What are your concerns with it?
I've tried over and over for decades to like Firefox, but I just don't. I can't say it's a rational decision entirely. But beyond that, I just think that Mozilla's motives can't really be trusted at face value with the amount of revenue they have these days, and their whole profile sync service. It just comes down to incentives, and any company which collects any kind of data has the incentive to profit at our expens…
[deleted]
Re: Brave taking cryptocurrency donations “for me” without my consent
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
That sounds so clumsy that I suspect they really don't care / want folks to fail to collect.
I think people may be forgetting that Brave is a very small, new company, and not everything is streamlined yet...
There's some things that you should not even start doing until you're certain that you can do them properly from beginning to end. If that breaks your business model, then your business model was shit.
This is why the "move fast and break things" ethos is a terrible idea for anything more substantial than social media. See Robinhood, Theranos, etc., etc.
Re: Brave taking cryptocurrency donations “for me” without my consent
#98Re: Brave taking cryptocurrency donations “for me” without my consent
#99Edit: title was changed, I am not Tom Scott I am not too familiar with how Brave and BAT (Brave Attention Token), so please chime in. Here's how Brave describes the BAT YouTube donations system: https://basicattentiontoken.org/brave-expands-basic-attentio... From my understanding, users of the Brave Browser select which YouTubers to donate to, but they don't know whether the channels have opted in to receive donation…
I work at Brave. Tips to un-verified publishers sit in escrow for the creator to claim.
IANAL but GDPR refers to personal data collected from users. The only "Youtuber data" being "used" here is publicly gettable data from the Youtuber's channel.
Re: Brave taking cryptocurrency donations “for me” without my consent
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah I suspect this is part of their overall revenue model.
Honest question: Why do you suspect that? (I work at Brave. We're all very, very nerdy here. It'd be helpful to understand why a fellow nerd suspects we're up to no good.)
You're taking donations on other peoples behalf without their consent. That's the definition of "up to no good". Why would you assume you can do this and people will be okay with it?