7 ms·

I'll say this much, Brave has done a marvelous job of branding this advertising middleware platform as an ad blocker and privacy protector. Look at question 15

I'll say this much, Brave has done a marvelous job of branding this advertising middleware platform as an ad blocker and privacy protector. Look at question 15 in their FAQ. https://brave.com/FAQ.html https://brave.com/FAQ.html They're gathering much more information than regular ads are able to, and they're using that information to push more highly targeted ads at you. That's the business model. All the handwaving about how that information never leaves the browser is irrelevant; it's still being used to push ads at you.

AndrewKemendo 9y ago
That's a really bad interpretation. By default any browser would "see this information" no matter what browser you are using. Our auditable open source browser code protects this intent data on the client device. Our server side has no access to this data in the clear, nor does it have decryption keys. We do not run a MitM proxy or VPN service. Right, as expected. So they aren't pulling your data - according to them. So I don't see the problem.
- outsidetheparty 9y ago
  > By default any browser would "see this information" no matter what browser you are using. Yes, but by default most browsers don't go on to use that information to decide "what preferences and intent signals to expose [to advertisers] to maximize user, publisher and advertiser [and Brave's] value". >Our server side has no access to this data in the clear, nor does it have decryption keys. We do not run a MitM proxy or VPN service. See, this is the brilliant marketing I was talking about. They don't use the data serverside and expose the results to advertisers. They use it clientside and then expose the results to advertisers. The end result is exactly the same, it just sounds friendlier. The references to MitM and VPNs is just verbal chaff: they don't need to run a man-in-the-middle attack to listen in on your traffic, because the end-user software is already doing everything a MitM would have done, and then some. Now do you see the problem?
  - AndrewKemendo 9y ago
    Not really. It seems like it's basically making everyone their own ad server in a pull process. Seems like the only way to do ad serving if you want to keep all your data private no? Otherwise they would be breaking the exposure protection if you sent your "intent" to their or another ad server. I think the trick here is that they don't want to completely break the capability for people to make money off of serving ads and people seeing those ads. So if that's the case then making everyone their own ad server makes sense.
    - outsidetheparty 9y ago
      > I think the trick here is that they don't want to completely break the capability for people to make money off of serving ads and people seeing those ads. You appear to be in agreement with my original point: Brave is advertising middleware and privacy intrusion branded as an ad blocker and privacy protector.
      - AndrewKemendo 9y ago
        Except you can be both an ad blocker/privacy protector and still serve relevant ads.
        outsidetheparty 9y ago
        Personally I prefer the ad blockers that don't serve ads and the privacy protectors that don't invade my privacy. But to each his own I guess.
        jonathansampson 9y ago
        The default behavior of Brave is to _block ads, trackers, and fingerprinting_. The ability to show safe, relevant ads is part of a future opt-in component of Brave. As always, Brave is hosted in the open: https://github.com/brave/browser-laptop/ https://github.com/brave/browser-laptop/
BrendanEich 9y ago
Sorry, that FAQ's way out of date. We won't do anything other than what other browsers do for history, anti-tracking (see Apple's announced on-device machine learning for third-party cookie blocking exception management), etc. in baseline Brave without users opting in. Any machine learning ad matching code will be a separate open source codebase and downloaded component.
- outsidetheparty 9y ago
  That's good news, and represents a significant change for the better compared to the last time I took a serious look at your company. I still find the whole ad replacement concept problematic, and I wish your marketing materials were a bit clearer about which ideas are current, which planned, and which abandoned -- but making it opt-in does go a long way toward allaying those concerns.
  - BrendanEich 9y ago
    Could you do me a favor and point out any more old junk on the site that you see? We scrubbed but clearly missed FAQ items, too much eng work not enough mktg, lol. Thanks!

AndrewKemendo 9y ago

That's a really bad interpretation. By default any browser would "see this information" no matter what browser you are using. Our auditable open source browser code protects this intent data on the client device. Our server side has no access to this data in the clear, nor does it have decryption keys. We do not run a MitM proxy or VPN service. Right, as expected. So they aren't pulling your data - according to them. So I don't see the problem.

outsidetheparty 9y ago
> By default any browser would "see this information" no matter what browser you are using. Yes, but by default most browsers don't go on to use that information to decide "what preferences and intent signals to expose [to advertisers] to maximize user, publisher and advertiser [and Brave's] value". >Our server side has no access to this data in the clear, nor does it have decryption keys. We do not run a MitM proxy or VPN service. See, this is the brilliant marketing I was talking about. They don't use the data serverside and expose the results to advertisers. They use it clientside and then expose the results to advertisers. The end result is exactly the same, it just sounds friendlier. The references to MitM and VPNs is just verbal chaff: they don't need to run a man-in-the-middle attack to listen in on your traffic, because the end-user software is already doing everything a MitM would have done, and then some. Now do you see the problem?
- AndrewKemendo 9y ago
  Not really. It seems like it's basically making everyone their own ad server in a pull process. Seems like the only way to do ad serving if you want to keep all your data private no? Otherwise they would be breaking the exposure protection if you sent your "intent" to their or another ad server. I think the trick here is that they don't want to completely break the capability for people to make money off of serving ads and people seeing those ads. So if that's the case then making everyone their own ad server makes sense.
  - outsidetheparty 9y ago
    > I think the trick here is that they don't want to completely break the capability for people to make money off of serving ads and people seeing those ads. You appear to be in agreement with my original point: Brave is advertising middleware and privacy intrusion branded as an ad blocker and privacy protector.
    - AndrewKemendo 9y ago
      Except you can be both an ad blocker/privacy protector and still serve relevant ads.
      - outsidetheparty 9y ago
        Personally I prefer the ad blockers that don't serve ads and the privacy protectors that don't invade my privacy. But to each his own I guess.
        jonathansampson 9y ago
        The default behavior of Brave is to _block ads, trackers, and fingerprinting_. The ability to show safe, relevant ads is part of a future opt-in component of Brave. As always, Brave is hosted in the open: https://github.com/brave/browser-laptop/ https://github.com/brave/browser-laptop/

BrendanEich 9y ago

Sorry, that FAQ's way out of date. We won't do anything other than what other browsers do for history, anti-tracking (see Apple's announced on-device machine learning for third-party cookie blocking exception management), etc. in baseline Brave without users opting in. Any machine learning ad matching code will be a separate open source codebase and downloaded component.

outsidetheparty 9y ago
That's good news, and represents a significant change for the better compared to the last time I took a serious look at your company. I still find the whole ad replacement concept problematic, and I wish your marketing materials were a bit clearer about which ideas are current, which planned, and which abandoned -- but making it opt-in does go a long way toward allaying those concerns.
- BrendanEich 9y ago
  Could you do me a favor and point out any more old junk on the site that you see? We scrubbed but clearly missed FAQ items, too much eng work not enough mktg, lol. Thanks!