Live data from Hacker News

Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

brave.com

561–570 of 580 posts

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not all ads manipulate, and not all advertisers are evil people looking to manipulate their target audience. (Disclosure--I do digital media for a living) Case in point, I once had a vet clinic as a client. People were seeking out information on Google for certain pet symptoms that owners may not have realized warranted a vet visit, and we ran paid search ads against those terms. People were clicking them and then co…

The only difference between persuasion and manipulation when it comes to media is the personal biases of the people having the discussion.

Couldn't help but notice you didn't leave other options beyond "persuasion" and "manipulation"...such as "offering an option for someone to self select." There's also another party absent beyond the people in the discussion, which is the end user exposed to this who likely has an opinion as well.

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#562
post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And Consumer Reports reaches about 7 million US households. Out of over 110 million. That's quite the definition of "most" you've got there.

> things like Consumer Reports ^^^^ If it wasn't clear, that was only one example. Every reviewer, search engine, friend-who-already-bought-one, and so on is a resource available to get information. This is, however, straying from my point, which was: just because people aren't informed about your particular product doesn't give make it ok to try to trick them into buying your product with manipulative advertising, a…

If it wasn't clear, that was only one example. People in general do not pay for things like Consumer Reports.

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#564
post #70

I will repeat this one more time, because Eich seems to be missing the point.[1] I don't adblock for privacy, security, or speed. Those are just nice-side effects. I adblock because I do not want to be manipulated into buying things I do not need. I wonder what would happen if, as a society, we said, "enough, no more ads". Would it really be the capitalist apocalypse that the ad industry is trying to make us believe…

> I don't adblock for privacy, security, or speed. Those are just nice-side effects. I adblock because I do not want to be manipulated into buying things I do not need.

Surely, though, "this project does not fit my use case" is not the same as "this is a bad project and you should feel bad"? There are people who adblock just for those reasons, and who would (or claim that they would) allow through ads, to support content creators, if those concerns were obviated.

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#565
The more I read through the Brave website the more it feels like this is actually vastly worse than the status quo.

All quotes are directly from the FAQ:

"We do not even have access to identifiable user data". Except for the "in-browser targeting engine" which has "substantially more information about the user's activity available to it than traditional tracking methods", which are stored in the browser and then exposed to advertisers "to maximize user, publisher and advertiser value."

"Each ad request is anonymous, and exposes only a small subset of the user's preferences and intent signals to prevent 'fingerprinting' the user by a possibly unique set of tags". Except that the only reason advertisers need to fingerprint the user is in order to collect enough information to decide which ads to serve to them, which is precisely what they'd be getting from Brave (and then some.) Great, that information is stored in the browser instead of the cloud, and only subsets of it are exposed to the advertisers for each request -- but that doesn't benefit the end user at all. It benefits Brave, by maintaining their middleman position as the de facto controller of which advertisers gets access to that data.

"We block trackers, that’s a big win compared to the status quo." It is! For Brave. Because the whole browser is now an ad tracker. Ok, the data is keyed to a UUID instead of a name or other "personally identifiable information". How does that benefit the end user? In no way at all.

Throughout the site is repeated handwaving about how nothing is sent in the clear, they don't even have the encryption keys, nothing is personally identifiable, but none of that matters, because the end result is the same. It's still an ad tracker designed to enable targeted advertising. But with much, much more data to work with than in existing browsers. Offloading the tracking work into the client instead of doing it server-side is just misdirection.

And how about those content creators? "Our goal is to make better revenue for all publishers," they say, but I see no explanation of how stripping out websites' individual ad sales and replacing them with Brave's benefits the publishers. Congratulations! Brave's "revenue sharing" program means your ad space is worth 55% of what it used to be! [1] Oh, don't worry, they'll get around to building a micropayments scheme someday, which they'll also take a share of.

This is just. I mean. Gah. Flames. On the side of my face.

[1] (I can't find that figure on their site, but it's quoted here: http://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/267089/new-bro... "...revenue derived by selling ads through Brave will be split four ways: 15% each will be distributed to the user, to Sonobi and to Brave, with 55% allocated to publishers.")

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#566

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not true that all diversity of thought is good or acceptable. As obvious examples, the idea that people with black skin should be slaves, or that people who believe in Judaism should be rounded up and exterminated. Saying that gay people should be denied the right to marry is not much different in my mind than advocating segregation for blacks, or denying Muslims various rights. (However, as long as Eich is no l…

You're in good company in your well thought out justification of not tolerating intolerance. Religious groups who themselves benefit from tolerance yet preach intolerance don't need to change their bigoted beliefs -- they are free believe anything they want, right or wrong. They only need to behave as if they were tolerant (by not actively trying to strip away the existing rights of others, like Brendan did), to get…

Thanks - I can really learn from people like Popper who have thought it through.

Great minds think alike - and for my part, even a blind dog finds a bone once in awhile.

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#567
post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Comments like this are not welcome here, regardless of one's position on any issue. Please post civilly and substantively or not at all.

Do you disagree that Proposition 8 was anti-gay? More to the point, do people get flagged for saying it was anti-gay?

It really isn't about the subject matter; you could fill in any other issue and the comment would be just as wrong for HN. We want civil, substantive, thoughtful conversation here.

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#570
post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I write blog posts from time to time and I do it for pleasure because I enjoy writing about things that interest me and sharing it with others. I do the same thing, but I realized a while back there is a flaw in this model. It means the available creative works—which in turn effectively means the engine of culture—is determined almost entirely by people who are well-off enough to have the free time to do that. I do…

> determined almost entirely by people who are well-off enough to have the free time to do that. The word “ amateur ” used to be a positive thing, meaning that an amateur really had the time to get to know their field and weren’t distracted by the business side of things.

I still consider it this way because it means someone loves, cares about what he is doing, and generally does not have much delay pressure, which allows him to take time to refine his word. And I use the word "professional" in a depreciative way.

"Oh, look at this hedge, it was trimmed by professionals, they damaged every single branch."

"Hey, look at how they painted the door, there's paint over the hinges and even the lock is stuck with it. That's professional work."

"Oh, my basic tool that [big software editor] forces me to use leaks 1Gb memory per hour. That's professional software (developed by the nephew of the trainee)."

So basically, for me, "professional" refers to a work that was done with great efficiency, but time and money spent were the only metric of this efficiency. Quality, attention, precision, thought about the consequences, the future were not part of the parameters.

Post reply on HN