4 ms·

>Mr Eich is now making the Brave web browser (based on Webkit by the way) which is arguably one of the most promising new browsers right now. Go figure. Right

>Mr Eich is now making the Brave web browser (based on Webkit by the way) which is arguably one of the most promising new browsers right now. Go figure. Right about here my confidence in the veracity of this guy's claims plummeted. Brave offers nothing existing browsers can't already provide, except of course a diversion of ad revenue directly into Eich's pocket.

ZenoArrow 11y ago
Nothing existing browsers could provide, but also something existing browsers do not provide... a way to block ads without short changing content creators. For those unfamiliar with Brave, I can recommend this interview: https://opensource.com/business/16/2/brave-browser-interview https://opensource.com/business/16/2/brave-browser-interview
Scarbutt 11y ago
except of course a diversion of ad revenue directly into Eich's pocket. And in there lies some of the problems, a Mozilla exec creates a new project that overlaps with Mozilla's star product. Whether Brave is good or bad is irrelevant.
- skylan_q 11y ago
  He's not a Mozilla exec. He got shamed out of his job for having had donated money to a group that was against same-sex marriage. Basically, all people who hold Christian values don't deserve to have a job.
  - Mithaldu 11y ago
    There's a difference between holding christian values and acting on them. I have many religious friends in many wide and varied religions from all over the earth, and they're all great people, because the only time they'll ever even talk (nevermind act) about their religion is when you ask them to.
    - apta 11y ago
      > is when you ask them to Seems that speech is free only when it is in accordance with popular opinion these days.
      - Mithaldu 11y ago
        I'm not even sure what you could possibly be trying to say.
    - skylan_q 11y ago
      Actions speak values. If you aren't acting on what you call values, they aren't values.
  - ubernostrum 11y ago
    Interestingly the conservative evangelical position on homosexuality is more or less "it's OK to have those feelings so long as you never act on them". So telling someone who holds that belief "it's OK to believe that as long as you never act on it" does have the virtue of asking them to first live up to the standard they seek to legally impose on others.
ex3ndr 11y ago
Brave is also stolen stuff: https://www.i2.si/ https://www.i2.si/ Brave uses almost same sentences as i2 project used in it's press-releases and was released in few weeks after i2 one.
- al_chemist 11y ago
  I havn't seen press-releases, but their websites looks completely different and saying somebody stole something is serious accusation. Same way as IE stolen Netscape Navigator, FF stolen IE, CH stolen FF? You can't steal idea. "Payment integrated in webbrowser" is not patentable (or I hope it's not).
- BrendanEich 11y ago
  Never saw that site before today. Careful with "stolen", you will cut yourself with Hanlon's razor. I also do not see any sentences in common. Brave aims to pay publishers better than the ads we replace would have paid them. No sign of that from what I read just now at i2.si. Did I miss it?
BrendanEich 11y ago
Admiral, your surname suits you. Brave has not even started ad replacement, we will bring up micropayments first. When the ad revenue flows, with NI-ZKP based anonymous confirmation of ad impressions, we will share 55% directly with publishers according to user traffic and impressions. We give 15% to users, which by default will auto micropay for their top sites to be ad-free. We take the same share, 15%. Our partner in privacy-preserving ad matching, Sonobi, makes 15%. To say that our aggregate 70% revenue share to websites goes "directly into Eich's pocket" is either to say something you guessed wrong about, in which case read our site docs and watch our GitHub; or it is a lie. Ads may decline in favor of paywalls but I doubt they will go away. And we are building, and bootstrap-funding via the 15% revshare, user wallets into Brave, with anonymity. If paying for web content does take off at the expense of ads, Brave is in pole position with our micropayments system to lead and win this race.
- dredmorbius 11y ago
  I'm well aware your business strategy's oriented contrary to the advice, but Nick Szabo and Clay Shirky's arguments against micropayments are very solid and should be considered. I'd suggest looking at a payment aggregating rather than disaggregating system. It's the direction publishing's been headed for about 400 years. Of course, you might just be the exception as proves the rule. But I doubt it.
  - BrendanEich 11y ago
    We aggregate payments to publishers. I recommend you read just the material at https://brave.com/ https://brave.com/ including the FAQ and blog posts. We strive to remove all cognitive overhead rightly decried in explicit micropayment systems. Users get a 15% revshare by default. It is used to auto-micropay their top 20 sites up to low monthly maximum or user wallet balance, whichever is smaller -- again by default. (All parameters will be adjustable, but the defaults will be tuned to drain the wallet each month unless the user intervenes.) Users get notified in time to revoke any micropayments they don't want to make, but otherwise they don't have to think or intervene. Your first sentence is oddly phrased, never mind pretentious and wrong. Did you give me "advice" that I ignored? I think the shoe is on the other foot.

