3 ms·
Here is my conspiracy theory. It is completely hypothetical and unsourced and I really hope it is untrue, but any scenario should be considered. Brendan Eich i
by jarek-foksa 7y ago
Here is my conspiracy theory. It is completely hypothetical and unsourced and I really hope it is untrue, but any scenario should be considered.
Brendan Eich is a shill controlled by Google and US goverment agencies. The social media mob attack on him was actually a planned marketing campaign with aim to create an image of an independent, anti-establishment and alternative leader.
His actual goal is to create a "controlled opposition" for Google Chrome and a replacement for Tor Browser. Brave project is needed by Google in order to avoid antitrust charges from the EU when Chrome reaches ~90% market share. It will be still selling user data to Google and it will contain TOR backdoors known only to the US agencies (which will be easier to hide in proprietary browser).
- BrendanEich 7y agoOh please. We use torproxy unmodified from upstream so the risk is fingerprinting — which is why we warn people looking for Tor-level network privacy on fear of life and limb to use Tor directly. Tor private windows in Brave are for users who should not have to find a trustworthy VPN to cope with untrusted wifi hotspots and the like. The “selling user data” line betrays ignorance of how data is valued. Google doesn’t sell bulk data to advertisers, it gives API access to ad exchange operations that leak data but not the whole user profile, especially not the valuable correlations, brand loyalties, and shopping searches that run for weeks in case of cars or other major purchases. Brave builds client only alternatives for anonymous donations and private ads that pay the user 70% of gross. We are making this verifiable on chain in the next stage of our BAT roadmap. If we defected and stole money or data, we would thus be caught and roasted into the ground by our lead users. This is by design. Last thing: I am hardly an anti establishment leader. I am too busy running a startup, trying to get revenue to cross over based on flat and small/standard fees that leave the big fee to the user. If you want to find controlled opposition, ask to see the terms of Google’s search deals with other browsers, especially the ones that have been slow and weak on tracking protection that is on by default. A Microsoft contact last year said he suspected those terms include proscription of tracking protection that is on by default, or at least that impairs Google search ads confirmation.
- jarek-foksa 7y agoI didn't mean what Brave does now, I meant what it could do after the competition is marginalized or eliminated. I'm sorry if this sounded like a disrespectful accusation. It was just my attempt to rationalize and make sense of the apparently irrational things that happened around your person. When identity politics and large capital are involved, I'm always suspecting machiavellian and cynical motives. I wish you prove me wrong and Brave will become a real competitor for Chrome with strong focus on user privacy and security.
- BrendanEich 7y agoWe are so far from cornering the market or even taking Chrome’s share that this seems like misdirection. Anyway, of course a monopoly or big enough company can go wrong, but Brave is built on ideas from https://brendaneich.com/2014/01/trust-but-verify/ https://brendaneich.com/2014/01/trust-but-verify/ and if future Brave ever went bad, I’d join many others in taking it down. It helps greatly, beyond the properties discussed in that blog post, that we don’t track, silo, or process any user data in the clear. Privacy by default must use client processing more, along with advanced cryptography, to blind and weaken the natural path dependent advantages of servers.