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

301–310 of 649 posts

Re: Brave launches 1.0

#301

Post by lliamander »

buboard wrote: post #143
have_faith wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't just mean news sites, they are a good example though. There is a lot of sites out there with very valuable information, I'm not convinced that they inherently need compensating though? but I might be mis-interpreting what you mean. More specifically I don't think encouraging these valuable sites to survive on new ad driven or donation modals is pragmatic, especially one backed by a crypto like BAT. If I crea…

> I'm not convinced that they inherently need compensating though? I am. I find some excellent Youtube channels, and i m sure google is not compensating them enough. I find interesting comments here or on reddit which are never compensated. For small audiences, there is just no way to be compensated. IF people take the time to provide value to me, simple logic says there should be a way to compensate them (but there…

> I am. I find some excellent Youtube channels, and i m sure google is not compensating them enough.

Depending upon youtube ads for your revenue is not a good model anyway. Many channel owners have their own monetization through sponsors ("this video was sponsored by..."), patreon, affiliate links, merchandise, etc.

For others, they may either produce the content for pleasure (i.e. without intent to monetize) or as a way of driving attention toward their real business (e.g. if they are a consultant or book author).

> I find interesting comments here or on reddit which are never compensated. For small audiences, there is just no way to be compensated. IF people take the time to provide value to me, simple logic says there should be a way to compensate them (but there isn't).

There are incentives that motivate people aside from money, such as reputation. That aside, I think the reason many participate in sites like this is that ultimately they intend to gain knowledge as well. There's not an explicit exchange, but by all of us willing to share our knowledge and experience, we all end up more educated than we started out.

> Most people do that with the expectation that once they hit a popularity threshold, they 'll be able to monetize it. At least that's what Google promises them (thats how blogs and youtube took off), and after they bait they switch and start starving creators of income. We can do better than that, imho

Again, depending upon a platform provider (and one that is often secretive and unaccountable with it's decisions) for your main source of income is a bad bet. For content creators, the hard truth is that you have to put a lot of work into connecting directly with your customers and finding ways to disintermediate the publishing platforms and diversify your revenue streams.

Re: Brave launches 1.0

#302

Post by PKop »

Drakim wrote: post #155
bilbo0s wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe my misunderstanding was more fundamental? It sounds like you're saying that people can purchase BAT for their wallets? I was thinking along the lines of the only method of acquisition being basically "view the brave ads". Can users purchase BAT outright for their wallets?

BAT is a cryptocurrency like Bitcoin, so yeah, you spend dollars to buy BAT, and put it your brave browser wallet, and decide your monthly donation budget. This is so that you can choose to support web and content creators online without the needs of ads. Think of it as automatic micro-donations based on your browsing. The ads are a completely separate feature, you enable voluntary ads to be shown to you, and in exch…

Why would either end users want to put $ into BAT, or content creators accept BAT in lieu of dollar given the massive volatility of BAT relative to $?

If I had stocked up my wallet with $ over the summer, those $'s I exchanged could be up to about 35% less now. We're discussing saving pennies on transaction costs while we lost massive amounts on exchange rate slippage and volatility. This is ridiculously silly, why would creators or users go for this? If you want to say creators will immediately exchange for $, then we must consider trading fees & effort/friction to doing so.

But for users, storing any significant value in a wallet for a more than a day or so is a non starter.

Re: Brave launches 1.0

#303

Post by jaywalk »

asdkhadsj wrote: post #292
cyborgx7 wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 soci…

You can buy BAT with a credit card and participate in Brave's system without ever seeing an ad.

Re: Brave launches 1.0

#304

Post by hinkley »

theli0nheart wrote: post #265
hinkley wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GP is on track to become my highest rated comment on HN, which suggests more people agree with me about this than anything else I've said here. There are some of us that think the distraction economy is making the world a worse place. OS notifications have a higher participation rate than side-bar ads because 1) nobody has learned to tune them out, and 2) theoretically speaking, these are the things we opted not to f…

That your comment was highly upvoted doesn't necessarily mean what you think it does. I often upvote items I disagree with only because they bring up something worthy of discussion. I'm curious how many other HNers do the same.

Yeah I could have done without that comment. My point was fine before I added it.

Still getting quite a few me too responses.

Re: Brave launches 1.0

#305

Post by gnicholas »

Lev1a wrote: post #206
gnicholas wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience (2017 MBP running Mojave), it is much, much faster than Firefox. I have lots of tabs open, and my fan almost never kicks on anymore. With FF, even using ublock and even a pihole, the fan was constantly at full throttle. Maybe I was doing other things wrong, but switching to Brave has made a huge difference for me. I say this as someone who stood by FF for a decade and a half.

> With FF, even using ublock and even a pihole, the fan was constantly at full throttle. Is that still the case even with FFs recent update to version 70[1]? [1]: https://mozillagfx.wordpress.com/2019/10/22/dramatically-red...

70, yes. Haven’t tried 71.

Re: Brave launches 1.0

#306

Post by hinkley »

chabes wrote: post #274
hinkley wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GP is on track to become my highest rated comment on HN, which suggests more people agree with me about this than anything else I've said here. There are some of us that think the distraction economy is making the world a worse place. OS notifications have a higher participation rate than side-bar ads because 1) nobody has learned to tune them out, and 2) theoretically speaking, these are the things we opted not to f…

As far as I understand it, using the browser with the default settings is basically like using Chrome with ad blocking (and tracking protection and all of that) already built in. The only opt in part is allowing ads, which you get paid for viewing.

It seems like the transaction is more akin to 'rewarded' than 'paid', but I'm not sure that detracts from your point.

Re: Brave launches 1.0

#307

Post by leftyted »

TremendousJudge wrote: post #256
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…

>when you compare against the current option To me the current option is no participation because I see no explicit ads. The web is pull and not push, and my browser renders whatever I want it to. As for the revenue, they can keep it for all I care, why would I want to make money browsing the web? It'd be like making money for talking a walk in the park

> To me the current option is no participation because I see no explicit ads. The web is pull and not push, and my browser renders whatever I want it to.

Yes and Brave's argument is that if everyone acted like you, the web as we know it would collapse. Perhaps it's an argument worth taking seriously. And I say that as someone who acts like you.

Re: Brave launches 1.0

#308

Post by k_vi »

TremendousJudge wrote: post #256
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…

>when you compare against the current option To me the current option is no participation because I see no explicit ads. The web is pull and not push, and my browser renders whatever I want it to. As for the revenue, they can keep it for all I care, why would I want to make money browsing the web? It'd be like making money for talking a walk in the park

It'd be like taking a walk in the park and paying/supporting the park if you feel the need to.

Re: Brave launches 1.0

#309

Post by fareesh »

I've been using Brave as a replacement for Chrome for about 3 months now. The switch has been quite enjoyable.

Lighthouse doesn't seem to work properly, which I use Chrome for.

Re: Brave launches 1.0

#310

Post by jaywalk »

bad_user wrote: post #187
brettnak wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> The website you are looking at did not select _any_ of the ads you see. That's irrelevant. In general the content creator gets to choose how their content gets monetized. They own the copyright after all. That ads blocking isn't considered yet a copyright violation in the court of law probably has to do with the upsides, like protecting against malware and privacy. But blocking ads for commercial reasons, like Brav…

Brave isn't replacing ads with their own, and you have to opt-in to see any of Brave's ads in the first place.

As far as privacy, that's your prerogative. But I trust Brave more than I trust Chrome.

Post reply on HN