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

Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

brave.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 381 posts

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#91

Post by pushcx »

javagram wrote: post #84
pushcx wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, but they still haven't shown remorse for claiming those payments were held in escrow when in fact Brave held the payments, and planned to take them after 90 days. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18736743

Your link doesn’t match your text. You say they “planned” to take funds but when I followed the link, I found a TOS that allowed them to take a portion of the funds, or redistribute all of the funds back to end users without taking any, and a post from a Brave employee saying they never took any for themselves

I see why you read it that way, but I can't read it so charitably after they claimed payments were held in escrow when they weren't.

I don't believe this program was live 90 days before the uproar, so I don't give much credit for them not taking the donations.

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#92

Post by BrendanEich »

orblivion wrote: post #80
jonathansampson wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is correct. Note that both of our founders are from the Firefox team originally. Our CTO, Brian Bondy, originally built the first Brave prototype on the Gecko engine. Unfortunately, after much testing, it was clear that a modified Chromium would be the better route forward. You can imagine this was not a decision taken lightly, as both of these individuals have lived and breathed Gecko/Mozilla for years prior.

Would the story be different with Quantum now?

No, the decision was based on a spreadsheet with many items concerned with web compatibility, HTML5 DRM plugin free-as-in-beer, extension support, etc.

Chromium without Google tracking is dominant, this is just a fact (it will change some day; not soon). The best way to counter this is not to die on the wrong hill (engine wars) right now -- it is to go a level up and fight for privacy and user sovereignty where Google cannot defend: blocking all tracking, paying users 70% of user private ad revenue.

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#93

Post by TheArcane »

phjesusthatguy3 wrote: post #85
bsclifton wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Brave employee here) Curious: what are some of the shortfalls you see in Chromium? Before I joined Brave, the desktop browser was originally using Gecko (from Firefox). Ultimately, there were some problems and the decision was made to move to Chromium. On iOS, Brave is forked from Firefox though You can check out more detail on Reddit where folks asked why FF was not used (which has links to more detailed info): htt…

>Curious: what are some of the shortfalls you see in Chromium? That it's a Google-controlled project. Seriously, that's it. I have no reason to believe Google has my best interest at heart. Don't turn that around and say "Oh, you think Mozilla is looking out for you?" because I don't. I just trust Google less.

The deGoogle movement has been gaining steam ever since the ad-block announcement, and I'm a 100% behind it

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#94

Post by dymk »

lukemulks wrote: post #88
basch wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

thats a bit of semantics. if they block someone elses ads, and display their own ads they are still replacing what a persons attention is drawn to, even if it is an overlay instead of injected into the page. (its literally called an attention token, diverting attention to a new target.) should they be allowed to create an ad driven piece of software? absolutely? but if that software is an ad blocking browser, its cre…

(Brave employee here) We block 3rd party ads and tracking, that collect user data, often without their knowledge or consent. Brave Ads are disabled by default, to ensure that no one sees ads that is not interested in viewing ads. This provides a benefit to advertisers as well, as they currently dump a lot of money into a dumpster fire, and are basically tasked with measuring how many of the pixels appeared on the scr…

You don’t block third party ads; you block first party ads that the website depends on for revenue

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#95

Post by eikenberry »

bsclifton wrote: post #28
zargon wrote: post #12

I really like what Brave is doing. I wish it was built on Firefox instead of Chromium. I just don't see myself leaving Firefox without major upheaval in the browser space.

(Brave employee here) Curious: what are some of the shortfalls you see in Chromium? Before I joined Brave, the desktop browser was originally using Gecko (from Firefox). Ultimately, there were some problems and the decision was made to move to Chromium. On iOS, Brave is forked from Firefox though You can check out more detail on Reddit where folks asked why FF was not used (which has links to more detailed info): htt…

Multi-account containers have become Firefox's killer feature that will keep me from switching. They are super handy for separating work accounts, managing my kids accounts, etc. while never having to worry about logging out of my primary accounts.

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#96

Post by TheArcane »

bsclifton wrote: post #28
zargon wrote: post #12

I really like what Brave is doing. I wish it was built on Firefox instead of Chromium. I just don't see myself leaving Firefox without major upheaval in the browser space.

(Brave employee here) Curious: what are some of the shortfalls you see in Chromium? Before I joined Brave, the desktop browser was originally using Gecko (from Firefox). Ultimately, there were some problems and the decision was made to move to Chromium. On iOS, Brave is forked from Firefox though You can check out more detail on Reddit where folks asked why FF was not used (which has links to more detailed info): htt…

Easy. Google has a lot of influence over Chromium development.

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#97

Post by jonathansampson »

basch wrote: post #68
songshuu wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's simply false. They don't do ad replacement. You have to volunteer yourself to receive ads and they come in like system notifications, not anywhere near the content.

thats a bit of semantics. if they block someone elses ads, and display their own ads they are still replacing what a persons attention is drawn to, even if it is an overlay instead of injected into the page. (its literally called an attention token, diverting attention to a new target.) should they be allowed to create an ad driven piece of software? absolutely? but if that software is an ad blocking browser, its cre…

The problem is more nuanced than "they block someone elses ads, and display their own," though. Modern digital ads (since their start in the early-mid 90s, have been about data collection. In 2009, online advertising was further adapted to include a process known as Real-Time Bidding, where users are auctioned off (usually in less than 100ms) for each ad-slot on each page they visit. The ad industry has been transforming more and more into a system of _surveillance capitalism_.

These changes to the digital advertising industry have driven mass adoption of ad and content blockers. In 2015, more than 500 million users were blocking trackers, and ads/content that relied on them. This protects user privacy and security, but hurts the sustainability of the Web we all know and love. Brave aims to deliver a fully developed solution.

Brave's model (which is predicated on user-consent, and privacy-by-default) seeks to fully-solve the aforementioned problems. We offer advertising without compromising user trust, and better value to advertisers/publishers during the process. Perhaps most importantly is that Brave Rewards brings disillusioned users who once ran ad and tracker blockers back into the fold.

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#98

Post by BrendanEich »

xur17 wrote: post #89
jonathansampson wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uphold is working hard to acquire the bitlicense for New York. They shared on Twitter earlier this month that they hope to have this resolved soon. It's worth noting that Creators also have a referral program whereby $5 in BAT can be earned for each user brought to the Brave platform. brave.com/refer Thank you for your incredible patience and participation. We hope to see positive developments on the bitlicense front…

Are there any plans to get rid of uphold on the publisher side and allow external wallets? It was a huge turn off to me when I signed up.

We need a regulated entity to do directed (tips, recurring), user-anonymous, off-chain transactions, and to comply with OFAC and other hard regulations. We can't do it ourselves. Wallet is the least of the issue, even if the publisher were willing to take BAT.

Our future phase (Apollo) blockchain work will move more txns on-chain but not solve all regulatory problems. No blockchain can do that unless you are using p2p directly, and then on the current big chains you don't have anonymity or low fees. This may change, we're working on it.

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#100

Post by option_greek »

zargon wrote: post #12

I really like what Brave is doing. I wish it was built on Firefox instead of Chromium. I just don't see myself leaving Firefox without major upheaval in the browser space.

Brave being based off chrome is actually great and your comment illustrates that. If it is based on FF, it will cut into FF market share which is already shrinking. Now, it cuts into Chrome which means two privacy focused browser instead of one.
Post reply on HN