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

Brave Origin

support.brave.app

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 33 posts

Re: Brave Origin

#11

Post by kbelder »

Valodim wrote: post #8
theNotFractured wrote: post #3

Paying for your browser is crazy when open-source ones like firefox and soon ladybird exist.

People keep mentioning ladybird like it'll be a serious contender as a daily driver in the next 10 years. While I do think they're doing impressive work for a tech demo, they are a couple hundred person years behind on an incredibly big piece of software. how could they possibly catch up?

Large enterprise software development is *hugely* inefficient. I wouldn't be surprised if, for any given feature, Ladybird developers could implement it in a tenth the time that current Chrome developers would.

Of course, they're ten thousand features behind, so it will take many years. I just think it's not fair to look at the huge number of developers working on Chrome and use that predict the productivity of a smaller, more motivated, less constrained team.

Re: Brave Origin

#12

Post by estimator7292 »

wky wrote: post #6

Interesting that it’s paying to remove features. Seems reasonable considering it’s paying to get an officially supported build, and if you’d rather not there’s probably a fork doing the same out there. Edit: That it’s free (as in WinRAR?) on Linux is interesting; what would be the motive for doing that?

It costs a lot of money to publish software on Windows. You have to pay Microsoft a ransom to sign your application or otherwise users get giant scary warnings about running unknown software.

Re: Brave Origin

#13

Post by pwdisswordfishs »

ImJamal wrote: post #2

I hope this works out well and Mozilla takes notice. I've never understood why Mozilla doesn't at least take donations for Firefox.

There are very good reasons why you 501(c)(3) doesn't allow setting up a non-profit that accept "donations" that benefit one of the non-profit's wholly owned for-profit subsidiaries.

Re: Brave Origin

#14

Post by pwdisswordfishs »

pwdisswordfishs wrote: post #13
ImJamal wrote: post #2

I hope this works out well and Mozilla takes notice. I've never understood why Mozilla doesn't at least take donations for Firefox.

There are very good reasons why you 501(c)(3) doesn't allow setting up a non-profit that accept "donations" that benefit one of the non-profit's wholly owned for-profit subsidiaries.

Mozilla also isn't exactly strapped for cash. They pull in around half a billion dollars per year (to accomplish what could be done on a budget a tenth that size).

Re: Brave Origin

#15

Post by sph »

I'd use Brave, and pay for it, if it wasn't running Blink. I know Gecko is a pain in the butt to use, but I'd rather not make Google's hegemony on the web stronger by using their code.

Sorry Brendan, hopefully you'll look into Ladybird once it's more usable.

Re: Brave Origin

#17

Post by tnelsond4 »

So by having you pay to disable Tor, the llm, and all their extra features are they basically admitting that none of their users actually want those things and that bundling those things is how they generate revenue?

Re: Brave Origin

#18

Post by AuthAuth »

rpdillon wrote: post #7
mfro wrote: post #5

I have found literally 0 incentive to switch from firefox to anything else.

They've watered down their privacy promises quite a bit: > Mozilla may also receive location-related keywords from your search (such as when you search for “Boston”) and share this with our partners to provide recommended and sponsored content. Where this occurs, Mozilla cannot associate the keyword search with an individual user once the search suggestion has been served and partners are never able to associate sear…

you're really complaining that they're using location based keywords? Using a location based keyword to serve a relevant sponsored post isnt personal data. I swear mozilla haters just want it to die so they can use chrome guilt free.

Re: Brave Origin

#19

Post by tredre3 »

tnelsond4 wrote: post #17

So by having you pay to disable Tor, the llm, and all their extra features are they basically admitting that none of their users actually want those things and that bundling those things is how they generate revenue?

I see that you're trying to frame it as a "gotcha", but they've always said that those features were to generate revenue. And this news isn't any different, literally the first line:

    Brave Origin is a minimalist version of Brave that allows users to disable the revenue-generating features that otherwise support Brave as a business.

Re: Brave Origin

#20

Post by tredre3 »

estimator7292 wrote: post #12
wky wrote: post #6

Interesting that it’s paying to remove features. Seems reasonable considering it’s paying to get an officially supported build, and if you’d rather not there’s probably a fork doing the same out there. Edit: That it’s free (as in WinRAR?) on Linux is interesting; what would be the motive for doing that?

It costs a lot of money to publish software on Windows. You have to pay Microsoft a ransom to sign your application or otherwise users get giant scary warnings about running unknown software.

It costs $200 to get a certificate from Microsoft to sign as many software as you want. Brave has more than $100M/yr revenue.

Please put more efforts in your anti-Microsoft rhetoric.

Post reply on HN