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

Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

brave.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 231 posts

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#131

Post by vrc »

rglullis wrote: post #128
vrc wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

uBlock origin is the only ad blocker worth trusting. Privacy Badger is fine but breaks things too often. PiHole is good but requires too much know-how for most. ABP and Brave both do the same garbage ransom-taking with their ad replacement schema. So few publishers have an account with them that the monies supposedly going to support content sits (at best) in an escrow account that is escheated at some point.

Brave rewards is opt-in. If you don't want to receive ads, just don't turn it on. If you still want to support creators but do not want to receive any kind of ads, just buy some BAT at any exchange, load your wallet and schedule monthly contributions. If you want to support a publisher who is not on the creators program - send them a message and let them know they have another income alternative.

Right. You’re missing my point. From the consumer side that makes sense. Very few publishers (ie those that are high quality and you’d happily spend on) are hooked up to receive funds from Brave, or will ever choose to receive funds from Brave. So lots of these transactions leave your wallet, Brave takes a cut, and then the remainder sits in limbo or is escheated to the state. The ads ecosystem is a 2-sided marketplace, and Brave really only supports/is supported by 1 side.

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#132

Post by BrendanEich »

bserge wrote: post #112

What does "no tracking" even mean here? Does it include no facial recognition? I mean, ffs, the FBI or Interpol or whoever could release such an app using keywords that mean nothing these days. Privacy preserving, no tracking, no installation, no special permissions. We just match everyone on video against a criminal database, but it's fine, we don't save your mugshot if you're not a criminal!

No one in the middle sees unencrypted video. Two-party is fully end-to-end encrypted. We avoid overusing that overloaded phrase for multiparty and we're working on defenses against active (zoom bomb) attacks, that do not require a login. So any face scanner on a multiparty call would have to be someone the host invited who is doing face scanning at their endpoint where the cryptographic session terminates and video gets decrypted.

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#134

Post by rglullis »

vrc wrote: post #131
rglullis wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brave rewards is opt-in. If you don't want to receive ads, just don't turn it on. If you still want to support creators but do not want to receive any kind of ads, just buy some BAT at any exchange, load your wallet and schedule monthly contributions. If you want to support a publisher who is not on the creators program - send them a message and let them know they have another income alternative.

Right. You’re missing my point. From the consumer side that makes sense. Very few publishers (ie those that are high quality and you’d happily spend on) are hooked up to receive funds from Brave, or will ever choose to receive funds from Brave. So lots of these transactions leave your wallet, Brave takes a cut, and then the remainder sits in limbo or is escheated to the state. The ads ecosystem is a 2-sided marketpla…

> high quality and you’d happily spend on

Can you give an example of publisher/creator that you support directly, and that is not interested in joining Brave Creators?

If I am a popular creator who relies on, e.g, Patreon or Ko-Fi for some sustained income, and I learn about a platform that gives people money and it makes it easy for them to pass along that money to me... why wouldn't I be interested?

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#135

Post by BrendanEich »

nicce wrote: post #83
mistrial9 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Mozilla didn't fire Brendan Eich true ! Mozilla harassed Brendan Eich publicly and he resigned.

They are always two sides for the story. So how did they harass? They told about harassment against their employees by Brendan Eich. I guess the main question is whether that is harassing. Brendan Eich did the same publicly against his employees.

I never harassed anyone at Mozilla or anywhere else. You wrote "They [Mozilla] told about harassment against their employees by Brendan Eich." Where did Mozilla allege any such thing?

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#136

Post by DonHopkins »

BrendanEich wrote: post #135
nicce wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are always two sides for the story. So how did they harass? They told about harassment against their employees by Brendan Eich. I guess the main question is whether that is harassing. Brendan Eich did the same publicly against his employees.

I never harassed anyone at Mozilla or anywhere else. You wrote "They [Mozilla] told about harassment against their employees by Brendan Eich." Where did Mozilla allege any such thing?

Why did you successfully try to destroy other people's marriages by donating your money to support Proposition 8?

Please explain why you believe same sex couples shouldn't have the same human rights to marry the person they love that you presumably enjoy?

Was your own marriage undermined as badly as you intentionally undermined many other people's marriages, after the Supreme Court declared same sex marriage legal?

