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

261–270 of 381 posts

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#261

Post by riquito »

marichards wrote: post #238
nothrabannosir wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly typing "privacy" into a UI that is designed to act as a search field for Google, and blaming that on Mozilla somehow, that's a stretch. What's next? Typing "which company faked the moon landing" and WOW you're redirect to Google! It must have been them. It's nothing but opinionated. You can't honestly call this a "fact" and go on to claim that HN is hypocritical. That's... is there a word for hypocrisy about…

If Mozilla wanted to respect privacy the "UI that is designed to act as a search field for Google" could be a "UI that is designed to act as a search field for DuckDuckGo", it wasn't that long ago it was a search field for Yahoo. What's notable here is that Google is the default and in doing so is endorsed and recommended by Mozilla for its users. So the fact here is that Mozilla made that choice to be in bed with Go…

Let's completely neglect in those "facts" that Google offers the best search engine and that people want to use it

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#262

Post by kerkeslager »

aaron_m04 wrote: post #259
kerkeslager wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right. Do you have a better solution? I'm not asking to be glib, I actually want a browser that does a better job of protecting my privacy.

I have a collective solution but not an individual solution: pressure Mozilla to change.

This is the direction I'm currently on.

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#263

Post by zucker42 »

vesche wrote: post #253
zucker42 wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you carry the analogy, you're saying the billboards destroying my view through Colorado are somehow paying for my roads. Well, actually taxes pay for my roads. You are entirely misinterpreting the Brave engineer's good faith argument. The argument wasn't that billboards somehow pay for roads. You introduced that analogy, and the reply showed where your anology falls apart. The argument was that unlike roads , mo…

Let's break down what the the rep from Brave said... I don't think I misinterpreted anything. > Your beautiful drive through Colorado requires quite a bit of maintenance and financial support. Roads cost money. > Somebody has to pay for that. Someone has to pay for the roads. > With Brave, Advertisers can pay for it (without getting hold of your data) by way of users. ... Brave aims to sustain the roads that grant yo…

If you use Firefox, ads pay for your browser experience. It's just one extra level of indirection (Advertiser -> Google -> Firefox vs. Advertiser -> Brave).

With regards to original argument, my impressions was you didn't assume good faith and respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what the Brave developer said, as the Hacker News commenting guidelines suggest you do. Take that how you will.

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#264

Post by 43920 »

randiantech wrote: post #207

Since Brave is usually roasted around here, I just want to say thanks to the devs. I'm a Brave user and the experience is fantastic. Two things: I was a Chrome user for many years, so switching to Brave was not traumatic at all (same user experience, plugin's compatibility) and also ad blockers work as expected. I've never pay attention to the included ad solution. Im not interested on it. Im strictly speaking as an…

Just curious: if you're not interested in the ads part, why did you decide to switch, rather than using Chrome/Firefox with an ad blocker?

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#265

Post by RyanAF7 »

Been using Brave for about 2 years now and here's the deal with BAT, Advertisers and Privacy.

As soon as you offer quid-pro-quo exhanges involving digital assets you open the door to the SEC/IRS. With even a modicum of success in market share Brave risks opening the door to the two most openly privacy smashing bureaucracies in financial history.

Brave can lament all they want but in the end digital assets will come to heel and SOX/Dodd Frank still stand.

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#266

Post by underwater »

skybrian wrote: post #123
phjesusthatguy3 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.

This is kind of silly. When you copy open source code, it doesn't give any magic access to the people who wrote it. If there is anything wrong with it, it has to appear on the source code somewhere. The question you should be asking is whether you trust Brave to vet the source code and remove anything that seems like a problem.

Absolutely not silly. By shipping a Chromium-based browser they weaken Gecko and Firefox. A real risk is that we are left with Blink and Webkit being the only two engines. That makes it easier for Google to use their influence to push for standard changes that benefit them (see: DRM).

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#267

Post by true_religion »

_corym wrote: post #150
buboard wrote: post #111

- do you plan to have a simple password instead of email link? - are there any brave banners i can use to promote brave? - will u provide a command line tool to verify websites? - why are referrals tied to channels instead of account? - will you expand to micropayments? - will brave always block ads everywhere or will you switch to blocking only on verified sites? Some form if instant payment is sorely needed. I hope…

(disclaimer engineer @ brave on creators team) > do you plan to have a simple password instead of email link? security gave the A-okay to give users an option to be able to stay signed in for 30 days. soon you will be able to check a box to stay signed in. > are there any brave banners i can use to promote brave? https://brave.com/assets-for-creators/ > will u provide a command line tool to verify websites? not in th…

Why do users receive 30% of revenue? They are the ones being advertised to.

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#268

Post by chrisseaton »

p1necone wrote: post #256
JohnTHaller wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Users in general. We can't track Brave users because it blocks Google Analytics.

Not being able to track users is literally the main feature of Brave, so I'm not surprised it's difficult. It's as it should be.

I don't think the person you're replying to was saying they were surprised or expressing any opinion on whether they should be able to or not - they just said they can't.

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#269

Post by rjf72 »

JohnTHaller wrote: post #206
qzw wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for sharing your real world experience. For the sake of clarity, is that a million monthly figure for your entire site or for just Brave users? If the former, would you be willing to share the number or percentage of Brave users?

All users. We don't track brave users as they block Google analytics. The users who requested we participate thought it would be a good way to get 'free money' from Brave users like them that we were leaving on the table. That's definitely not the case.

Free money isn't free money?

Sure it's only a few bucks a month but look at that in terms of your user base. What are you going to assume your marketshare of Brave users is? For context consider the marketshare of Firefox is in the single digits. Brave is probably a fraction of that. If we assume Brave's popularity is 10% of that of Firefox, that'd give you an expected userbase of That'd be $3/month for, at most, 10k users. If your entire userbase was on brave that'd be $300/month for doing literally nothing. It's really quite a nice model.

Actually this also understates the profit per person for another reason. In Brave you have to opt in to the site rewards system. So you're likely not only seeing a fraction of your userbase paying you but a fraction of your Brave users.

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#270

Post by rjf72 »

RenRav wrote: post #255
JohnTHaller wrote: post #39

We signed up for Brave's setup at PortableApps.com after a few users asked about it. They hold your last 90 days in escrow, so you can find out how successful it is once you sign up. We were looking at around 10 cents a day for a bit under a million monthly users for that timeframe over the summer. And we can't even access it since Brave only works with one crypto provider and they aren't licensed in New York. The pr…

I've been using Brave for almost a year and haven't been shown a single ad, I think it's only been a few months since the ads were enabled though. I wonder if the same happens for others.

Just to be clear you opted in to the program? Top right menu icon -> Brave Rewards.

By default no ads are shown.

Post reply on HN