/tech/ - Technology★

Vivaldi is a far better alternative to Brave. That isn't an endorsement though, I dislike the Chromium-botnet.

this level of kikery is something not even jewgle or pozilla does

this also seems like a pretty massive lawsuit

A very.... brave move

>>1011209 (OP)

Is HN worse than reddit, or is it just the same crowd?

Any alternative to Brave other than Palemoon and GNUIcecat? I started using Brave to check what it was like, and it looks like a re-skinned Chrome, hell, they even got rid of the old addons they had and when you click to configure them it now sends you to Google's extension website.

>criminal impersonation

based

>against malaria foundation

They might as well call it "the we love niggers foundation".

some goy on twitter has a valid point

>There's barely a hair's-breadth of difference between that and, say, scraping somebody's name and info off Twitter or Facebook and using it to set up a fake GoFundMe using their name - and people *are* getting prosecuted for fraud for that. +

https://twitter.com/ummjackson/status/1076221401353207808

OYVEY

https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/basic-attention-token/

Does anyone even use Brave?

>>1011222

they have no way to win here

the right wing definitely isn't buying into this, and the soy enthusiasts aren't supporting it either.

brave jew trying to badly damage control while confirming unclaimed funds are part of their plan

>We do not keep it for ourselves; we put it back in the (((user growth pool))) that funds user grants & creator referral awards. Tom has a point, we should let creators say "no thanks" and be auto-excluded. Users may already auto-exclude unverified sites/channels. We will work on this.

<this will remain an opt-out, brave will keep collecting in your name to fill their coffers

https://twitter.com/BrendanEich/status/1076187316748615680

>>1011231

more damage control in twitter replies

>I realize some don’t like it, agree we should respect their wishes. But the ability to paypal or western union or otherwise send to people without their consent exists and is not illegal or unethical. Nominative fair use of public data also legal.

>We do not “keep it”, our terms allow grants we provide to be recycled (but we have not done this ever). User funds we hold indefinitely. Anonymity means no refunds. Users like this system because it helps them convince creators via tokens held, not promises that may not fulfill.

<We do not “keep it”, our terms allow grants we provide

it's not a donation from your viewers goy, it's a "grant" we graciously provide to you which is funded by OUR users you should be happy.

<NO REFUNDS

<(((Users))) like this system

everyone who doesn't is a bot

>That is for tokens we grant to users --- they come from the growth pool and our terms allow us to put them back after 3 months. We have never done so, and we are looking at changing terms to lengthen the period. For tokens useds buy, no such term. No recycling.

<if you don't give the coins you mine by watching our advertisements back to us we'll take them back anyway after 3 months

>Our terms are clear, so if you do not like the opt-in system we’ve built to onboard creators from users’ anonymous contributions, then don’t use it. We took inspiration from http://tiptheweb.org in particular, and we have over 413K funded wallets and 30K paid creators.

<If you don't like it goy, don't claim your money! We'll be happy to relieve you of it!

I had no idea brave was this kiked.

https://twitter.com/BrendanEich/status/1076187316748615680

><NO REFUNDS

hard to give refunds to anonymous

>>1011234

>anonymous

it's only anonymous because brave users apparantly never own their own coins.

blockchain is not anonymous, brave had to take extra steps to centralize the system into something they control to control the users coins and prevent refunds.

>>1011235

>it's only anonymous because brave users apparantly never own their own coins.

wrong. brave browser gives you grants. those you don't own. you also can buy their crypto currency yourself. those you do own.

stop spouting FUD

BASED BROWSER EVERYONE!!!

I hate Tom Scott.

>>1011236

convenient that they don't give you coins for watching ads, they only give you fiat coupons for their coin which have expiration dates and can only be used in their own donation store, after expiration they take them back and further profit.

>>1011239

based

>>1011240

ok. i don't disagree but what does that have to do with this thread?

>>1011243

>oyvey, brave being a scam isn't related to brave being a scam

SHUT IT DOWN

the only positive of this is the typical goyim who would be fooled by this kikery isn't going to be using brave in the first place. coin fans and those who are privacy focused will see right past this and see it like it truly is, pure kikery.

