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

171–180 of 231 posts

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#171

Post by [deleted] »

kf6nux wrote: post #73
aeturnum wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why Brave Rewards needs to be enabled, but it seems very normal for the company operating a service to require some kind of account or membership. If you don't trust Brave this is probably not the service for you.

It's even more mundane than that. They just require you to allow their ads during your call. It's privacy preserving ad tech in exchange for 1:1 video calls. That's way better than sites requiring you to allow 3rd party ads to use their site. EDIT: I just saw they let you set your ads to "0 per hour" and still let you use this service. I wonder if that's an oversight.

[deleted]

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#172

Post by BrendanEich »

silisili wrote: post #42
DonHopkins wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many times does this need to be repeated? Mozilla didn't fire Brendan Eich. He resigned of his own free will, against the Mozilla board's request that he stay. His own words and the Mozilla FAQ quoted below, I'm not just making this up. Down the following thread, Brendan suggested googling "constructive separation" -- but I'm not sure if he meant for that euphemism to apply to how he left his job at Mozilla, or t…

I'm not trying to rewrite history or pick sides...but... if I remember right wasn't it basically that everyone at Mozilla kept calling him a bigot and saying they wouldn't work there? And rather than argue back and forth, he realized it would be easier to just resign? That's what I remember, at least. It is true he wasn't 'fired', but basically pushed into a wall and told to do something.

No one at Mozilla kept calling me anything. You may be thinking of

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/03/mozil...

None of those people worked for me as then-CEO, they were in the arms-length Mozilla Foundation.

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#173

Post by BrendanEich »

nicce wrote: post #145
BrendanEich wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Harassing can also be considered as opposing the "equality". It is a dangerous path to take part for some specific politics, when the target of those politics are working under the same company. If the employees feels that this brings inequality for them inside the company, it can be considered as harassment, if it is showing in some way. As Mozilla, I referred multiple employees which came with above feelings at tha…

Use a dictionary and stop lying about me:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/harass

Feelings alone without action cannot be considered harassment, legally or by that definition. Words are the means to meaning, and if you continue to misuse them, no one will talk with you.

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#174

Post by thegabez »

mNovak wrote: post #165
thegabez wrote: post #159

Easily the best browser on the market and continues to produce great features. Very bullish on its crypto token BAT which is earned by viewing their ads ($5-10/mo). If you're going to use a browser why wouldn't want to use Brave with rewards turned on, honestly?

I use Brave, but turned off the ads. Only so many times I want to see ads for crypto exchanges and such.

Sure, I've gotten use to them. Having ads enabled also allows for easy donations to Wikipedia, Khan Academy, etc.

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#175

Post by hundchenkatze »

jonathansampson wrote: post #126
peakaboo wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the wrong way for them to do it. It must work on all browsers and the they can possibly add features that make people WANT to use Brave, not force them to do it.

Brave Talk does work in all major browsers. Initiating a call requires Brave, but participation in a call does not.

So it works in all major browsers once you redefine "works" - got it.

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#176

Post by BrendanEich »

vrc wrote: post #163
BrendanEich wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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, an…

Because you’re you and I was basing it on working in the space 3 years ago, I admit I was wrong. But I really do want to solve this problem. Despite my mistake, the spirit of the question is unresolved — you claim that you allow publishers/creators to be paid for their work. In the case a pub isn’t on your platform, you don’t pay them — you return payment to the user. So content continues to go unfunded. How do you i…

Please be careful with "you". The tokens tipped or otherwise contributed to unverified creators never leave the browser. We do not track them or intermediate them. They stay pending as noted.

It's up to the browser user to notify the creator about the tip or contribution they're sending. We don't and can't know who the creator is and we wouldn't spam them. Fans can and do get creators to sign up. This is the clean way to do it, and fits our user-first principle.

If you want a publisher-first play, Scroll (Twitter bought it) was doing a portable paywall with publishers. Not user-first, no rev share to users, users pay. Not us. Have to serve one master or the other.

But I claim our user-first way is best because users can then get sites and channels they've tipped to come and sign up. Going the other way means getting users to subscribe, always a conversion funnel and usually low rate.

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#177

Post by silisili »

BrendanEich wrote: post #172
silisili wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not trying to rewrite history or pick sides...but... if I remember right wasn't it basically that everyone at Mozilla kept calling him a bigot and saying they wouldn't work there? And rather than argue back and forth, he realized it would be easier to just resign? That's what I remember, at least. It is true he wasn't 'fired', but basically pushed into a wall and told to do something.

