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

Brave Search beta

search.brave.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

661–670 of 697 posts

Re: Brave Search beta

#661

Post by tomstockmail »

maeil wrote: post #503
tomstockmail wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With the referral program and integration with a cryptocurrency, anyone can shill for it. It's hard if not impossible to know if someone promoting Brave has a stake in BAT or not. Those that are showing Braves many problems ("badmouth") don't have a stake one way or the other except to warn people.

There is hardly a significant website out there with a higher concentration of Google and Microsoft employees than Hackernews, in light of which that's quite the baffling comment to make.

I'm guessing you consider Google/Microsoft a competitor to Brave. Google I might get, Microsoft I don't.

Neither consider Brave any real threat. Another commenter said "romantic view" - I think that applies here.

Re: Brave Search beta

#662

Post by tomstockmail »

cheschire wrote: post #500
tomstockmail wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With the referral program and integration with a cryptocurrency, anyone can shill for it. It's hard if not impossible to know if someone promoting Brave has a stake in BAT or not. Those that are showing Braves many problems ("badmouth") don't have a stake one way or the other except to warn people.

That’s a romantic view. There’s folks on HN working for direct competitors of brave. I doubt that everyone defending brave is a shill, or that everyone criticizing it does so with the purest intent as you’re suggesting.

The only real competitors for Brave are other cryptocurrencies, which yes there are many. I feel there's plenty of reasons to not like Brave and few if any are about suggesting a superior cryptocurrency.

The only non-compromised Brave users I've come across are mobile, and they are the ones that find using the Firefox add-ons menu to install uBlock origin too complicated. They are unlikely to learn the BAT system.

Re: Brave Search beta

#663

Post by jay_kyburz »

jonathansampson wrote: post #631
jay_kyburz wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi Jonathan, here is my hot take on the issue. When a user installs uBlock Origin, they are attempting to protect themselves from ads, not just privacy, but because the ads themselves attempt to manipulate them into buying things. When Brave blocks ads in one place, but shows others ads instead, the users are not actually protected from the ads, any potential money that may have been generated by the ads is effective…

You're absolutely right that some people are not interested in ads, at all. And this is why they install content-blockers and more. This doesn't change the fact that many others install things like uBlock Origin for their security and privacy benefits. This is precisely why Brave ships with Brave Ads and Rewards disabled by default. We believe that the out of box experience should be blocking . This works for both pa…

I notice you didn't address one important part of my comment, that Brave is attempting to monetize other peoples intellectual property by stripping it of ads.

There is a big moral difference between a community of people blocking ads for their own protection, and a company blocking ads for profit.

--

When somebody reads a web page, but blocked the ads, I like to think the reader is saying, I'm interested in what you have to say, but I'm not spending money today.

When somebody uses the Brave browser and has opted in to other ads, I can only think the reader is saying, I'm interested in what you are saying, but fuck you, I'm not buying what you are selling, I'm going to check out these other ads, make some money for myself and for Brave, and If I see anything I like I'll buy there instead.

Re: Brave Search beta

#664

Post by mastazi »

rataata_jr wrote: post #592
mastazi wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

or even better you can use !sp https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27598042

Startpage got sold

I'm aware, that was almost 2 years ago and startpage still has no trackers (as of today, according to EFF Privacy Badger), so I consider it safe.

Re: Brave Search beta

#665

Post by ocdtrekkie »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #640
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #618

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> While scraping the results for yourself to look at might be OK, scraping results to display verbatim in another search engine without permission stretches fair use. No, it doesn't, because Google results aren't copyrightable, hence, there is no such thing as fair use. It's just information anyone is free to collect and use as they see fit.

Why would rankings not be copyrightable?

Why would they be? Again, if all things being copyrightable by default, Google could not even exist, they assume they have the right to consume any data they want.

If a monkey can't copyright a selfie because they're not a person, an algorithmically generated spew of stuff Google ripped from elsewhere certainly lacks merit for copyright.

Re: Brave Search beta

#666

Post by boinkyboinnk »

jonathansampson wrote: post #632
xgulfie wrote: post #614

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've hit the nail on the head calling it the basic attention token. While you haven't literally replaced ads in the page you are still removing their ads then adding your own. You didn't replace the ad directly, but you've redirected the user's attention.

Brave blocks harmful third-party ads and trackers. This is a security and privacy matter, as these types of ads are actually small scripts/apps which run in the context of your local machine. As malignant as third-party ads have become, they do generate revenue for content creators. As such, Brave didn't stop at "block, and let the creators figure it out." We did the work to propose a new approach to supporting conte…

Keep digging.

Re: Brave Search beta

#667

Post by eyelidlessness »

Judgmentality wrote: post #654
Kiro wrote: post #648

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or they can just tell them facts instead of pretending to care what a random hater thinks. Just like they did. They also asked what bad UX they referred to, so they did what you wanted but it was still disrespectful apparently. If genuine feedback was met with "go fuck yourself" we could maybe call it user hostility but this was not.

I feel like pretending to listen, which is what he is doing, is worse than saying "go fuck yourself" because then it would be honest. I find it bizarre you find his feedback genuine, as to me it's the same thing as "go fuck yourself" but neatly wrapped up in a "I pretend to care what you say" format. If he came straight out and said "I don't care about your opinion and here's why" I would respect him. Instead he just…

You put it better than I could have before I got back to this. It doesn’t really count as “asking” if you’re preemptively dismissing the answer in the same comment.

Re: Brave Search beta

#668

Post by dang »

teclordphrack2 wrote: post #496
smoldesu wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you could start by listening instead of accosting every comment that you find. Your incessant reply-bombing is childish and unprofessional, nobody wants to engage with someone who defends a browser like it's their sole lifeline. Furthermore, you don't get to choose what your "UX issues" are. "UX" quite literally stands for "users experience", which is on the other side of the spectrum from "developer experience…

I see you put the twit in twitter.

We've banned this account for repeatedly breaking the site guidelines.

If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

Re: Brave Search beta

#669

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

gigamatt wrote: post #657
1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If things go as planned, this may become a paid, ad-free, zero-tracking search engine." In 1998 when Google's founders announced their search engine they claimed it would be less commercial, more academic, more transparent and they would avoid the influence of advertising. Did things "go as planned." Not even close. What is the lesson here. Meanwhile, every search submitted during the "beta" period is subject to non…

hi, gigablast creator, matt, here. thanks for mentioning gigablast. i've been coding web search engines for almost 25 years so it's always nice to see ppl recognize. i wish more ppl would care about these things. with enough people caring i think i (or we) could make gigablast into a super transparent, private search engine that doesn't rely on big tech like the other guys. really i just need more hardware at this po…

in the distribution available on github.com, included are some static binaries for various open source programs. any reason that a static gb binary could not be distributed as well. with linux, i use musl so prefer static to ones linked against gblic.

Re: Brave Search beta

#670

Post by hnlmorg »

nagarjun wrote: post #589
hnlmorg wrote: post #564

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DDG already includes Google (amongst others) in its results. It's not just a front end to Bing, like many assume (though I can't find DDG's article on the subject to directly cite). The thing with people who switch to DDG is, they do so consciously for privacy reasons but then forget that the reason G's results are so good is because they add little bits of context in through their profiling. But that doesn't mean th…

> Or if you're search for a restaurant, add in your home town too. This definitely doesn't help in India. If you live in the US, Brave/DDG can probably serve you better local results. It's abysmal in India. Google local results in India are orders of magnitude better here.

I live in Europe so I'm definitely not talking from a US perspective. But I acknowledge that web services are generally worse in India than most (other) developed countries.
Post reply on HN