4 ms·
I actually find the Brave model bizarre. You get paid for viewing ads but you can't cash it out. So you have this model of virtual (useless) money moving betwee
by nabaraz 7y ago
I actually find the Brave model bizarre. You get paid for viewing ads but you can't cash it out. So you have this model of virtual (useless) money moving between publishers and consumers at all times. And then you have centralization in both on-boarding publishers and also handling payments (Uphold) that provides single point of failure.
I wish Google Contributor[1] was more popular and covered more websites. I would gladly pay $15-$20 per month to not see ads and also not get tracked throughout the internet.
1. https://contributor.google.com/v/beta https://contributor.google.com/v/beta
- fanerel56 7y agoIt's an obvious cash grab. Brendan Eich got frustrated because of the Mozilla story now he tries to influence script kiddies with marketing slogans (private, secure etc.) While in reality Brave has less privacy than Chrome due to fingerprinting.
- arkano 7y agoThis raises the interesting question; how much is our attention really worth, say, per month, when it comes to ads? Per this vox article, https://www.vox.com/recode/2019/6/24/18715421/internet-free-data-ads-cost https://www.vox.com/recode/2019/6/24/18715421/internet-free-..., it would cost $35 per person in the US per month to replace ads in the US to cover the profits from ads. Maybe this isn't the right way to think when pricing attention though.
- nabaraz 7y agoIt depends on various factors like region, person's interest etc. Facebook valued North American user at about $112 per year while globally it is about $25/year. Twitter is about $ 9 per user and SNAP is about $6 per user. Source: https://thespring.io/investing/facebook-makes-more-revenue-per-user-than-netflix/ https://thespring.io/investing/facebook-makes-more-revenue-p...