ZenoArrow 11y ago

Nothing existing browsers could provide, but also something existing browsers do not provide... a way to block ads without short changing content creators. For those unfamiliar with Brave, I can recommend this interview: https://opensource.com/business/16/2/brave-browser-interview https://opensource.com/business/16/2/brave-browser-interview

Scarbutt 11y ago

except of course a diversion of ad revenue directly into Eich's pocket. And in there lies some of the problems, a Mozilla exec creates a new project that overlaps with Mozilla's star product. Whether Brave is good or bad is irrelevant.

skylan_q 11y ago
He's not a Mozilla exec. He got shamed out of his job for having had donated money to a group that was against same-sex marriage. Basically, all people who hold Christian values don't deserve to have a job.
- Mithaldu 11y ago
  There's a difference between holding christian values and acting on them. I have many religious friends in many wide and varied religions from all over the earth, and they're all great people, because the only time they'll ever even talk (nevermind act) about their religion is when you ask them to.
  - apta 11y ago
    > is when you ask them to Seems that speech is free only when it is in accordance with popular opinion these days.
    - Mithaldu 11y ago
      I'm not even sure what you could possibly be trying to say.
  - skylan_q 11y ago
    Actions speak values. If you aren't acting on what you call values, they aren't values.
- ubernostrum 11y ago
  Interestingly the conservative evangelical position on homosexuality is more or less "it's OK to have those feelings so long as you never act on them". So telling someone who holds that belief "it's OK to believe that as long as you never act on it" does have the virtue of asking them to first live up to the standard they seek to legally impose on others.

ex3ndr 11y ago

Brave is also stolen stuff: https://www.i2.si/ https://www.i2.si/ Brave uses almost same sentences as i2 project used in it's press-releases and was released in few weeks after i2 one.

al_chemist 11y ago
I havn't seen press-releases, but their websites looks completely different and saying somebody stole something is serious accusation. Same way as IE stolen Netscape Navigator, FF stolen IE, CH stolen FF? You can't steal idea. "Payment integrated in webbrowser" is not patentable (or I hope it's not).
BrendanEich 11y ago
Never saw that site before today. Careful with "stolen", you will cut yourself with Hanlon's razor. I also do not see any sentences in common. Brave aims to pay publishers better than the ads we replace would have paid them. No sign of that from what I read just now at i2.si. Did I miss it?

BrendanEich 11y ago

Admiral, your surname suits you. Brave has not even started ad replacement, we will bring up micropayments first. When the ad revenue flows, with NI-ZKP based anonymous confirmation of ad impressions, we will share 55% directly with publishers according to user traffic and impressions. We give 15% to users, which by default will auto micropay for their top sites to be ad-free. We take the same share, 15%. Our partner in privacy-preserving ad matching, Sonobi, makes 15%. To say that our aggregate 70% revenue share to websites goes "directly into Eich's pocket" is either to say something you guessed wrong about, in which case read our site docs and watch our GitHub; or it is a lie. Ads may decline in favor of paywalls but I doubt they will go away. And we are building, and bootstrap-funding via the 15% revshare, user wallets into Brave, with anonymity. If paying for web content does take off at the expense of ads, Brave is in pole position with our micropayments system to lead and win this race.

dredmorbius 11y ago
I'm well aware your business strategy's oriented contrary to the advice, but Nick Szabo and Clay Shirky's arguments against micropayments are very solid and should be considered. I'd suggest looking at a payment aggregating rather than disaggregating system. It's the direction publishing's been headed for about 400 years. Of course, you might just be the exception as proves the rule. But I doubt it.
- BrendanEich 11y ago
  We aggregate payments to publishers. I recommend you read just the material at https://brave.com/ https://brave.com/ including the FAQ and blog posts. We strive to remove all cognitive overhead rightly decried in explicit micropayment systems. Users get a 15% revshare by default. It is used to auto-micropay their top 20 sites up to low monthly maximum or user wallet balance, whichever is smaller -- again by default. (All parameters will be adjustable, but the defaults will be tuned to drain the wallet each month unless the user intervenes.) Users get notified in time to revoke any micropayments they don't want to make, but otherwise they don't have to think or intervene. Your first sentence is oddly phrased, never mind pretentious and wrong. Did you give me "advice" that I ignored? I think the shoe is on the other foot.