191–200 of 231 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would you pay to have a browser-independent version?
you don't need to pay anything. They've just repackaged Jitsi into the browser, which is already free https://jitsi.org/jitsi-meet/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
you don't need to pay anything. They've just repackaged Jitsi into the browser, which is already free https://jitsi.org/jitsi-meet/
See discussion of free lunch elsewhere. https://jitsi.org/meet-jit-si-terms-of-service/
https://brave.com/privacy/browser/
Our terms are better for privacy than 8x8’s, e.g., callstats are disabled in Brave Talk.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> How many times have Brave pivoted at this point? On one hand, the features are at least somewhat adjacent to their core business of building a web browser. On the other, whenever Mozilla did something like this they were panned for spreading themselves too thin and diverging from their core mission.
On the other hand, Mozilla fans are mostly morons who are actively hostile to success and want a pristine FOSS project funded entirely on donations. (I was one of those morons back in the day) I think initiatives like Pocket, Brave Search, Brave Talk, a privacy-respecting ads ecosystem, Vivaldi's Mail/Calendar/RSS setup and integrated barebones Notes module are all pretty much exactly what should happen. There was an…
As soon as Firefox on mobile isn’t a thing people want to use, desktop Firefox suddenly has a “it won’t sync with your mobile” hill to climb.
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 g…
I'm not one of those people that doesn't like redundancy or thinks that people developing tools that serve a purpose for which other tools already exist is a waste of time. I like options, I want people to build what they think they should build.
But I honestly do not see a point of this, except that Brave is trying to become an ecosystem. I don't want another ecosystem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
See discussion of free lunch elsewhere. https://jitsi.org/meet-jit-si-terms-of-service/
Also see our terms, included in https://brave.com/privacy/browser/ Our terms are better for privacy than 8x8’s, e.g., callstats are disabled in Brave Talk.
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 g…
Also, what is your approach to CSAM? Do you plan to go the Apple route and do endpoint scanning?
I’m not sure I understand Braves claim about “sharing revenue” with rewards users. Rewards users are getting paid in BAT no? I assume Brave is getting paid in USD. Do they have an arbitrary treasury of BAT tokens? It seems like Brave isn’t sharing any revenue if they’re paying out in tokens they created. Can’t they just create more BAT tokens or switch to BAT2 whenever they please?
I am genuinely confused here and would love to be enlightened.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm glad you like Firefox, I spent a lot of years on it, and on Mozilla, Gecko, SpiderMonkey, and the XUL platform before it. But Mozilla is currently beholden to Google and this has left them with year over year market share losses against Chrome. I don't see how they've "undermined" Google. If they switch to Bing as scooped by TechCrunch, they may start.
Yes, I'm quite familiar with your record - you sell it endlessly. Your getting in early at Mozilla doesn't make up for the damage you've done to the web with Brave.
Honestly I’m glad to see some disruption in the web advertising space. I’m not sure I understand Braves claim about “sharing revenue” with rewards users. Rewards users are getting paid in BAT no? I assume Brave is getting paid in USD. Do they have an arbitrary treasury of BAT tokens? It seems like Brave isn’t sharing any revenue if they’re paying out in tokens they created. Can’t they just create more BAT tokens or s…