4 ms·

That's because it is a scammy project. I don't think that creating a popular technology should grant you a pass on the ethical issues of future endeavors.

BrendanEich 6y ago
I would not want anyone using Brave because they blindly trust me. On the other hand, you libeling Brave without any evidence (to avoid rehashing, onlookers should see https://twitter.com/BrendanEich/status/1360780527100338177 https://twitter.com/BrendanEich/status/1360780527100338177 and do their own research) reflects poorly only on you.
- tomComb 6y ago
  The person I was responding to had already read about the issues - I was confirming their existing impression and, more important, addressing the fact that they were putting them aside for a reason i didn't agree with. The fact that you would attack me without understanding the thread (and use it as an opportunity to divert people to your Twitter) reflects badly on you.
  - BrendanEich 6y ago
    I don't see anything above justifying your "scammy" word, which is libelous thrown without back-up and therefore does reflect badly on you. But please, go on: justify it. I'll help by citing the dictionary definition of "scam": Noun: a dishonest scheme; a fraud. "fraud": "wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain." Also, as the tweet I linked above said, we didn't profit from either the fast-fixed error of showing unverified creators as being tipable with our token grants to users (we don't make money recirculating our own grants) or the refgate case (we turned off that future-share-of-trading-commission affiliate revenue with Binance). Hanlon's razor explains these blunders without jumping to scam or fraud, which is a crime we have to fight on the Brave Ads front, so I take it seriously. Should someone not use Brave on account of these two mistakes? Not for me to say; no browser is perfect. But they were not scams or frauds, and we fixed code and design processes to avoid anything like them in the future.
    - tomComb 6y ago
      Please don't pretend you don't know what I'm talking about or that the idea that Brave is 'scammy' is anything new - Brave is very controversial and its ethical lapses have been discussed extensively including here on HN. You went thru various dubious business models before you even got to your current incarnation. But the most current of your controversies is covered here: https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2020/06/06/the-brave-web-browser-is-hijacking-links-and-inserting-affiliate-codes/ https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2020/06/06/the-brave-we... And discussed here on HN https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23442027 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23442027 That alone is enough for me to call Brave 'scammy'.
      - BrendanEich 6y ago
        We never injected ads in publisher pages; we proposed doing this but only with publisher as partner and user opt-in. Brave Rewards are opt-in and put ads in the user's inventory, not the publisher's. Gerard lies about us "hijacking links", which I'm sure he knows has a well-defined meaning: changing the URL of a link the user clicks on in a page. We've never done any such thing, either. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25841456 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25841456 If you want to believe we did these things, you're believing misinformation. If you can't verify these claims are false, I can help; many neutral third parties can help too. But it seems to me you want to believe such misinformation. Why?
      - bsaul 6y ago
        That's exactly why i think knowing that a famous and respectable person (in the sense that he already accomplished great things) is behind the project is important. When someone creates a browser around token and adtech, and offers to be a gateway between content and ad money, it better has a serious reputation of integrity for me to even start digging into the technical details and see what it's really all about. Until now, the whole project looked scammy because i only paid a cursory glance at it, because i didn't know who was behind it. Now that i've watched the podcast and understand the whole reasoning behind it actually makes a lot of sense.
    - paulryanrogers 6y ago

BrendanEich 6y ago

I would not want anyone using Brave because they blindly trust me. On the other hand, you libeling Brave without any evidence (to avoid rehashing, onlookers should see https://twitter.com/BrendanEich/status/1360780527100338177 https://twitter.com/BrendanEich/status/1360780527100338177 and do their own research) reflects poorly only on you.

tomComb 6y ago
The person I was responding to had already read about the issues - I was confirming their existing impression and, more important, addressing the fact that they were putting them aside for a reason i didn't agree with. The fact that you would attack me without understanding the thread (and use it as an opportunity to divert people to your Twitter) reflects badly on you.
- BrendanEich 6y ago
  I don't see anything above justifying your "scammy" word, which is libelous thrown without back-up and therefore does reflect badly on you. But please, go on: justify it. I'll help by citing the dictionary definition of "scam": Noun: a dishonest scheme; a fraud. "fraud": "wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain." Also, as the tweet I linked above said, we didn't profit from either the fast-fixed error of showing unverified creators as being tipable with our token grants to users (we don't make money recirculating our own grants) or the refgate case (we turned off that future-share-of-trading-commission affiliate revenue with Binance). Hanlon's razor explains these blunders without jumping to scam or fraud, which is a crime we have to fight on the Brave Ads front, so I take it seriously. Should someone not use Brave on account of these two mistakes? Not for me to say; no browser is perfect. But they were not scams or frauds, and we fixed code and design processes to avoid anything like them in the future.
  - tomComb 6y ago
    Please don't pretend you don't know what I'm talking about or that the idea that Brave is 'scammy' is anything new - Brave is very controversial and its ethical lapses have been discussed extensively including here on HN. You went thru various dubious business models before you even got to your current incarnation. But the most current of your controversies is covered here: https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2020/06/06/the-brave-web-browser-is-hijacking-links-and-inserting-affiliate-codes/ https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2020/06/06/the-brave-we... And discussed here on HN https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23442027 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23442027 That alone is enough for me to call Brave 'scammy'.
    - BrendanEich 6y ago
      We never injected ads in publisher pages; we proposed doing this but only with publisher as partner and user opt-in. Brave Rewards are opt-in and put ads in the user's inventory, not the publisher's. Gerard lies about us "hijacking links", which I'm sure he knows has a well-defined meaning: changing the URL of a link the user clicks on in a page. We've never done any such thing, either. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25841456 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25841456 If you want to believe we did these things, you're believing misinformation. If you can't verify these claims are false, I can help; many neutral third parties can help too. But it seems to me you want to believe such misinformation. Why?
    - bsaul 6y ago
      That's exactly why i think knowing that a famous and respectable person (in the sense that he already accomplished great things) is behind the project is important. When someone creates a browser around token and adtech, and offers to be a gateway between content and ad money, it better has a serious reputation of integrity for me to even start digging into the technical details and see what it's really all about. Until now, the whole project looked scammy because i only paid a cursory glance at it, because i didn't know who was behind it. Now that i've watched the podcast and understand the whole reasoning behind it actually makes a lot of sense.
  - paulryanrogers 6y ago