4 ms·

Brave is even better since the ad engine is actually built in (lower level) and written in Rust if memory serves me well. And before anyone says anything about

by cromka 1mo ago

Brave is even better since the ad engine is actually built in (lower level) and written in Rust if memory serves me well. And before anyone says anything about crypto: pay a small fee for Brave Origin or use it for free on Linux.

bigyabai 1mo ago
> pay a small fee for Brave Origin "Hey, we recognize that normal Brave is exploitative and user-hostile by default. We'll fix it if you pay us $59.99 in mutual acknowledgement that you're a chump who can't install UBO." I'm glad (and unsurprised) that Brave's vision for the web never hit the big leagues.
- PKop 1mo ago
  It's not their "vision for the web" it's just an attempt at funding development of the browser given they aren't an ad-network behemoth like Google. Like Kagi charging for their search engine, a company charging money directly for the product is a good idea all things considered. How do you expect them to pay their developers?
  - bigyabai 1mo ago
    > How do you expect them to pay their developers? Ethically, for one. I'll be fucked if you expect me to "donate" to a browser that thinks my friends and family deserve a lower-quality browser experience.
    - PKop 1mo ago
      They crypto payments for ads mechanism isn't enabled by default. Charging money directly is a way to avoid all of this so should be supported by people seeking "ethical" ways to fund development. What is lower quality about Brave's experience? Their built in ad blocker is great, certainly not low quality. Google pays Mozilla something like $400 million a year. So what browser do you use that you claim is ethical, and what exactly is the ethical method to fund development which you haven't actually defined? Origin, like Kagi, seems the best way to do it imo.
  - zem 1mo ago
    I don't use brave, and I'm mostly going by this comment thread, but if the free brave is user hostile by default in an attempt to steer people over to the paid brave, that's a very legitimate thing to complain about. you can't compare it to kagi.
    - cromka 1mo ago
      No one is steering towards paid version. Every for profit feature can be disabled in free version. Whoever said hostile absolutely abused that phrase to make their point. And be the judge of it yourself: try it.
- cromka 1mo ago
  Right, so when exactly paying a LICENSE for SOFTWARE had become EXPLOITATIVE?
  - bigyabai 1mo ago
    [dead]
- bethekidyouwant 1mo ago
  How is it hostile? Serving you an ad when you don’t have a tab open? Literally open a tab my guy it’s free
  - _--__--__ 1mo ago
    Many opponents of Brave online are thoroughly convinced that Brave Rewards (which gives you their Ethereum coin in exchange for showing ads as OS notification) is on by default, when it isn't. They also claim that this replaces blocked ads on webpages (this may have been true very early, I didn't use Brave back then).
- cute_boi 1mo ago
  Maintaining browser takes a lot of effort. And, fighting with google implementation takes it to whole new level. $60 is very reasonable amount as it is a lifetime license.
  - bigyabai 1mo ago
    I don't trust Brave to fight the good fight against Google. Brave wants to sell their own ads and push Web3 slop, making them an ethical tarpit with questionable motivations.
    - cromka 1mo ago
      Web3 slop? WTF?!
    - PKop 1mo ago
      Web3 was used simply as a way to get money for development that gave some control to users about which ads they would see and isn't enabled by default. Origin avoids all of this and charges the user directly for the product, like Kagi seems like great motivation in my mind what issues do you have with it? Who do you trust to fight the good fight against Google? Mozilla, who get $400 million per year from Google? Makes no sense. Brave has a great built in ad blocker that is configurable with lists and works great. What's the problem?
      - cute_boi 1mo ago
        i think kagi isn't open source, we should stay away from closed source software as much as possible.
        PKop 1mo ago
        Oh I don't care about that, I want a well functioning search engine that doesn't have ads and Kagi is that and it works well. You can pay for it with Bitcoin which is nice. Which search engine do you use instead?
grrben 1mo ago
$60 ain't exactly teensy.
- cromka 1mo ago
  It's a lifetime license.
  - grrben 1mo ago
    Yes.
    - cromka 1mo ago
      60 USD for a lifetime license for software is a lot in 2026? For a browser that's arguably the fastest, most lightweight, privacy oriented and with best AdBlock available?
      - catlikesshrimp 1mo ago
        This is arguably a sales pitch
        deleted 1mo ago
        [deleted]
        cromka 1mo ago
        How so?
  - stubish 1mo ago
    'lifetime' The last lifetime license I bought expired when the developer was bought, stopped releasing updates, and the software stopped working the next major OS upgrade. It is on a clock, and you don't know when it runs out so you can't value it.
gilrain 1mo ago
Thanks! I had no idea they added a paid option. This is a brilliant browser for iOS/Linux usage, and now its UI is minimal, and its settings are filled only with stuff for my benefit. It feels like the early 2000s again! This should be much more ballyhooed.

by cromka 1mo ago

bigyabai 1mo ago

> pay a small fee for Brave Origin "Hey, we recognize that normal Brave is exploitative and user-hostile by default. We'll fix it if you pay us $59.99 in mutual acknowledgement that you're a chump who can't install UBO." I'm glad (and unsurprised) that Brave's vision for the web never hit the big leagues.

