3 ms·

No, we punish them when they have fraudulent practices and when the product is a scam, like brave is. They modify user's input without their consent, they accep

No, we punish them when they have fraudulent practices and when the product is a scam, like brave is. They modify user's input without their consent, they accept money with no guarantee of delivering to the intended target and talk about privacy as a selling point when they run an ad network . I cannot believe how much people turn in to a cult like fanboy for a product they understand very little about.

BrendanEich 6y ago
We fixed the bug where refcodes were added to binance.us and binance.com URLs. That was a blunder, but not a scam. We made no money from it. As for "modify user's input without their consent", go type keywords into any browser, Firefox Safari Chrome Edge etc. You'll see search affiliate client code, same as we had by mistake for the two binance domains, and only as suggestions for other partners (all of this, we removed in the springtime, to quell concerns and misrepresentations such as you make here). We do not "accept money" as intermediary, the browser holds the tips to unverified creators. You seem to be operating on misinformation here. In December 2018 we briefly shipped a system that sent our own funds when directed, back to us, on behalf of unverified creators. That too was a mistake, but we fix bugs and so such tips are now buffered client-side. In any case, we were the source of funds there, not the user. We've taken great pains with Brave Ads (not an "ad network" by the way) to avoid any privacy problems, starting by making them opt-in, using in-browser-only data matched against a fixed-per-population-per-day catalog, confirmed via Privacy Pass (blind signature cryptographi). This is the wave of the future, even Google is trying to do a Privacy Sandbox now, but they are piling up risks and letting partners into the sandbox last I looked. It's clear you have some underlying problem with us, but it isn't based on the facts. What's the story?

BrendanEich 6y ago

We fixed the bug where refcodes were added to binance.us and binance.com URLs. That was a blunder, but not a scam. We made no money from it. As for "modify user's input without their consent", go type keywords into any browser, Firefox Safari Chrome Edge etc. You'll see search affiliate client code, same as we had by mistake for the two binance domains, and only as suggestions for other partners (all of this, we removed in the springtime, to quell concerns and misrepresentations such as you make here). We do not "accept money" as intermediary, the browser holds the tips to unverified creators. You seem to be operating on misinformation here. In December 2018 we briefly shipped a system that sent our own funds when directed, back to us, on behalf of unverified creators. That too was a mistake, but we fix bugs and so such tips are now buffered client-side. In any case, we were the source of funds there, not the user. We've taken great pains with Brave Ads (not an "ad network" by the way) to avoid any privacy problems, starting by making them opt-in, using in-browser-only data matched against a fixed-per-population-per-day catalog, confirmed via Privacy Pass (blind signature cryptographi). This is the wave of the future, even Google is trying to do a Privacy Sandbox now, but they are piling up risks and letting partners into the sandbox last I looked. It's clear you have some underlying problem with us, but it isn't based on the facts. What's the story?