3 ms·
Not saying Brave is the answer, but I think they have at least identified the right problem - ie If, for example, an effective adblocking browser takes off, hu
by DrScientist 7y ago
Not saying Brave is the answer, but I think they have at least identified the right problem - ie
If, for example, an effective adblocking browser takes off, huge amounts of revenue to content providers will disappear. So content providers will start to resist in the only way they can - by blocking people with adblockers.
If you want to avoid either massive reduction of content, or the blocking of ad blockers, then you need to offer an alternative.
As I said, whether Brave's model is the right alternative is an open question - but at least they are having a go.
- stiray 7y agoYes, I want massive reduction of content. I am sorry, but if you haven't noticed, internet is a giant, steaming pile of garbage. Amount of usable content is 1:10000 and the reason for this are ads - you earn money regardless what crap you sell. It is no longer about content but about watching ads.
- DrScientist 7y agoI agree with much of that - but what I worry about is the perilous state of journalism - it is being hit by reduction in ad money resulting in less depth and more pandering to people with money. You could argue the garbage is the problem - taking ad money from better sources, however if you have a blanket ad block then there is no discrimination - the Brave model offers you a chance to discriminate but still use ad payment model. The alternative is to move to 'pay to view' models - the problem here is that then competes with free content that is free because it's paided propaganda.