PKop 1mo ago
It's not their "vision for the web" it's just an attempt at funding development of the browser given they aren't an ad-network behemoth like Google. Like Kagi charging for their search engine, a company charging money directly for the product is a good idea all things considered. How do you expect them to pay their developers?
- bigyabai 1mo ago
  > How do you expect them to pay their developers? Ethically, for one. I'll be fucked if you expect me to "donate" to a browser that thinks my friends and family deserve a lower-quality browser experience.
  - PKop 1mo ago
    They crypto payments for ads mechanism isn't enabled by default. Charging money directly is a way to avoid all of this so should be supported by people seeking "ethical" ways to fund development. What is lower quality about Brave's experience? Their built in ad blocker is great, certainly not low quality. Google pays Mozilla something like $400 million a year. So what browser do you use that you claim is ethical, and what exactly is the ethical method to fund development which you haven't actually defined? Origin, like Kagi, seems the best way to do it imo.
- zem 1mo ago
  I don't use brave, and I'm mostly going by this comment thread, but if the free brave is user hostile by default in an attempt to steer people over to the paid brave, that's a very legitimate thing to complain about. you can't compare it to kagi.
  - cromka 1mo ago
    No one is steering towards paid version. Every for profit feature can be disabled in free version. Whoever said hostile absolutely abused that phrase to make their point. And be the judge of it yourself: try it.
cromka 1mo ago
Right, so when exactly paying a LICENSE for SOFTWARE had become EXPLOITATIVE?
- bigyabai 1mo ago
  [dead]
bethekidyouwant 1mo ago
How is it hostile? Serving you an ad when you don’t have a tab open? Literally open a tab my guy it’s free
- _--__--__ 1mo ago
  Many opponents of Brave online are thoroughly convinced that Brave Rewards (which gives you their Ethereum coin in exchange for showing ads as OS notification) is on by default, when it isn't. They also claim that this replaces blocked ads on webpages (this may have been true very early, I didn't use Brave back then).
cute_boi 1mo ago
Maintaining browser takes a lot of effort. And, fighting with google implementation takes it to whole new level. $60 is very reasonable amount as it is a lifetime license.
- bigyabai 1mo ago
  I don't trust Brave to fight the good fight against Google. Brave wants to sell their own ads and push Web3 slop, making them an ethical tarpit with questionable motivations.
  - cromka 1mo ago
    Web3 slop? WTF?!
  - PKop 1mo ago
    Web3 was used simply as a way to get money for development that gave some control to users about which ads they would see and isn't enabled by default. Origin avoids all of this and charges the user directly for the product, like Kagi seems like great motivation in my mind what issues do you have with it? Who do you trust to fight the good fight against Google? Mozilla, who get $400 million per year from Google? Makes no sense. Brave has a great built in ad blocker that is configurable with lists and works great. What's the problem?
    - cute_boi 1mo ago
      i think kagi isn't open source, we should stay away from closed source software as much as possible.
      - PKop 1mo ago
        Oh I don't care about that, I want a well functioning search engine that doesn't have ads and Kagi is that and it works well. You can pay for it with Bitcoin which is nice. Which search engine do you use instead?

grrben 1mo ago

$60 ain't exactly teensy.

cromka 1mo ago
It's a lifetime license.
- grrben 1mo ago
  Yes.
  - cromka 1mo ago
    60 USD for a lifetime license for software is a lot in 2026? For a browser that's arguably the fastest, most lightweight, privacy oriented and with best AdBlock available?
    - catlikesshrimp 1mo ago
      This is arguably a sales pitch
      - deleted 1mo ago
        [deleted]
      - cromka 1mo ago
        How so?
- stubish 1mo ago
  'lifetime' The last lifetime license I bought expired when the developer was bought, stopped releasing updates, and the software stopped working the next major OS upgrade. It is on a clock, and you don't know when it runs out so you can't value it.

gilrain 1mo ago

Thanks! I had no idea they added a paid option. This is a brilliant browser for iOS/Linux usage, and now its UI is minimal, and its settings are filled only with stuff for my benefit. It feels like the early 2000s again! This should be much more ballyhooed.