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

281–290 of 381 posts

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#281

Post by rjf72 »

JohnTHaller wrote: post #277
rjf72 wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

If our entire userbase switched to Brave and we made $300 a month from them, I'd have to shut the site down. Either way, it's really not worth the time and effort to set it up right now unless you're a huge site like wikipedia and you don't have any ad revenue to lose. I do think it will be interesting what this does to donations to wikipedia. It would make sense, I think, that Brave users may donate less per user ov…

The median donation to Wiki is, of course, $0. By giving anything users would be giving infinitely more than the regular user.

It'd be quite interesting to know what your aggregate CPM is. One way you could probably determine brave users is by contrasting raw user agents against your analytics data. The discrepancy there is going to be some mixture of Brave and those running other things that also block analytics like uBlock. But it should at least you give you a very rough ballpark CPM that's probably going to be much more reliable than e.g. a survey.

One other important figure that Brave could probably roughly answer (but also probably won't) would be what percent of Brave users opt in ads.

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#282

Post by stjohnswarts »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #196
TheArcane wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Presumably they also have a veto, at least, on Firefox development as they're paying handsomely for it?

Mozilla project would dissolve before they let google tell them how to make their browser

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#283

Post by doctor_eval »

pastastickers wrote: post #219
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.

They might need an Apple-like "courage" moment, and replace Google with DuckDuckGo or Startpage as their default search service. Come to think of it, I would expect the same move from Apple as well, on Safari.

Safari/DDG user here. Presumably Firefox could load the search results into a container that throws away all the cookies after the search is done. Doesn’t it work like that for FB?

Presumably, the real problem is that this would be against Google’s terms of the agreement between google and. moz, but - at least technically - there is no reason to throw away access to google if that’s seen to be a desirable default.

Of course - I’m guessing that google is gonna add its own tracking variables to URLs, so any search result returned by google really is going to be suspect regardless of what we do.

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#284

Post by a_imho »

43920 wrote: post #264
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?

As someone considering switching from Firefox, I don't trust Moz://a's willingness to disrupt the status quo. In fact, at the moment I'm not entirely sure they are not simply entrenching Chrome by blocking other niche browsers to gain market share.

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#285

Post by amelius »

mkl wrote: post #239
amelius wrote: post #210

> The average mobile browser user pays as much as $23 a month in data charges to download ads and trackers — that’s $276 a year. Is that true?

"as much as" just means one or more people have really expensive mobile internet and visit ad-heavy sites. It's not really saying much. My entire phone bill is ~half that.

They say "the average user".

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#286

Post by scarejunba »

Brave is such a clever concept. I'm just mad I didn't think of it. But then again, they've got some heavy technical firepower behind it.

I think they're genuinely doing all the right things:

* Opt-in advertising

* Client-side advertising

* Using a cryptocoin to avoid the microtransaction payment processor problem

They will probably do fine having had a very successful ICO but I can't imagine anyone actually donating meaningful amounts of money to any site. After all, you can just get it for free.

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#287

Post by Vinnl »

marichards wrote: post #204
onyva wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mozilla's focus is user's rights online and privacy. They have a track record doing that. Brave (AKA AdBuddy) is just another product, desperately looking for a revenue stream, notably believing contaminating all news regarding browser technology with its presence is the way to go. The last thing the world needs is a predatory vendor trying to force itself somewhere it's not needed. Its non existing market share is t…

Whatever Mozilla's focus is when you load Firefox you experience the following: 1. On ESR first time it loads two pages load including https://www.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/60.8.0/firstrun/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/privacy/firefox/ You then find first party cookies are set by Google Analytics _ga GA1.2.1671101194.1567114471 _gat_UA-36116321-1 1 _gid GA1.2.377831647.1567114471 In the EU this would breach the ePri…

Relevant context:

1. Mozilla only enabled Google Analytics after signing a contract with Google that that data would not be fed into Google's models. There's no reason to believe Google would violate that legal agreement.

2. The Twitter thread you linked is by a Brave employee. It should be judged by the facts it shows, but is good context to keep in mind w.r.t. their presentation.

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#288

Post by reportgunner »

marichards wrote: post #204
onyva wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mozilla's focus is user's rights online and privacy. They have a track record doing that. Brave (AKA AdBuddy) is just another product, desperately looking for a revenue stream, notably believing contaminating all news regarding browser technology with its presence is the way to go. The last thing the world needs is a predatory vendor trying to force itself somewhere it's not needed. Its non existing market share is t…

Whatever Mozilla's focus is when you load Firefox you experience the following: 1. On ESR first time it loads two pages load including https://www.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/60.8.0/firstrun/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/privacy/firefox/ You then find first party cookies are set by Google Analytics _ga GA1.2.1671101194.1567114471 _gat_UA-36116321-1 1 _gid GA1.2.377831647.1567114471 In the EU this would breach the ePri…

What happens when you turn on chrome or brave ?

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#289

Post by elkos »

drusepth wrote: post #151
bduerst wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google tried this with contributor, dunno what happened to it: http://contributor.google.com

Assumedly because not enough people were willing to outright pay cash to websites (rather than just receiving ads) to justify the platform cost. I loved Contributor. I wish more people had loved it too.

Interesting that it's the first time i stumbled upon this.

Re: Wikipedia Is Now a Brave Verified Publisher

#290

Post by reportgunner »

jonathansampson wrote: post #54
jchw wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IIRC it was actually originally Firefox. I wonder what exactly made them switch?

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.

>lived and breathed Gecko/Mozilla for years prior

but they don't anymore ? So if someone lives and breathes policeman life and then becomes a drug dealer, is it just like buying drugs from a policeman ?

Post reply on HN