Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing • Hacker News Board

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#211

Post by endisneigh » Thu, Sep 23, 2021, 4:11 PM UTC

1_player wrote: post #204

endisneigh wrote: post #17

I wonder if Brave (the company) is what Mozilla would look like if Eich ended up being CEO of Mozila. EDIT: Some people took offense, so I am more explicit in my hypothetical here.

> Some people took offense Frankly it was an interesting observation of yours, but a less charitable view of your comment is that you were subtly trying to start the same idiotic flame thread found at the bottom of any Brave post on this forum. And you did. In case your observation was in good faith, I don't think Mozilla would have gone so deep into crypto and those little unsavoury sponsorships (Binance, etc.) had…

> Frankly it was an interesting observation of yours, but a less charitable view of your comment is that you were subtly trying to start the same idiotic flame thread found at the bottom of any Brave post on this forum. And you did.

Nope. I simply stated the facts, not that it really was the point of my comment anyway, hence the edit.

> In case your observation was in good faith, I don't think Mozilla would have gone so deep into crypto and those little unsavoury sponsorships (Binance, etc.) had Eich never left his top spot, and I am positive his governance would have kept Mozilla and Firefox itself in a better place than whatever is happening over there right now.

It's hard to say. I don't agree with crypto and think it's not really a great way to go, but Mozilla has Google funding - I don't think it's ridiculous to think Mozilla Rewards or equivalent could've been introduced somehow (with or without crypto)

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#212

Post by blitzar » Thu, Sep 23, 2021, 5:15 PM UTC

olah_1 wrote: post #210

blitzar wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They are offering this free to everyone via their browser. By they I assume you mean Brave - by this I assume you mean Jitsi, which Jitsi also offers free to everyone via any browser.

> which Jitsi also offers free to everyone via any browser. Jitsi is eating that cost. Nothing is free.

> Jitsi is eating that cost. Nothing is free.

Brave is eating that cost. Nothing is free.

btw. thanks for the circular conversation. utterly pointless.

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#213

Post by fancy_pantser » Thu, Sep 23, 2021, 5:41 PM UTC

secretj wrote: post #189

fancy_pantser wrote: post #185

Important to note that only 1:1 calls are E2E encrypted and larger calls are forwarded to a SFU that 8x8 calls "Jitsi Videobridge" where they are decrypted, processed in memory, and then re-encrypted for each participant stream.

Hi I'd like to correct this, if you have enabled "Video Bridge Encryption" in Brave Talk, this is not the case. Calls of up to 20 participants would be encrypted, using keys locally exchanged among participants. The SFU wouldn't be able to decrypt these video/audio streams. Of course, as would be standard and expected, the SFU would decrypt the transport layer of encryption, but wouldn't be able to decrypt the second…

Does that require all participants to have enabled "Video Bridge Encryption" in Brave Talk?

Does it notify participants when they go over 20 and does then everyone stop encrypting at the same time?

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#214

Post by deeblering4 » Thu, Sep 23, 2021, 7:04 PM UTC

BrendanEich wrote: post #130

smoldesu wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was just about to say this. Brave is the opposite of a free browser, it just so happens to cost nothing to download/use it.

What browser is different in this regard?

Mozilla Firefox

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#215

Post by BrendanEich » Thu, Sep 23, 2021, 7:43 PM UTC

deeblering4 wrote: post #214

BrendanEich wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What browser is different in this regard?

Mozilla Firefox

How exactly (can you give examples) is it different, given its dependence on major search partner (Google at present).

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#216

Post by BrendanEich » Thu, Sep 23, 2021, 7:46 PM UTC

blitzar wrote: post #212

olah_1 wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> which Jitsi also offers free to everyone via any browser. Jitsi is eating that cost. Nothing is free.

> Jitsi is eating that cost. Nothing is free. Brave is eating that cost. Nothing is free. btw. thanks for the circular conversation. utterly pointless.

No, it's not pointless. Jitsi's terms allow them to get calldata and other metadata, Brave's do not. Equating all "free" legs or free-only services is a good way to get pwned. Good luck!

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#217

Post by BrendanEich » Thu, Sep 23, 2021, 7:50 PM UTC

endisneigh wrote: post #211

1_player wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Some people took offense Frankly it was an interesting observation of yours, but a less charitable view of your comment is that you were subtly trying to start the same idiotic flame thread found at the bottom of any Brave post on this forum. And you did. In case your observation was in good faith, I don't think Mozilla would have gone so deep into crypto and those little unsavoury sponsorships (Binance, etc.) had…

> Frankly it was an interesting observation of yours, but a less charitable view of your comment is that you were subtly trying to start the same idiotic flame thread found at the bottom of any Brave post on this forum. And you did. Nope. I simply stated the facts, not that it really was the point of my comment anyway, hence the edit. > In case your observation was in good faith, I don't think Mozilla would have gone…

The "without crypto" path would have been a regulated-in-most-regions in-game token, a gift card or existing portable-points system (TAP network), Amazon Prime, or something super-high-friction involving credit card or ACH. There aren't other options AFAIK.

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#218

Post by BrendanEich » Thu, Sep 23, 2021, 7:53 PM UTC

hundchenkatze wrote: post #206

BrendanEich wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, once you start a call, which requires native code for the full offering (N>2, any time and duration). See TANSTAAFL reply above.

I don't care what kind of code is required for it to actually work. If I can't start a call in a browser other than Brave, then it by definition does _not_ work in every browser. You stating that it requires native code that's not present in other browsers is clear evidence that it doesn't work in all browsers.

No one disputed that but I gave reasons why this is so. You can use Gmeet in any modern browser (it breaks more often in non-Chrome browsers IME). Is it better on that basis alone? I think not because TANSTAAFL. Why is Google subsidizing it that way?

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#219

Post by secretj » Thu, Sep 23, 2021, 7:57 PM UTC

fancy_pantser wrote: post #213

secretj wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi I'd like to correct this, if you have enabled "Video Bridge Encryption" in Brave Talk, this is not the case. Calls of up to 20 participants would be encrypted, using keys locally exchanged among participants. The SFU wouldn't be able to decrypt these video/audio streams. Of course, as would be standard and expected, the SFU would decrypt the transport layer of encryption, but wouldn't be able to decrypt the second…

Does that require all participants to have enabled "Video Bridge Encryption" in Brave Talk? Does it notify participants when they go over 20 and does then everyone stop encrypting at the same time?

Once the moderator enables "Video Bridge Encryption" it is automatically enabled for other participants. I believe that if a 21st user tried to join it would error out, but let me confirm this with the 8x8 team.

Re: Brave Talk – Privacy-Preserving Video Conferencing

#220

Post by secretj » Thu, Sep 23, 2021, 8:00 PM UTC

secretj wrote: post #219

fancy_pantser wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does that require all participants to have enabled "Video Bridge Encryption" in Brave Talk? Does it notify participants when they go over 20 and does then everyone stop encrypting at the same time?

Once the moderator enables "Video Bridge Encryption" it is automatically enabled for other participants. I believe that if a 21st user tried to join it would error out, but let me confirm this with the 8x8 team.

Update, I checked with the 8x8 team, and it will warn from 21 to 25 users, and then disable when the 25th user joins. You'll see the green video bridge encryption notification turn off at the top at that point.