81–90 of 172 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Shouldn't Kagi ( https://kagi.com ) also be on that list?
Someone will correct me if I'm wrong but Kagi uses Google search results. I'm sure it's more complicated than that and they have their own secret sauce but it is not an independent search engine. See: https://help.kagi.com/kagi/why-kagi/kagi-vs-google.html
The major problem with Brave search is their position about indexing and licensing content against the wishes of the website publisher. Their robot does not identify itself, meaning the publisher cannot use the standard robots.txt to block its crawling if the publisher so wishes. Incidentally, the robots.txt file has been used in court cases litigating if a search engine is legal or not. Even worse, they state that B…
Hmm, I don't know, it doesn't seem obvious to me that it is unethical to disobey the publisher wishes. If you post something to the open web, what's it to you who reads it and how? You can block some IPs but that's about it. I don't know if Brave has a knowledge graph - if they do, I would understand objecting if they filled it in with “stolen” content. But I don't see what's the problem with search. By the way, isn'…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You should check these assumptions, Mozilla has been hard at work enshittifying their entire portfolio. Instead of giving the public features they actually want (the most secure, performant, and predictable web browser), the current CEO has directed the focus towards revenue-generating features. My god, there is so much telemetry in FF now, and it's tricky to hunt down all the about:configs to disable it. Not friendl…
I mind Mozilla trying to find alternate revenue sources 0%. It's a good thing: Organizations like Mozilla and Brave SHOULD be making their own money and not be stuck to the Google teat. Mozilla doesn't go about it in as upfront way as Brave does, IME, but stuff like VPN, Pocket and other browser-related services I mind not at all. I have no sympathy to the current political shitfest that Mozilla is as an organization…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see they say "if a domain or page is not crawlable by any search engine (it has a noindex tag), or if it is not crawlable by googlebot, then Brave Search’s bot will not crawl it either." 1: https://brave.com/search/api/
What if I want googlebot to crawl it but not bravebot? Every other search engine lets me block its crawler specifically. Only Brave has this shady policy.
Then you need to gate your content such that it is not available openly to the public.
This falls inline with many objections to Google's WEI. If you host content openly and allow access freely, then don't be surprised when people access it at will and use it for free.
The major problem with Brave search is their position about indexing and licensing content against the wishes of the website publisher. Their robot does not identify itself, meaning the publisher cannot use the standard robots.txt to block its crawling if the publisher so wishes. Incidentally, the robots.txt file has been used in court cases litigating if a search engine is legal or not. Even worse, they state that B…
> A publisher should have full control to discriminate which search engine indexes the website's content
If you want someone to not see what you publish block him yourself. Also why would you want to do that? Do you want google to own the web or something?
The major problem with Brave search is their position about indexing and licensing content against the wishes of the website publisher. Their robot does not identify itself, meaning the publisher cannot use the standard robots.txt to block its crawling if the publisher so wishes. Incidentally, the robots.txt file has been used in court cases litigating if a search engine is legal or not. Even worse, they state that B…
I'm always staying away from Brave because I've been confronted so many times with bait-and-switch tactics that I have the feeling that one day they will move away from being good and monetize all the collected data, even though they don't collect data. I'm so skeptical that I'm just now starting to develop a feeling of trust towards DuckDuckGo. In the browser domain, Mozilla is the only company of which I feel that…
You should check these assumptions, Mozilla has been hard at work enshittifying their entire portfolio. Instead of giving the public features they actually want (the most secure, performant, and predictable web browser), the current CEO has directed the focus towards revenue-generating features. My god, there is so much telemetry in FF now, and it's tricky to hunt down all the about:configs to disable it. Not friendl…
I'm curious to see what you think about this. If you're not okay with Firefox telling Mozilla your IP address every time you connect, does the same go for Brave sending entire pages of your search results to them? This also includes which results you've clicked on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hmm, I don't know, it doesn't seem obvious to me that it is unethical to disobey the publisher wishes. If you post something to the open web, what's it to you who reads it and how? You can block some IPs but that's about it. I don't know if Brave has a knowledge graph - if they do, I would understand objecting if they filled it in with “stolen” content. But I don't see what's the problem with search. By the way, isn'…
I’m just thinking that if website publishers are able to legally allow Googlebot but block other bots, it might contribute to the Google monopoly.
That makes two companies who both maintain their own Chromium forks and run direct competitors to core Google search products. I wonder if we'll see Google start to close off open development on Chrome - Microsoft will likely be fine, but that could put Brave in a precarious position.
On the other hand, the Google lawyers seem to have found an excuse to link some proprietary code into Chome (that's not part of Chromium). Does anybody know what that excuse is, and if it provides a loophole large enough to close off Chrome development?
The major problem with Brave search is their position about indexing and licensing content against the wishes of the website publisher. Their robot does not identify itself, meaning the publisher cannot use the standard robots.txt to block its crawling if the publisher so wishes. Incidentally, the robots.txt file has been used in court cases litigating if a search engine is legal or not. Even worse, they state that B…
Curious why cannot selectively block using IP address instead of user-agent string. According to HTTP specification, UA is not a required header. There is certainly no technical requirement for it in order to process HTTP requests. Of course, any website could block requests that lack a UA header. I never send one and it's relatively rare IME to see a site require it, but it's certainly possible.
Also, these search crawls by the browser do not identify themselves beyond the Brave standard UA header, namely a plain Chrome user-agent string.