>>1011220

Icecat is the final boss of browsers

>>1011244

stop sperging

>>1011247

>>1011243

>>1011236

>i have no arguments but i must shill for brave

>>1011248

>i have no arguments

you were spouting FUD, i proved you wrong. you're the one not having any arguments

>shilling for brave

<shit, i have no arguments. i know i'll spread FUD

amazing

>>1011250

>downvoting with stage

>still not having any arguments

>"i already won the argument" we need to stop talking about this, and that's a good thing

how much brave scamcoin do you own? you might want to sell it

>>1011251

>FUD

lol. keep it up, kiddo.

>>1011249

>this isn't donation fraud because our fiat coin coupons aren't donations and have no value until they are redeemed by the creator for value

this is actually a decent argument which i'm sure will be their defense when they eventually get sued

it's not going to stop the bad PR though.

>Brave is not keeping profiles on any content creators

<we're just assembling profiles on content creators from public domain data along with a donation amount

i don't think this will fly with the GDPR and brave is not too big for the GDPR jews to try to extort for money.

>>1011252

i'm honored /tech/ is considered large enough to have a paid shill from brave here.

>>1011255

>>1011249

and what about the BAT stupid lemmings purchase in order to donate to websites? this is no longer coupon fiat that has no value.

i would also love someone to explain why they do not clearly state in the donation advertisement they use that the content creator has not setup a profile for collection yet

because if they do and the creator hasn't nobody will donate

there's clearly a financial incentive for them to keep this information hidden.

>>1011255

>GDPR

Brandon Eich is claiming that they don't store any personal info. They only store the Youtube channel id. But AFAIK that would also count as personally identifiable data under GDPR.

>>1011256

why are you so mad? if being wrong enrages you that much maybe you should think before posting your ment diarrhea

>>1011209 (OP)

Based, downloading Brave right now.

>>1011260

forgot to unsage XDDD

>>1011264

based

>>1011259

shill harder brave jew

>>1011270

based

>>1011271

based^2

Just shut up and use Brave goyim, it's totally the bestest browser!

This is literally exactly the sort of thing Brave promised to do right from the start you fucking spergs. Brave keeps you out of the jewgle ad system, which means content creators don't get ad shekels out of Brave users, so people who still want to support content creators have the option to donate monopoly money which Brave forwards to the content creators so they can try to convert it to real money. And if the content creators don't claim the monopoly money then it gets distributed to the users, monopoly money distribution to users being yet another thing Brave promised right from the very start. Literally what even is the issue here? I don't even use Brave but holy fuck you retards here about money changing hands and instantly turn into Bolsheviks just calm the fuck down.

>>1011289

ikr? Fucking goyims learning that they got scammed and getting all surprised. It was all explained to them, their own fault for not paying attention.

oy vey all this prosecution brings flashbacks of the shoah!

>>1011289

>Brave keeps you out of the jewgle ad system

ublock keeps me out of the jewgle ad system and doesn't insert ads which make brave money instead

>so people who still want to support content creators have the option to donate monopoly money which Brave forwards to the content creators

which brave makes money on. content providers that care have other means to give them money where the middle man doesn't take such a significant cut

>Literally what even is the issue here?

shut it down

>I don't even use Brave

not even brave shills use brave because of how shit it is

>>1011259

They're not stealing the money if the creator doesn't grab it. For a creator, why wouldn't you take the money? Tom scott could just donate the money to the malaria foundation directly. The "financial incentive" is that they want their platform to succeed.

>>1011296

Exactly? So what if the goyim had no idea some kike browser was taking donation in his name? Goyim's own fault for not paying attention. Brave is just doing what normal (((businesses))) do and collecting money by pretending to be someone else is totally normal and legal.

>>1011299

They're not taking the money for themselves though. And they message the creator after $100. I don't know if you think it would be more helpful to inform someone they have 10 cents sitting in an account waiting for them to collect.

