3 ms·

I think you demonstrated in your own post why this is such a big deal. Extensions can certainly deliver this type of functionality in large part, but you have

I think you demonstrated in your own post why this is such a big deal. Extensions can certainly deliver this type of functionality in large part, but you have to [run an extension]. You need to ran an extension process (with its additional overhead). You need to make sure Google doesn't swoop-in with breaking changes between manifest versions. Then you have to make sure the extension is permitted in the Web Store, and not removed over something as silly as a detailed description. By delivering this functionality natively, Brave offers a more reliable and efficient solution to the problem of AMP.

richardwhiuk 4y ago
You have to run Brave, which is a considerable overhead.
- jonathansampson 4y ago
  Running a browser is better than running a browser in addition to several extensions for functionality that could be integrated natively, resulting in less overhead. But yes, you will need to use a browser to browse the Web
  - smoldesu 4y ago
    I don't trust Brave's implementation in the first place. You have a direct conflict of interest with protecting user privacy since you also make money off of the ads you serve users (because of how you skim BAT revenue). Furthermore, your scummy behavior of holding site operators ad revenue hostage is pretty disgusting, and doesn't provide much of a moral compass for us to base your actions off of. I'd trust stock Chromium before I'd install Brave on any of my machines.
    - jonathansampson 4y ago
      Brave's Ads are optional (off-by default in the case of Ad Notifications), and matched-on device (so no user data leaves the machine). There is no conflict of interest here; Brave doesn't harvest user data. The Brave Rewards/Ads model is centered around _attention_, not data. Regards to the "holding site operators and ad revenue hostage," I'm not sure to what you're referring. Perhaps the UI/UX of Brave Rewards ("Payments" at the time) in late 2018? If so, see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31086397 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31086397 what, I hope, will be a helpful answer.
KennyBlanken 4y ago
Or...and bear with me here...I just don't run Chrome. I don't run Firefox, but a derivative. On rare occasion an extension I use has been removed from the store over "silly" reasons (this has happened once, maybe twice in over half a decade) I've been able to re-install it from the author's site. > By delivering this functionality natively, Brave offers a more reliable and efficient solution to the problem of AMP. Just because it avoids a separate process doesn't mean it is more reliable or efficient. Further, you offer a subset of the functionality of the URL-cleaning extension I do use, so it's moot. I don't care if your browser ever becomes a superior product for me. I can't stand the community, who are easily the most aggressive and zealot-y bunch of any open source project I can think of. The comments section of any HN article about Brave becomes a shit-show as Brave users with the emotional maturity of teenagers dogpiling on shouting about how Brandon was the victim of a conspiracy by 'The SJWs', Firefox is "spyware", we're all stupid sheeple for not using Brave, etc. And then at least one person from Brave shows up and starts condescendingly responding to every comment that isn't supportive of Brave. There's the history of crypto-bro-y nonsense. The donation-scamming where creators had to "opt out" of Brave pretending to collect donations "for them." And so on. I also don't want to support a company run by a person who has spent vast amounts of his money supporting some of the most bigoted politicians in our nation's modern history and to causes working to strip people of human rights. I don't want to support him, and I don't want to support people for whom his political activities are not an issue.

richardwhiuk 4y ago

You have to run Brave, which is a considerable overhead.

jonathansampson 4y ago
Running a browser is better than running a browser in addition to several extensions for functionality that could be integrated natively, resulting in less overhead. But yes, you will need to use a browser to browse the Web
- smoldesu 4y ago
  I don't trust Brave's implementation in the first place. You have a direct conflict of interest with protecting user privacy since you also make money off of the ads you serve users (because of how you skim BAT revenue). Furthermore, your scummy behavior of holding site operators ad revenue hostage is pretty disgusting, and doesn't provide much of a moral compass for us to base your actions off of. I'd trust stock Chromium before I'd install Brave on any of my machines.
  - jonathansampson 4y ago
    Brave's Ads are optional (off-by default in the case of Ad Notifications), and matched-on device (so no user data leaves the machine). There is no conflict of interest here; Brave doesn't harvest user data. The Brave Rewards/Ads model is centered around _attention_, not data. Regards to the "holding site operators and ad revenue hostage," I'm not sure to what you're referring. Perhaps the UI/UX of Brave Rewards ("Payments" at the time) in late 2018? If so, see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31086397 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31086397 what, I hope, will be a helpful answer.

KennyBlanken 4y ago

Or...and bear with me here...I just don't run Chrome. I don't run Firefox, but a derivative. On rare occasion an extension I use has been removed from the store over "silly" reasons (this has happened once, maybe twice in over half a decade) I've been able to re-install it from the author's site. > By delivering this functionality natively, Brave offers a more reliable and efficient solution to the problem of AMP. Just because it avoids a separate process doesn't mean it is more reliable or efficient. Further, you offer a subset of the functionality of the URL-cleaning extension I do use, so it's moot. I don't care if your browser ever becomes a superior product for me. I can't stand the community, who are easily the most aggressive and zealot-y bunch of any open source project I can think of. The comments section of any HN article about Brave becomes a shit-show as Brave users with the emotional maturity of teenagers dogpiling on shouting about how Brandon was the victim of a conspiracy by 'The SJWs', Firefox is "spyware", we're all stupid sheeple for not using Brave, etc. And then at least one person from Brave shows up and starts condescendingly responding to every comment that isn't supportive of Brave. There's the history of crypto-bro-y nonsense. The donation-scamming where creators had to "opt out" of Brave pretending to collect donations "for them." And so on. I also don't want to support a company run by a person who has spent vast amounts of his money supporting some of the most bigoted politicians in our nation's modern history and to causes working to strip people of human rights. I don't want to support him, and I don't want to support people for whom his political activities are not an issue.