No one at Mozilla kept calling me anything. You may be thinking of https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/03/mozil... None of those people worked for me as then-CEO, they were in the arms-length Mozilla Foundation.

Ah, indeed I was. From the man himself, I'll eat my crow. Thank you for clearing that up.

Also, if you read replies, thank you for Brave. Big fan, and excited to see what's next.

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#178

Post by staysafeanon »

soundnote wrote: post #166
smoldesu wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate playing cards and hate disagreeing with a personal hero even more, but as a gay person I frankly have a hard time caring. Eich is an idiot on the same level as Rob Monster, but he has a right to espouse or endorse whatever completely bonkers shit he wants. That's the reason why open source exists, and why we reserve the right to maintain a fork of someone's software if their leadership comes into question. I u…

It's probably criminal to be this level-headed nowadays, kudos.

100%. All the histrionics would be screaming ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM! You support the status quo! You're alt-right/Nazi adjacent with your complicitness! etc. ad nauseam.

smoldesu's take is refreshing, even though he's absolutely be skewered for it if he dared to say it on the company Slack.

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#179

Post by nicce »

BrendanEich wrote: post #173
nicce wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Harassing can also be considered as opposing the "equality". It is a dangerous path to take part for some specific politics, when the target of those politics are working under the same company. If the employees feels that this brings inequality for them inside the company, it can be considered as harassment, if it is showing in some way. As Mozilla, I referred multiple employees which came with above feelings at tha…

Use a dictionary and stop lying about me: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/harass Feelings alone without action cannot be considered harassment, legally or by that definition. Words are the means to meaning, and if you continue to misuse them, no one will talk with you.

From the dictionary literally:

> to create an unpleasant or hostile situation for especially by uninvited and unwelcome verbal or physical conduct

If the situation is expressed(felt) by employees as hostile or unwelcome (those who were target of the political view), then by definition it can be considered as harassement, if it is visible somehow. It does not need to go the court to be.

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#180

Post by BrendanEich »

open-paren wrote: post #4

To start a call, there is a requirement that you are 1) Using the Brave Browser 2) Have Brave Rewards (their crypto-and-ads service) turned on. Not loving that. Edit: the first one is fine (although a little strange that it is a requirement here but not for their other products, like Brave Search). I'm irked by the second one.

The first one is because we have to use native code with our partner for a user hosting a call to create one. After the call is up, any modern browser can be used to join, given the unique link provided by the host.

The second one, I addressed directly for all Brave products that have significant fixed and per-user/usage costs, the other week on Reddit:

https://www.reddit.com/r/BATProject/comments/pl2lgi/comment/...

Quote:

"A free browser is a free lunch, and TANSTAAFL. Brave has sponsored images on by default, we don't pretend to be free by selling default search to Google as Firefox does. Privacy-conscious users know that nothing on the Web, no app or service, is free.

The salient difference about Brave in this context: we put users first and deal them in for >= the revenue we make on any attention-based revenue where we take the gross. This can't be done with search deals: Google, Bing, and others forbid paying users a share of the revenue that the search partner shares with the browser maker. But we aim to do it when ready with self-serve keywords-at-auction private search ads.

Before then, we hope to offer private ads via a partner, but that's not a sure thing. Details if and when we have a deal. That's the free leg of Brave Search. The premium is ad-free search for a small monthly fee (a few dollars, discounted if paid annually).

This is necessary because Brave Search has per-user as well as fixed costs, which we must cover with a reasonable margin. I think users understand this. In all cases, Brave Search remains private: no tracking or use of IP even for short-term query-refinement "sessions". But if users won't pay, we will put private-until-and-unless-clicked ads in the free leg. This freemium model goes for Brave News too."

End Quote

TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch (popularized by Robert A. Heinlein).

Hackers here on HN may be able to self-host a Jitsi instance, even build their own browser. Most users cannot. We at Brave aim to provide all users with a truly user-first, privacy-designed+engineered-in-&-on-by-default products to take on Big Tech with its centralized data collection, surveillance based ads, fraud and abuse problems, and monopolistic, user-hostile tendencies.

We know TANSTAAFL is true so we don't pretend to offer a free lunch and we don't track users. We will work to add more "buy out my ad inventory" ease of use, including for Rewards as well as News. Those who can't or won't pay can still use Brave as a fast, tracking/fingerprinting-blocking browser. We aim to get enough of you using Rewards to keep our lights on, and we'll have to work on distribution and promotion of search to get it covering its costs (premium ad-free or free private ads leg, you choose).

I hope this helps explain what we're trying to achieve, and that you'll give us a try.

Post reply on HN