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#137

Post by jonathansampson »

sodality2 wrote: post #54
zormino wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's one thing to strip out content or ads, but an entirely different beast to replace ads with your own. There are arguments for blocking ads, both ethical and security based. But replacing the ads with your own is basically the same as stealing the content for your own profit. Brave is a shitty company with no moral leg to stand on.

This is the crucial part. Is brave inserting ads on the SAME PAGE that it stripped out of? If so I agree completely. I thought brave had some sort of notification system though, which is a bit different IMO.

No, Brave does not display ads on publisher properties. Brave blocks trackers (which impacts most third-party ads), but does no in-situ substitution. First-party ads are generally untouched. Brave acts as a content-filter out of the box (similar to uBlock Origin), protecting the user and their data from third-party harvesters and more.

Brave does offer an optional feature called Brave Ads, which enables users to view privacy-respecting ads (as notifications, and high-quality New Tab Page wallpapers) for 70% of the associated revenue. This revenue (in the form of BAT rewards) can then flow out to verified publishers as a form of support. No user data is collected; ad-matching happens on-device, and in accordance with user-specified constraints.

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#138

Post by BrendanEich »

vrc wrote: post #131
rglullis wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brave rewards is opt-in. If you don't want to receive ads, just don't turn it on. If you still want to support creators but do not want to receive any kind of ads, just buy some BAT at any exchange, load your wallet and schedule monthly contributions. If you want to support a publisher who is not on the creators program - send them a message and let them know they have another income alternative.

Right. You’re missing my point. From the consumer side that makes sense. Very few publishers (ie those that are high quality and you’d happily spend on) are hooked up to receive funds from Brave, or will ever choose to receive funds from Brave. So lots of these transactions leave your wallet, Brave takes a cut, and then the remainder sits in limbo or is escheated to the state. The ads ecosystem is a 2-sided marketpla…

You're wrong, nothing leaves the user's browser for us to take a cut in the case of an unverified creator. Those tips or donations sit in the browser, and cancel after 90 days. The user gets the tokens back and can cancel the pending tips or contributions at any time.

The ad ecosystem is multisided, not two-sided. We put the user in first place and cut out the ad-tech intermediaries who raid privacy, enable fraud, and take north of 50%, 70% in one case (the Guardian bought out its ad space and got 30p on the GBP).

Please check your facts before attacking us. It's one thing to operate on misinformation, but another to throw "escheated" around like a lawyer. It sounds impressive, but it's based on falsehoods all the way down. Again, tips from rewards users to unverified sites and channels sit in the browser, time out back to the user, and can be canceled. Look for "Pending tips" in rewards settings.

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#139

Post by jonathansampson »

zormino wrote: post #49
barnabee wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reader mode proves that "exatly as sent" is the opposite of what I want. I would like browsers to reinterpret what is sent for me (and noone else, definitely not for the browser maker) and display something more readable and useful (lightweight, queryable, cross-referenced, hyperlinke, actionable, etc.). I'd love to never see the site owner's design or interact with their UX 95% of the time (if you're an artist or mu…

I think it's one thing to strip out content or ads, but an entirely different beast to replace ads with your own. There are arguments for blocking ads, both ethical and security based. But replacing the ads with your own is basically the same as stealing the content for your own profit. Brave is a shitty company with no moral leg to stand on.

Brave does not replace (meaning, display in-situ) third-party ads. Those are blocked, as you stated, for ethical and security reasons. Brave offers an opt-in feature of the browser called 'Brave Rewards' and 'Brave Ads'. This feature enables users to opt-in to ad-notifications (displayed as native prompts on the device; not shown on the pages you visit). Ads are displayed on every 4th new tab page for participating users (again, no ads on publisher properties). The user consents to these, receives 70% of the revenue for their attention, and sets threshold limitations for how many ads can be displayed in a given period. Brave has never replaced ads on pages; that would be highly unethical.

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#140

Post by ElijahLynn »

slenk wrote: post #10

https://jitsi.org/jitsi-meet/ for the ability to do it with any browser and not having to opt in to their ads.

> Brave Talk is powered by the Jitsi as a Service open source video meeting platform from 8×8, a leading integrated cloud communications platform provider (NYSE: EGHT), using WebRTC open source technology that enables developers to embed HD video directly into the browser.
Post reply on HN