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

681–690 of 697 posts

Re: Brave Search beta

#681

Post by rattray »

tobr wrote: post #552
tobr wrote: post #542

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally the same type of problems as a lot of UX has today, especially on mobile: various messages and modals and controls that seem to be motivated by Brave’s needs, not mine. Sponsored images, trying to get me to set it as standard browser, “Brave rewards” whatever that is being a permanent part of the UI and turning itself on without me asking it to. These might be small things compared to Google, but I’ve never…

Let me expand a little on why I think this is so corrosive to my trust in Brave, because this is interesting stuff. When I use the Brave browser, I have to second-guess everything in the UI to consider why a control or message is there, if it’s in my interest or if you’re trying to get me to do something that’s in your interest. My eyes have to scan the UI in much the same way I do with ads in search results or spam…

Yep, agreed. I ended up switching to Firefox as a result of things like this, which was good in many ways but took a lot more configuration.

Re: Brave Search beta

#682

Post by unicornporn »

mackrevinack wrote: post #605
unicornporn wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you could just use https://startpage.com/ and get Google quality results 100% of the time.

that's also 100% reliant on google though. what would happen if that became a lot more popular than it is now? would google try to sabotage it in any way? i would rather support and spread the word about search engines that don't rely solely on google

> that's also 100% reliant on google though. what would happen if that became a lot more popular than it is now? would google try to sabotage it in any way?

Yes, same applies to DDG/Bing though.

Re: Brave Search beta

#683

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #669
gigamatt wrote: post #657

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

anyway, thx for sharing some of your work. very much appreciated.

Re: Brave Search beta

#684

Post by jay_kyburz »

cortexio wrote: post #580
jay_kyburz wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Person 1: Brave replaces existing ads, that’s bad >Someone from Brave: actually we don’t replace existing ads at all, here’s why Me: Brave guy used a lot of words but what they said was they remove ads from one place and move them to another place, that's still replacing ads.

not if it's opt-in... if i install a firefox plugin that puts all pages full of ads, it's not firefox doing that.. it's me.

Did Firefox implement a nice button for you to turn it on? Did they sell the ads to the advertisers? Did they take a cut of the money? Did they trick you into thinking it was a good idea?

That's not you.

Re: Brave Search beta

#685

Post by jay_kyburz »

jonathansampson wrote: post #676
jay_kyburz wrote: post #663

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> Brave is attempting to monetize other peoples intellectual property by stripping it of ads. Brave doesn't make money by blocking third-party ads; that's a privacy and security decision. Brave could default to no-blocking (which would be unwise, given the threat to users), and still have its own ad model of displaying ad notifications. > …people blocking ads for their own protection… This is why people install Brave…

>Why do you assume people aren't using Brave for their own protection?

OK, sure, lets rewrite it as "Brave is attempting to monetize other people intellectual property by striping it of ads for the protection of readers."

And sure, you could argue that you are providing a service to readers. Unfortunately, in order to provide tha service you must harm the content providers by denying them ad revenue, whether or not they are actually doing any harmful tracking.

This is why I believe content providers will come after you once you get big enough.

And you might be able to scare users, but I doubt you will be able to convince a court that just collecting the data is harmful in any meaningful way.

But come on, we're all tech folks here, Brave is only blocking 3rd party tracking, the 1st parties are still tracking what pages on their site you are reading. Facebook knows what you see on Facebook. Newscorp and Tencent and Apple all know what you are reading across their own IPs. Netflix knows what you are watching and Spotify knows what you are listening to. You have to be logged in after all.

And anyway, I'm sure 3rd parties have started serving up scripts that run 1st party now, just proxxied through the first party server.

Update: And to be clear, if you were doing this all for the good of society alone I would cheer you on, but because you are doing it for profit it becomes unethical in my mind.

Now I know nobody asked, but if I were Mr Eich and I wanted to do this is a way that _was_ ethical, I would attempt to create a parallel internet that was attractive to both users and content providers. I think both parties need to opt-in to this new trackingless internet.

I have a lot of crazy ideas for making this crazy parallel internet good for everybody, but I would be here all night.

