IPFS Support in Brave • Hacker News Board

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#61

Post by Shared404 » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 9:57 PM UTC

jonathansampson wrote: post #47

miles wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps this? The Brave web browser is hijacking links, and inserting affiliate codes https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2020/06/06/the-brave-we... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23442027

Please see https://brave.com/referral-codes-in-suggested-sites/ regarding this claim. It's important to note that Brave never hijacked links, modified pages, our injected codes into content. The browser offered a pre-search list of suggestions for a small set of keywords (see blog post for screenshots). Happy to answer any questions you may have beyond the contents of that blog post. Nothing malicious here; no data o…

> “Show Brave suggested sites in autocomplete suggestions” setting’s default to “off”

This may be the change I needed to know about to try Brave at some point.

Are there any plans to get into any Linux distro's repositories? Brave wasn't in Ubuntu's last time I checked, although that was a little while ago.

E: Formatting doesn't like asterisks.

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#62

Post by elisaado » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 9:58 PM UTC

4b11b4 wrote: post #44

Is there any kind of "index" of "public" IPFS sites?

Curious about this as well, may be a proto-Google but for IPFS?

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#63

Post by mikece » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 9:58 PM UTC

agilob wrote: post #40

Mozilla promised us Tor integration, IPFS integration and more private browsing by default. Brave delivered it all.

Does Brave have an implementation of Multi-Account Containers? This is the ONE killer feature in Firefox that makes it impossible for me to leave for Brave completely:

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account...

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#64

Post by justsee » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 9:59 PM UTC

joshuakelly wrote: post #29

Massive. I have a project that assumed ipfs:// would eventually exist natively within a mainstream(-ish) browser, and I'm very pleased to discover that after updating to 1.19.x it all just works. Excited for the forthcoming DNSLink support too, even if it's just a bridge to something even better. Best of luck to everyone who wants the web to stay bundled inside of the corporate state.

It really is great to see challenger browsers pushing the web forward like this.

Along with IPFS it's nice to see Tor integration, low-level content blocking, a privacy-respecting Zoom alternative (https://together.brave.com/) and integrated MetaMask for Web3.

Brave still has a small userbase (~24 million), but hopefully it creates the space / incentives for Firefox and others to play catch-up so we see a lot of these features standardised for the benefit of all users, regardless of browser preference.

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#65

Post by tarruda » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 10:00 PM UTC

agilob wrote: post #40

Mozilla promised us Tor integration, IPFS integration and more private browsing by default. Brave delivered it all.

It is easier for Brave to deliver new features when the biggest work is done by Chrome team.

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#66

Post by jonathansampson » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 10:01 PM UTC

mikece wrote: post #63

agilob wrote: post #40

Mozilla promised us Tor integration, IPFS integration and more private browsing by default. Brave delivered it all.

Does Brave have an implementation of Multi-Account Containers? This is the ONE killer feature in Firefox that makes it impossible for me to leave for Brave completely: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account...

Not a 1-to-1 parity at this time, but Brave offers parallel profiles. You can have one running personal interests, while the other has professional interests. Each profile is able to host a unique session for Facebook, etc. Brave already prohibits cookie and data bleed-over from one domain to another.

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#67

Post by elwell » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 10:01 PM UTC

> If you choose to use a local node, Brave will automatically download go-ipfs as a component and will route future traffic through this node.

That's nice. I was worried it was just going to be centralized somewhere at a different level.

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#68

Post by jamienicol » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 10:03 PM UTC

ampdepolymerase wrote: post #19

jejkfmgmgk wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably the one by the Mozilla CEO, "We need more than deplatforming"[1] 1: https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2021/01/08/we-need-more-than-d...

It is not particularly surprising considering that the founder of Brave was fired as Mozilla's CEO and replaced by the current one specifically because of politics.

Brendan Eich wasn't replaced by the current CEO though. Nor was he fired. Nor was it just because of [his] politics.

Nor does that article say what you think it does.

But whatever, think what you like.

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#69

Post by mikece » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 10:04 PM UTC

jonathansampson wrote: post #66

mikece wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does Brave have an implementation of Multi-Account Containers? This is the ONE killer feature in Firefox that makes it impossible for me to leave for Brave completely: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account...

Not a 1-to-1 parity at this time, but Brave offers parallel profiles. You can have one running personal interests, while the other has professional interests. Each profile is able to host a unique session for Facebook, etc. Brave already prohibits cookie and data bleed-over from one domain to another.

That creates a new window per Profile as opposed to just one window with a bunch of tabs, all conceivably in using their own Container, right?

Re: IPFS Support in Brave

#70

Post by detaro » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 10:05 PM UTC

da_big_ghey wrote: post #31

arsome wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That headline is certainly inflammatory, but I don't think the actual content of the post is nearly as bad - they're not suggesting web browser start flagging/blocking sites or anything similar like it initially made me think. They're simply suggesting further transparency in algorithmic suggestions and research be conducted. You could even argue that they're suggesting that deplatforming simply isn't the ultimate so…

You're right that the content itself doesn't suggest Firefox doing something troubling, but the headline certainly does. It bothers me much more from a company known for privacy than it would from someone else.

How is "more transparency from platforms" not in line with what you'd expect from Mozilla? It's not like they just suddenly started to talk about the topic.