4 ms·
Let's break down what the the rep from Brave said... I don't think I misinterpreted anything. > Your beautiful drive through Colorado requires quite a bit of m
by vesche 7y ago
Let's break down what the the rep from Brave said... I don't think I misinterpreted anything.
> Your beautiful drive through Colorado requires quite a bit of maintenance and financial support.
Roads cost money.
> Somebody has to pay for that.
Someone has to pay for the roads.
> With Brave, Advertisers can pay for it (without getting hold of your data) by way of users. ... Brave aims to sustain the roads that grant you access to that scenery.
Ad's (billboards) can pay for a great browser experience (the roads)...
So, therefore I said: Billboards don't pay for roads, taxes do. I get that the analogy isn't 1:1. However, stating that is an easy way to demonstrate that Brave doesn't have a market. Just like I don't need billboards to pay for my roads, I don't need ad's to pay for my browser experience. Firefox is open-source, and adblock exists. Come off it.
- zucker42 7y agoIf you use Firefox, ads pay for your browser experience. It's just one extra level of indirection (Advertiser -> Google -> Firefox vs. Advertiser -> Brave). With regards to original argument, my impressions was you didn't assume good faith and respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what the Brave developer said, as the Hacker News commenting guidelines suggest you do. Take that how you will.