Re: Brave Search beta

#686

Post by permo-w »

jonathansampson wrote: post #628
permo-w wrote: post #611

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Will this search engine have better filters, and an option to sort results? It’s always bothered me about Google that there’s no sort feature, especially by date

Can you tell me more about the "better filters" request? Regarding sorting , that's great feedback. I'm curious how you would see this implemented. Would the sort by date arrange results in order of their modified date, created date (such as when they were published), or perhaps their first indexed date? There are a few other dates that could be considered too.

Ideally have all three of those date types as sort options. Definitely one of the first two as default though.

I appreciate the reply

Re: Brave Search beta

#687

Post by mynameismon »

jonathansampson wrote: post #424
smoldesu wrote: post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Their privacy is miles ahead of the other options. If by "other options" you're purely referring to "the 5 most popular browsers", you're mostly right. Brave still uses much more telemetry than UnGoogled Chromium and Vivaldi, so make of that what you will.

I reviewed Vivaldi back in 2019 on Twitter (see https://twitter.com/jonathansampson/status/11653581559220592... ), and later again for an official blog post (see https://brave.com/brave-tops-browser-first-run-network-traff... ). It was indeed much better than many of the other top browsers. Brave does, however, still come out on top when you consider Vivaldi proxies few, if any, requests to Google. On the topic of te…

Vivaldi user here. If anyone is interested in Vivaldi's network requests, feel free to check their blog post that addresses the same: https://vivaldi.com/blog/decoding-network-activity-in-vivald...

Re: Brave Search beta

#688

Post by mynameismon »

rpdillon wrote: post #485
smoldesu wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as I know you want to chime in here, I'm not going to play any games where you draw the goalposts. My current options are the following: 1. I can continue to use Vivaldi and uBlock origin as a completely open-source and so far flawless combo or 2. Go out of my way to switch to a browser with dubious privacy claims, a goddamn personal cryptocurrency and (the cherry on top) a developer who spent the better half…

Is Vivaldi open source? The only reason I don't use it is because it's closed, so this would be great news!

They do not publish any code relating to the UI, but the Chromium part is absolutely open: https://vivaldi.com/source/

Also, Vivaldi is entirely moddable.

Re: Brave Search beta

#689

Post by aarnushrithkha »

gigamatt wrote: post #655
aarnushrithkha wrote: post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Im using private.sh but what is the proof that it does'nt have any logs and it isn't open source. And please add a anonymous view like startpage and make it open source.

The encryption code is open source as it is in the javascript so you can evaluate it. It's also available in the chrome plug-in, and there's now the app in the android play store: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.privatesh.... so the private.sh web server or related anonymyzing proxy don't have access to your query since it is encrypted. on the gigablast servers will know your query, but they won't k…

Ok but please add anonymous view like startpage and i will recommend my friends use it. Hence startpage is owned by advertising company i cannot trust it anymore. I have only 2 options for myself private.sh or searx. I trust private.sh and gigablast. Thanks matt brother.

Re: Brave Search beta

#690

Post by manofthunder »

gigamatt wrote: post #244

I've been working on this private search engine https://private.sh/ for a while. It encrypts your query using client-side javascript so only the Gigablast search engine can read your query. And your query is delivered to Gigablast through an anonymizing proxy that is not in Gigablast's control. So you get TOR-like privacy. Also Gigablast's privacy policy https://gigablast.com/privacy.html shows that your query is not…

Don't trust private.sh or gigablast.

Here are the reasons

Note: im not aganist anyone.

Yes, Gigablast is open source and i trust gigablast but privte.sh isn't open source. They said they will release code but from the past 1 year they didn't releas.

2nd reason is privatesh is owned by pia which is based in us. Since we all pia keeps logs about metadata it isn't secure.

Note: metadata is also important

3rd reason : There is a lot more to develop

4th reason : It has no anonymous view. It is better to add anonymous view like startpage. Startpage anonymous is more secure but i do not trust startpage because it has no source code. Maybe in future private.sh could develop.

Post reply on HN