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

Brave launches private search ads

brave.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 299 posts

Re: Brave launches private search ads

#241

Post by carlivar »

travisgriggs wrote: post #105

This statement (second paragraph) > Ads are a key part of search engines, helping to facilitate the free and open exchange of information on the Web, and to connect users to helpful products and services related to their search terms. Is just non sequitur for me. It's said in such a smooth way, in such a gaslight-ish way, that your tempted to just accept it. But it actually makes no sense to me. I get what ads are ke…

It's funny you mentioned "yellow pages". The Yellow Pages were ads. Really just like a search engine. If you paid, you got a big, prominent listing in your category (or others). Otherwise you were relegated to the tiny alphabetical list.

Re: Brave launches private search ads

#242

Post by blacksmith_tb »

paulcole wrote: post #178
blacksmith_tb wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At $1 it would be a no-brainer for me, but one possible argument I can see is that a flat fee is a funny arrangement here - I pay $3/mo if I make 100 searches a day, or 1, or none. If the idea is that it would only be fair to Brave to pay them for what they aren't making by showing me ads, you might think it would make more sense to have me pay for exactly how much they lose, not less or more?

> you might think it would make more sense to have me pay for exactly how much they lose, not less or more You might think that, yes. Why is the flat fee “funny”? Netflix, Spotify, NYT, etc. all charge the flat fee. In fact I’m having a hard time thinking of any non-flat-fee consumer digital products.

Well in broad terms those also are getting paid up front or making you watch / listen to ads instead, sure. In the case of SEM, the industry puts kind of a lot of energy into tracking ads, so it seems a little more straightforward to know how much I'm worth to them. But in more general terms, if we ever manage to sort out micropayments, I would prefer to pay as I go for everything - imagine the flat rate subscription model for say, your energy or water bill: "we're charging about what most families would use in a month; you say you're not a family of four? too bad."

Re: Brave launches private search ads

#243

Post by AraceliHarker »

I think Brave Ads is sophomoric to say that they don't track users when Apple, not to mention Facebook and Google, understand that the effective operation of Internet advertising is to track users.

Blocking other companies' ads and posting their own ads instead is unbecoming and also reminds me of AdBlock Plus.

Re: Brave launches private search ads

#244

Post by somenameforme »

_dan wrote: post #203
therealmarv wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

- Brave blocks you more against Fingerprinting than Firefox with uBlock. https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/ - Brave uses Chromium and uses better isolation and sandbox than Firefox. Especially on Android. - Brave has Adblock built-in natively. It's written in Rust, so Manifest v3 will not affect it. https://github.com/brave/adblock-rust - Brave is profitable on itself and not dependent on search engines money like Fire…

To each their own, bit this is what it boils down to for me: I trust Mozilla's intentions more than I trust Brave's. There's no telling when Brave are going to decide it's time to monetize and start compromising themselves and their users.

If you'll excuse the tangent, judging [anything] by intentions is generally impossible. There was a time when Google was an absolutely inspiring company and there whole 'Don't Be Evil' slogan wasn't just an ironic joke. And they kept doing the right thing year after year. Yet within a matter of years from their peak they managed to devolve into a sort of satire, in their extremism, of 'evil corporation.'

There was never any reason to expect this to happen, but it did - and exceptionally rapidly. I absolutely agree with you that there's no telling when Brave will start going the other way and compromise all that they currently stand for. And that's okay. Because if, or probably more accurately when, that day comes - I'll be moving onto whoever the next "Brave" might be.

And the cycle will continue.

Re: Brave launches private search ads

#245

Post by perryizgr8 »

s3p wrote: post #215
SebastianKra wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate that ads are now seen as a necessary evil for funding free access to services. The money still comes from you, just through the purchase of products. What's worse, if you pay for YouTube Premium or Kagi, you're effectively paying for your content twice. No wonder, poorer people can't afford that. I guess you could frame it like this: "Company are overcharging us by insane amounts anyways, so at least some of t…

>What's worse, if you pay for YouTube Premium or Kagi, you're effectively paying for your content twice. No wonder, poorer people can't afford that. How is this true with YT premium? There are no ads if you pay.

