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

Brave launches 1.0

brave.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 649 posts

Re: Brave launches 1.0

#291

Post by PKop »

triclops200 wrote: post #41
bvda wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder why they chose to use (yet another) crypto currency for this.

I'd assume to limit how much transaction costs for microtransactions from many users. Credit cards are awful for small transactions, so you buy a bulk of BAT every month to reduce transactional overhead and then let creators cash out when they have some threshould of BAT. They could have done it way simpler than a cryptocurrency, though, by just using a floating point number in a database somewhere, but I'm assuming…

>so you buy a bulk of BAT every month

Why is nobody considering the exchange rate volatility here? Endless comments about saving a few pennies, while massive depreciation from holding large quantities in volatile crypto blow away any benefit of not using dollars.

Re: Brave launches 1.0

#292

Post by asdkhadsj »

cyborgx7 wrote: post #267
jonathansampson wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brave Ads are opt-in, and user-configurable. You decide whether or not to participate, and to what degree (1 to 5 ads per hour). These ads are surfaced as OS notifications, which means they respect settings like Do Not Disturb, Focus Mode, etc. And, as always, you receive 70% of the ad revenue for your participation. Respectfully, that doesn't strike me as an "escalation of hostility" when you compare against the cur…

I already decided my Ad participation. I block ads, and want the advertising industry to die. This does not seem like a value add to me.

Yea, I'd be happier if there was some notion of an inherent value in my eyeballs - and then I could just put that money into the system. Eg, I pay $5/m or $15/m, whatever, and that gets split up by the number of pages I view and content I consume.

I'm a firm believer that FOSS and (Internet) Content needs funding. Yet, I loathe ads. They promote (but are not solely to blame for) behavior that is a brain drain on society. Ads always seem to boil down to 90s style child cereal commercials. Loud noises and flashy attention grabbing tactics to pull you towards it within a tiny, limited window of bought attention.

I'm not convinced society is better because of ads. The dystopian movies with neons signs everywhere seem shockingly accurate (and I believe are already like that in many eastern cities).

I like some of Brave's attempt. At least their doing something. But Ads still seem wrong to me.

Re: Brave launches 1.0

#293

Post by buboard »

jamiequint wrote: post #262
carlosdp wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference with Brave is they also provide a mechanism to contribute those earned funds to sites you visit directly.

That doesn't make it more ethical. Presumably if the sites wanted to operate under that model they would be already. In any case, Brave's effective CPM that they pay out to publishers it complete shit even compared to bottom-of-the-barrel ad exchanges. It's objectively a bad deal for publishers.

It does make it more ethical. There is no easy way to set up an own advertising network for every website, ads are pennies.

> Brave's effective CPM

You will find that everyone except google has terrible CPMs. I like the fact that they are exploring new delivery technologies though

Re: Brave launches 1.0

#294

Post by pergadad »

judah wrote: post #153
apazzolini wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> rather than intrusive in-page ads, Brave ads show up as a notification in your operating system I'm sorry, how is that not orders of magnitudes MORE intrusive?

Brave ads don't track you around the web and sell your data to other advertisers. Brave ads don't slow down the pages your browsing, or get in the way of the content you're trying to view. And, Brave ads are optional; you only view them if you want to support the pages/news sites/YouTube channels you're viewing.

Total propaganda war here. No they are not opt in for a site, you opt in and then they always show, you only share tokens if you choose to do so.

And who tells me brave is not tracking me? If anything they have even better data than eg Google.

Re: Brave launches 1.0

#295

Post by buboard »

NelsonMinar wrote: post #200
have_faith wrote: post #30

If people like Brave's ad model, all the power to them. I would personally never touch it. I'm not philosophically on board with the idea that paying people to look at ads is a pragmatic way forward. It doesn't matter if it's opt-in, free-to-play games with loot crates are opt-in, but the decision to go down that road will effect their decision making process when designing new features and I don't want to be part of…

Brave is unethical. The key problem is they insert themselves into the revenue stream without the consent of the web publishers. It's fine to block ads entirely, but substituting your own ads and collecting money from that is wrong.

The idea is to nudge advertisers and publishers towards a more transparent model without middlemen. Unethical is what's happening today, with middlemen making obscene profits. It's more like civil disobedience than unethical.

Re: Brave launches 1.0

#297

Post by asdkhadsj »

justsee wrote: post #289
sadturnip wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can someone explain to me this, as i could not find any real answers from my few minutes of searching. Lets say i have a blog and suddenly people start sending me BAT. 1. How does this impact my taxes? Wouldn't this be considered an income? 2. If i don't collect it where does it go? 3. If my content is being hosted on something like youtube or github do i get it or does the site hosting it get it? 4. How do i go abou…

People can't suddenly start sending you BAT. They can attempt to send you BAT in the browser, but it shows that you're an unverified creator, so the browser essentially 'holds' the BAT and attempts to send to you for a period of time (I think 90 days). You sign up at https://creators.brave.com/ for your website / reddit / github / twitter / soundcloud / etc and verification happens depending on the platform, then you…

How might multiple owners of content / distribution work? Some example scenarios:

1. Github.com wants X% of BAT for hosting the FOSS project.

2. A set of core contributors want X%s of BAT, with the owner getting Y%.

3. #1 and #2 combined.

Re: Brave launches 1.0

#298

Post by pergadad »

brettnak wrote: post #76
Dolores12 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You disable competitors ads to show your own. Something is wrong with it.

I think this largely ignores "how" ads are distributed. The website you are looking at did not select _any_ of the ads you see. They chose a network who is delegating that placement to someone else. Depending on which ad network, this could delegated by several different ad networks until an advertiser is finally selected by the final intermediary. In principle this may not be a very important distinction. However, I…

They don't choose the brave ads either.

In return you get shown ads - and they get nothing unless they give in and sign up for another service that may or may not actually pay them something.

Re: Brave launches 1.0

#299

Post by nfoz »

EpicEng wrote: post #261
nfoz wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you have the freedom to block/skip ads from your TV, too.

Or course you do, but you also seem to think no one should be using the web if they want to make ad revenue. >If you don't want to provide free content then stop publishing on the web, a free medium. How would that not also apply to television?

If you want to provide TV content, go for it. But if your content has ads, don't be surprised when people skip all the ads, because ads are offensive, and they're free to skip them. So that's an awkward business model to rely on. The consumers aren't the ones being unethical; you chose to put yourself in an aggressive and dubious position in the first place. I prefer public and collectively-funded broadcasting.

Re: Brave launches 1.0

#300

Post by maelito »

foob4r wrote: post #269
annoyingnoob wrote: post #249

Fuck ads. Fuck tracking. Fuck making me part of your 'audience'. There has to be a better way. I'm going with blocking until there is a better answer. Brave may be a step in the right direction but its not the solution.

I understand "fuck trackers". Why "fuck ads"?

Because I want to buy what's useful to me, not what companies suggest to me (mostly through obvious or less obvious lies).
Post reply on HN