>>1011295

>and doesn't insert ads

Brave allows you to block ads entirely without even installing an add on. It's build in to the browser. You can either have them disabled, have them replaced with Brave ads, or just have it display the actual ads.

>>1011299

>by pretending to be someone

Brave isn't pretending to be someone.

>>1011300

Yep. They're merely collecting money impersonating as some other individual asking for donations. They also just keep the money if uncollected. Or if it's under 1$100.

Fucking goyim creating drama over nothing really.

>>1011302

Yeah they just have a donate button next to someone else's profile, totally legit.

>>1011296

brave is redirecting donations that would have been made using the creators chosen method to take donations to their service instead, their UI is designed to confuse users into thinking the content creator wants them to donate using this method.

>>1011300

>They're not taking the money for themselves though

they are, if they don't claim within 90 days brave takes their scamcoin back. this isn't just their coupons generated from ad viewing it's scamcoin that users actually purchased as well.

>>1011304

this

the scamcoin they're using is obfuscating the situation to make it look better than it is.

this is no different than if chromium put a donation button on every single twitter and facebook page (things not affiliated with google at all), and took a 90% cut on donations.

they are profiting off of other people's work.

Brave isn't stealing that many donations judging from the quality of shills they employ.

>>1011255

>GDPR

Who is retarded enough to operate in the EU?

>they aren't taking the scamcoin it's going back into a general fund and redistributed to users viewing ads

<as an incentive to gain users

they also subsidize this with their own money. they are taking the donation money and using it for advertising.

>>1011308

brave

https://www.zdnet.com/article/brave-browser-files-gdpr-breach-complaints-against-google-in-the-eu/

>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18734999

"

imustbeevil 4 hours ago [-]

To anyone who has mistakenly "donated" to someone through this service, here's a link to the FTC complaint assistant for reporting fraud, namely "Pretending to be a representative or employee of a business". You don't have to be a lawyer to let the FTC decide whether this is misleading marketing or not.

I honestly like the BAT idea. This is not the way to implement it, and based on the responses from Eich on twitter, and the representative in this thread, it seems like they aren't going to willingly change their scheme.

https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/

"

oy

>>1011306

>and took a 90% cut on donations

Brave is taking a 0% cut on donations though. That's not comparable. It'd be more like if tho donation was deposited directly into your Adwords account. So instead of the money coming from the advertiser to you, it's just coming from the user.

>>1011307

I've never once used Brave before nor have I ever recommend anyone ever use it, so how can I be shilling for it.

>>1011311

>Pretending to be a representative or employee of a business

That's not what is happening though. Who is pretending to be an employee of what business? Is he suggesting that Tom Scott should be reported for pretending to work for Brave? I don't get it.

>>1011313

>Brave is taking a 0% cut on donations though.

https://brave.com/faq-rewards/#brave-fee

<"Why does Brave take 5% of my publisher contributions, isn’t this high compared to credit card fees which are typically 2.5%?

>Credit card interchange fees may appear to total only a bit more than 2%, but due to chargebacks over fraud, merchants pay a heavy hidden fee. Also, our fee has to cover infrastructure costs which provide an always free Brave browser as well as the Brave Rewards system for publisher support. It is our intention to minimize those fees as we grow and realize economies of scale.

it's 5% now i'm sure they will adjust it for maximum profit

>Who is pretending to be an employee of what business?

brave is pretending to be a representative of tom scott in a capacity to take donations on his behalf.

who knows how that's going to fly but like the poster said it's up for the FTC to decide how to look at it. they keep on this track there's going to be legal problems and the lawyer jews are going to smell money from a juicy lawsuit, there will be no stopping it.

>Also: your responses here, and Brendan Eich's on Twitter, seem to assume you are somewhere in the general brand feel of the EFF or Firefox. That this is a big misunderstanding of a clearly well-intentioned feature from familiar volunteers to the public interest.

