BrendanEich

11 ms·

91.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
Not so. The Chromium bits have the native tracking goo we neutralize, see https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/wiki/Deviations-from-... .
92.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
We didn't hide "adware", probably you are thinking of this: https://brave.com/blog/referral-codes-in-suggested-sites/ We made $0 off it, it was a blunder, we fixed it right away. But if you mean som
93.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
I mentioned Adsense for Search (AFS) and toolbars, but it seems Google now limits AFS to websites with search boxes. In pre-Chrome era, it let many toolbars for IE (7 or even 8, they both sucked) monetize this way. This toolbar support went
94.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
Yes, you are missing how browsers without search engines could do fair and non-discriminatory pay for traffic deals with Google in a remedy that follows the spirit and letter of Sherman-Clayton and Robinson-Patman. Again, the document does
95.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
I won't attack Mitchell, with whom I worked closely from 1999-2014. The issue is who in general gets credit for tech. Often it is not the key engineer but the front person. I'll stop here.
96.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
Spellcorrekt got me: "Omnibox".
97.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
> the DOJ order is also asking to ban payments between search engines and browser makers The remedy document does not ask this. What you cite after "> As detailed in..." does not ban any and all payments from a search engine
98.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
Ignorance is bliss, I'm here to bring enlightenment: https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/wiki/Deviations-from-... https://brave.com/privacy-updates
99.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
Brave Search Premium launched before we showed any search ads: https://x.com/brave/status/1466510541128548362
100.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
On why no extant 1995 language and why no bytecode: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1905155 https://kripken.github.io/talks/2020/universal.html#/ (from Alon Zakai in 2020)
101.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
Also, it did start life as an acronym, and that spelling perdures in the hated "ECMAScript" name.
102.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
From the day WebAssembly was announced: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9732827 The Web is an evolving system too large and long-lived for any single company, stable consortium, or standards body capable of doing the d
103.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
Apple has WebKit, which Chromium forked as Blink in 2013. Apple and Google do not share code post-fork, and Apple denies Google ~30% of the browser market, so using "mono-" is wrong. Google has a search monopoly, but not quite a b
104.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
This isn't ads-related, our private ads that pay users >= what we get are opt-in. This is about finding out what's working vs. not in the toolbar, sidebar, and other prime user interface surface area of Brave. If you don't
105.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
Outgrowth of STAR and STAR++, sorry. Can prefix "Brave" or otherwise limit context. All the good names are taken!
106.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
I did not want Java-syntax, that was an order from management (Sun as well as Netscape; Bill Joy for Sun). Java applets could not interact with HTML at all, just render within a rectangle. They were in the plugin prison, where Flash shanked
107.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
We don't log anything. Chrome does, but Google doesn't sell it to advertisers, Google hoards the data for its own business interests, at best renting API ad matching access to slices of your data.
108.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
That's always been opt-in (off by default), but suit yourself. Just be careful not to leave a false impression that it's opt-out (on by default). People still smear us with this canard.
109.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
Or you could help us take down Google's abused-monopoly business now, instead of dying on the "make a new engine work with the Web as it is" hill. Choose wisely, you may not get to that new-webcompat-enough-engine hill in any
110.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
No affiliates, where'd you hear that? Beware disgraced Wikipedia editors bearing false witness. As for update pings, all browsers automate this to avoid the plague that was IE, layered like sediment from IE6 on across the chart of brow
111.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
If no Java big brother language mandate, then only nil: https://x.com/BrendanEich/status/1672314927401549824
112.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
Please see https://x.com/BrendanEich/status/1273250867823538176 and the quoted thread in that post.
113.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
(Loved you in "Galaxy Quest"!) Whatever you think of us, no lawsuit like this one, or data collector (Pocket, I think Anonym) acquisitions, or me taking > $25M out over eight straight years of declining market share. When we er
114.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
(McKinsey -- but bad under any name!)
115.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
Mozilla Corporation creation had nothing to do with Firefox OS or ambitions beyond Mozilla as a browser company -- it was forced on us by the IRS, after they'd promised we could take sponsorship revenue from Google for the search deal,
116.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
So everyone can see that you are neither accurate nor entertaining -- thanks for confirming!
117.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
I never called you an asshole, I quipped that your handle's surname suits you. Accuracy matters, especially given that you are the source of the ass* name. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11232460
118.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
I never agreed to apologize, so never reneged. Don't believe everything you read, especially this "secret plan" that would have violated CA Labor Law. The board was not going to do that.
119.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
Google's not removing the internals for webRequest, as far as we can tell they have internal and "enterprise" needs.
120.
by BrendanEich 2y ago
Thanks for this, I misread your comment. Sorry about that. It's still tricky to believe a claim made by one person on the Internet, but in this case, I think one should look at who said it, when they said it, whether it's credible

More ›