> There are no ads if you pay.

That's not true. Almost all high quality channels on Youtube have some sort of sponsorship inside the video. It doesn't go away even if you pay for Youtube red.

Re: Brave launches private search ads

#246

Post by perryizgr8 »

kevinventullo wrote: post #111
Archipelagia wrote: post #41

Not the biggest fan of Brave myself, but they seem to actually get extra points in my eyes for adding the paid option. It's not like you can pay $3 to Google to get them to stop surveilling you. On a bigger note, monetizing search without ads seem to be a pretty tricky business model. Especially if you want to move beyond being a niche product; even an average HN reader would be hard to convince to pay for a regular…

If search engines were considered important enough to be a public utility, one could be funded by taxpayer dollars. Now of course, search results can be heavily politicized, but I suppose the same is true of which books a library decides to carry.

> funded by taxpayer dollars.

No thanks, I'd rather not use money coerced from innocent citizens for making a web search engine. Let's use that money for the smallest possible set of limited services.

Re: Brave launches private search ads

#247

Post by hollerith »

perryizgr8 wrote: post #245
s3p wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What's worse, if you pay for YouTube Premium or Kagi, you're effectively paying for your content twice. No wonder, poorer people can't afford that. How is this true with YT premium? There are no ads if you pay.

> There are no ads if you pay. That's not true. Almost all high quality channels on Youtube have some sort of sponsorship inside the video. It doesn't go away even if you pay for Youtube red.

"Almost all" is not my experience.

Re: Brave launches private search ads

#248

Post by ouid »

r00fus wrote: post #184
Archipelagia wrote: post #41

Not the biggest fan of Brave myself, but they seem to actually get extra points in my eyes for adding the paid option. It's not like you can pay $3 to Google to get them to stop surveilling you. On a bigger note, monetizing search without ads seem to be a pretty tricky business model. Especially if you want to move beyond being a niche product; even an average HN reader would be hard to convince to pay for a regular…

> It's not like you can pay $3 to Google to get them to stop surveilling you. You can, at least for Youtube - the premium offering is ad-free. In fact, that's the only reason I subscribe - not the content - because my entire family uses my account or is part of my Google "family" to bypass YT ads. Worth the (ever increasing) monthly fee. My guess is that this only exists to foil Netflix, and if Netflix didn't have an…

you can just use ublock origin.

Re: Brave launches private search ads

#249

Post by squeaky-clean »

s3p wrote: post #215
SebastianKra wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate that ads are now seen as a necessary evil for funding free access to services. The money still comes from you, just through the purchase of products. What's worse, if you pay for YouTube Premium or Kagi, you're effectively paying for your content twice. No wonder, poorer people can't afford that. I guess you could frame it like this: "Company are overcharging us by insane amounts anyways, so at least some of t…

>What's worse, if you pay for YouTube Premium or Kagi, you're effectively paying for your content twice. No wonder, poorer people can't afford that. How is this true with YT premium? There are no ads if you pay.

Only if you use SponsorBlock. Something something LTTStore.com (okay I've actually bought mech from them, but it's like 3x per episode plus the hardware sponsor segment).

Re: Brave launches private search ads

#250

Post by Melatonic »

SebastianKra wrote: post #169
squeaky-clean wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I sat down with a troubled couple who was having a hard time communicating, I wouldn't periodically interrupt and say "let's pause a moment for an ad. I think that's going to really open up a better and more free exchange between the both of you." Couples counseling isn't free, maybe with ads they could be. I mean obviously not, but only because a professional counselor can only see about 8 couples per day while…

I hate that ads are now seen as a necessary evil for funding free access to services. The money still comes from you, just through the purchase of products. What's worse, if you pay for YouTube Premium or Kagi, you're effectively paying for your content twice. No wonder, poorer people can't afford that. I guess you could frame it like this: "Company are overcharging us by insane amounts anyways, so at least some of t…

Not sure I get the Kagi part ?
Post reply on HN