>You're nowhere near them. You're in the same mental headspace as ICO scams because you're also promising that if we give your cryptocurrency a bit of money the riches will rain down for everyone. You need to radically change your rhetorical approaches to this PR disaster (not to mention this "feature") if you hope to start building trust.

Fucking burn

another interesting comment

>Is this de-platform proof? eg, if <insert-controversial-site-or-person> - and they got lots of complaints for triggering <whatever-major-taboo-thing> - can the payments to gab,storm,badguy,badgirl,camgirl etc get stopped from brave or get brave stopped from taking payments all together from higher up the chain or whatever?

this will end up happening too.

>>1011314

>brave is pretending to be a representative of tom scott in a capacity to take donations on his behalf.

Tom Scott is not a business though. That is a person. Additionally they aren't really donations to him. All the tips and stuff stays in the Brave ecosystem until someone like Tom Scott wants to withdraw it. If you had a website in which you voted on your favorite content creator, people voting wouldn't be donating to them. Brave's system is similar to this.

>>1011322

https://twitter.com/ummjackson/status/1076221401353207808

>Says send a tip right there

>Made to look like the person is asking for money when it's just (((Brave)))

>It's just voting goyim, nothing to see here no deception

You're the worst shill I've seen, get the fuck out and tell brave to hire a better company

>>1011322

>Tom Scott is not a business though. That is a person.

doesn't matter, and in this case tom scott is making money on his shit already he's acting in a business capacity

> Additionally they aren't really donations to him. All the tips and stuff stays in the Brave ecosystem

this is the spamcoin obfuscation that intentionally confuses the issue instead of simply taking credit card payments. BAT is exchange traded though, it will be seen as having value and not just as being brave internal worthless fiat that has no value until redemption. there's also no difference between the bat grant that users receive for free and bat that users have bought once it has been "donated" to a publisher, brave will take it after 90 days if it's unclaimed either way, i think the argument that BAT is completely internal and worthless until redemption isn't going to fly.

imagine if amazon took donations for content creators in this way, on all kindle devices they inserted a donation button on everyones social media page without consent. creators could withdraw if they signed up into the ecosystem and get actual cash, but users had to buy amazon gift cards to donate, and amazon gave free gift card money every once in a while for watching ads; i don't think this is any different.

>>1011327

not to mention i think there would be serious legal consequences if the content creator had an advertisement on his page asking for donations, which brave detected as an ad; and blocked, replacing it with it's own donation system which it profits on.

>>1011329

The comments seem to suggest Brave does do that, blocking Patreon (links? ads?) and only showing their own.

>>1011330

i don't know anymore thinking about it.

imagine if ublock instead of blocking ads served their own "ethical" ads in place of the ads that it blocked, and these "ethical" ads went straight to ublock's wallet instead of the websites.

the websites would kvetch hard, but the user consented to everything.

the sketchiness here is with their UI giving the impression that the site owner themselves supports this.

>>1011229

Yes.

>>1011333

>imagine if ublock instead of blocking ads served their own "ethical" ads in place of the ads that it blocked, and these "ethical" ads went straight to ublock's wallet instead of the websites.

Not illegal. There are many addons that already do this. Some even inject more ads than already exist.

>>1011334

Who? Like 5 people? Nobody in the real world uses it. Who gives a shit about a browser with 0% market share?

so much so for all "that" hype at the time of launch~~~ fuckin ignorant WANNABES.

>>1011299

I'm all for railing against the kikes but the grammar is wrong. Goyim is plural not singular; it means cattle. Goy is the singular version.

Polite sage.

>>1011532

Literally a grammar nazi

>>1011532

only a kike would know this tbh

>>1011229

It's been heavily shilled, there are always people dumb enough to take the bait.

>>1012047

sage negated

>>1011209 (OP)

Based Tom

>>1011326

>Made to look like the person is asking for money

That's just you being low IQ pajeet.

>>1011245

Do you actually use the preinstalled addons or do you remove them?

>>1012100

Better, but not by much.

Why can't they find a decent company to shill.

>using brave

what did we tell you