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

Brave’s use of direct mailers

brave.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 172 posts

Re: Brave’s use of direct mailers

#151

Post by Buttons840 »

ElvisTrout wrote: post #83
Buttons840 wrote: post #70

I have a cynical take on the prevalence of marketing in our society. This may not apply to Brave specifically, but while we're on the topic of marketing: I wonder if growing wealthy inequality means that consumers simply don't have enough wealth to make honest exchanges worth while. The powers-that-be look for ways to "grow" and consider making an honest product and simply selling it, but the common people don't have…

Marketing is very profitable. Sadly word of mouth is a painfully slow way to sell even a good product.

Marketing isn't the only example. Marketing does have an important purpose to play, as you say.

Take for example Diablo Immortal. Blizzard and Diablo have tons of fans. People want an old school Diablo, a game that puts the player first, a game they can buy for a flat fee and then have and enjoy for decades like they have the others in the series. But Blizzard doesn't care, consumers can't pay enough to make it worth their while, so instead they'll deliver a thin veil over gambling and exploitation and call it Diablo Immortal.

Re: Brave’s use of direct mailers

#153

Post by Amezarak »

jonathansampson wrote: post #143
Amezarak wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brave used an official USPS mass market program to distribute mailers. The USPS allows these mailers to be mailed to every address (by route) in a zip code. The USPS also allows you to filter by such things as "age, household size, and income" (again the route is the granular level), but there's no indication Brave used this filtering. To use the program, you have to print your own mailers. Naturally, the mailers hav…

We did communicate our desire to exclude names from mailers; you can see an example from last month at https://twitter.com/TravelTechGuy/status/1513965348177219588 . Because we wish not to be exposed to any user data, our QA process ends prior to the stage where names would be printed. Once we learned names had been printed on a recent batch (a deviation from previous batches), we took prompt action to "halt and catc…

Thanks for trying to be on stop of this. It is appreciated.

Personally I think people are making a mountain out of a molehill - but I guess we such people are the demographic you signed up for. ;)

Re: Brave’s use of direct mailers

#154

Post by User23 »

edf13 wrote: post #149
User23 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US Census is public record and breaks down all kinds of demographic information by zip code. The USPS is almost certainly just using census data. Even if they didn't provide the convenience, a marketer could easily replicate what they currently do. If you have a problem with the US Census Bureau collecting demographic data or making it public, those are certainly valid positions to hold. However, point your ire a…

You haven’t answered my point as to why the USPS needs this extra info to do their job?

Because I thought that was self-explanatory: part of their job is selling advertising. Cash is tight enough at the post office as is. Why let third party marketers sell advertisers public census data instead of just providing it directly?

Re: Brave’s use of direct mailers

#155

Post by jonathansampson »

nvrspyx wrote: post #147
jonathansampson wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's EDDM, and previous mailers lacked printed names. Our request to exclude printed names, while honored in the past, was not honored with a recent batch. Rather than brushing this off, we chose instead to investigate where the break-down in communication occurred, and share our findings in the blog post. Thankfully, this issue has no impact on user-data, privacy, or security. But it is definitely frustrating for us…

I don't understand why addresses are being used to begin with. They're not needed. You simply choose the route/zip code and the mailer will be dropped off at every mailbox on the route, hence the name "Every Door Direct Mailer". It's specifically to avoid using addresses. This sounds more like a traditional direct mailer through a vendor rather than EDDM.

You're absolutely right; no-addresses is the ideal, and what we would have preferred over no-names from the beginning. We have a call this week to investigate further why addresses were included in the first place, and why our request to exclude any personalization was not respected.

Re: Brave’s use of direct mailers

#156

Post by jonathansampson »

bzxcvbn wrote: post #148
sha256sum wrote: post #34

I feel like the criticism towards Brave ITT is unjustified. This is a USPS service which is available to businesses. If you're a privacy conscious person in the US, you've likely opted out of this list. Brave is reaching the people who may not have done this, to the end of getting regular folks to know their alternatives against big tech companies. I guess don't get the ire, or what the expectation is for them to gro…

One of the foundations of privacy is that data sharing in any form should be opt-in , not opt-out.

This was not an example of data-sharing; the data in question (names and addresses) resides with the United States Postal Service. That data is never accessed or viewed by Brave.

Re: Brave’s use of direct mailers

#157

Post by annoyingnoob »

jonathansampson wrote: post #141
annoyingnoob wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like their business model is at odds with their privacy goals.

Not at all. EDDM doesn't impact user privacy. Brave never sees any user data during this process.

EDDM, the no opt-out mail service.

Re: Brave’s use of direct mailers

#158

Post by morganvachon »

jonathansampson wrote: post #142
morganvachon wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> or a privacy-focused company is snooping on your devices to steal your personal info (so they can send you mailers?) I never said that. I don't want Brave on my devices due to their past bad behavior: lying, stealing money from creators in their affiliate program, redirecting legitimate links to shady crypto sites, running a crypto pyramid scheme, and so on. This is just the latest in a long list of reasons not to…

Brave doesn't harvest or collect any user data; we explicitly requested that no names be printed on these mailers (which was the case prior to this recent batch). You're mistaken about the other issues as well (they are every bit as overblown and misrepresented as this present issue). "Stealing money from creators" is quite misleading. When Brave held its token sale in 2017, we allocated 300M tokens to the User Growt…

I appreciate the attempt to explain your company's bad behavior, but I'm not convinced. And to be fair, you're not alone in making mistakes in the arena of privacy and security; all the major browsers have privacy-averse settings and "anti-features". The difference with your company is that you falsely advertise yourself as the one true private browser, while simultaneously profiting from your users' personal data. It's a lie, it's a scam, and it's morally reprehensible. You only fixed the issues I brought up after being caught and publicly shamed over them; if you hadn't been caught out you'd likely still be doing those things today. Shame on you.

Re: Brave’s use of direct mailers

#159

Post by saalweachter »

eli wrote: post #152
saalweachter wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Back of the envelope, they're roughly the same, CO2-wise.

I doubt that

US junk mail volume is something in the 6 million ton range, and paper production releases 3-10 pounds of CO2 / pound of paper, depending on whether it is virgin or recycled.

(Regoogling that second figure returns some ranges as low as 1-2 lb/lb, which would put junk mail at like 0.2-0.4 crypto.)

Re: Brave’s use of direct mailers

#160

Post by password4321 »

jonathansampson wrote: post #139
drusepth wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the best vibe from a company whose livelihood is dependent on convincing more and more people to trust them with more and more data.

Brave doesn't ask you to trust it with more and more data; we explicitly do not want any of your data. This issue did not impact user data or privacy in any way either.

It's nice of you to stop by HN when your keywords are hit so you can rebut each comment, but it will stand in the record as PR.

Simply put, Brave takes calculated risks to expand its revenue/marketshare. I only hear about it when things go wrong. It must be worth it, because it keeps happening.

Post reply on HN