/tech/ - Technology★

>>1042102 (OP)

>0.53$ have been deposited into your bank account

>being a paid shill

>telling everyone that you are a paid shill

jej

the joke is on you

No thanks, I have enough botnet in my processor.

https://spyware.neocities.org/articles/brave.html

>>1042102 (OP)

>monthly earnings 0.53$

Your mom will give you 10 times that if you do the dishes.

>>1042106

https://spyware.neocities.org/articles/http.html

Wow look, better fuck off back to gopher now nigger.

>>1042111

If you beat and rape your mom, she will give you $1,000!

i unironically switched to brave and have no regrets

>>1042143

He's right, you know

>Proprietary cuckware

>>1042173

it's open source

>>1042176

wtf since when

>>1042102 (OP)

What the fuck is a "BAT" and how do you claim these digital jew shekels?

>>1042176

>it's open source

It's "open source" spyware.

That's why I don't use this term. Free software is much better.

>>1042232

See:

>>1042211

Be a good little shill and pill me on this.

>>1042211

>>1042237

Actually i dont know how to claim these digital shekels. Hold on, how do i delete a thread? i dont want to spread gay shit that doesnt work.

>>1042239

Damnit, i dont have the password

DO NOT DOWNLOAD THIS SHIT, JUST FILTER THIS THREAD OR SOMETHING

I CANT CONFIRM IF THE PAYMENTS ARE LEGIT OR NOT

>>1042240

It doesn't seem to be 'fake'. It's just another crypto, and I assume you're going to be paid on the 5th of next month, but how? Did you set up a wallet? Is it built into the browser?

>>1042232

>Every other browser is inferior

20 mins later:

>>1042240

>DO NOT DOWNLOAD THIS SHIT

Get used to it. Tokenization is the latest craze. Crypto is not dead, just the speculators scurried off. The Dapps are coming,

>>1042241

Its an opt-in feature. I forget how exactly you set it up, but i do know you need the dev version of the browser, as the feature is still in development. I dont know how to convert the currency into real shekels either.

brave is malicious

https://spyware.neocities.org/articles/brave.html

https://digdeeper.neocities.org/news/2019-02-13-brave_trackers.html

>>1042258

see:

>>1042143

>>1042181

Since the beginning. How anyone thought this was proprietary is a mystery to me.

>>1042260

http article is shit

but brave is still malicious

Don't forget that Brave makes bullshit payments and donations in your name without your knowledge.

>>1042293

no it doesn't. you have full control over it.

So how does this work, I installed the beta build turned ads on and set it to 5 per hour, when do I get my tokens? What if I turn on ad blocking under brave shield defaults in settings? Will it still show the 5 per hour?

>>1042102 (OP)

>>1042232

>>1042239

You lose that 1$ in hardware and time requirements to render those ads. And BAT can't be sold or used so it's worthless. It literally exists for you to donate it to sites.

>>1042249

>>1042315

You can't convert it into money. Stop using this meme.

So what happened to this shit impersonating content creators and stealing donations?

>>1042310

I think he meant they accept donations in your name, and you never know.

See here: https://twitter.com/tomscott/status/1076160882873380870?lang=en

You have got to be a special kind of stupid to use something like brave that is literally adware it itself.

"But it's open source"

when will the shilling stop?

>the shilling never stops

When will you stop talking to yourself?

>stop talking to yourself

>>1042102 (OP)

if it has (TM) its probably bad for you

>>1042451

Thanks anon I told my doctor to fuck off with all those trademarked medicine

>>1042102 (OP)

> Earn money by contributing to our (yet another one of many) bait-and-switch

> Not FSF approved

Into the bin

>>1042102 (OP)

It's a fucking scam and not real money you fucking idiot. Might as well pretend dlive gives real money. You can't do shit with it.

>>1052722

It doesn't earn money. Stop bumping this shit.

>>1042454

inb4 the poisonous jew

You can actually get it payed out as far as I know but he's the kike who invented Javascript and is co-founder of Mozilla.

The one responsible for all your misery and the state of the web. He makes a lot more with this then you are with those small good goy shekels.

He's just making a profit off of you while you play work slave and do that for 50 cents like those Chinese comment writers for the CCP.

>>1052731

It does but you have to convert it to a cryptocoin first and then transfer it to your bank account.

After those transfers you will receive even less because exchange costs.

Most people like OP don't even have crypto so they can't get the payout.

IT'S NOT WORTH IT AND A KIKE IS A KIKE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDmlYn7oXZs

Here's Ahmed being happy about those 15$.

Idea: Design a website revenue model in a post-ad world.

>>1058634

Donations or paywalls. Can't we just drop the idea of having to earn money? I mean with the widespread automation, capitalism won't live for long anyway.

>>1058634

its only good if there is none. it means that highly centralized botnet shit like facebook could not exist. people would have to host their shit on their own servers if they want that someone sees it or just turn off their computers and go do something useful instead.

>>1042102 (OP)

unbased

>jej

fuck off faggot you dont deserve to use this word

>>1042105

OP BTFO

/thread

>>1042102 (OP)

Brave is spyware and send your data to their servers without your permission. They also used people identities without consoling or paying them.

>Using anything with Google's rendering engine

A total mistake. You may go on how open source it's all you want, it doesn't change the fact that you are contributing to Google's appropriation of the web. Use something based off Firefox's engine.

or even better, use a text-based browser and don't ever visit sites that don't work with them since they aren't even worth visiting.

>>1058634

There shouldn't be one to begin with. Websites should be p2p distributed and decentralized as much as possible, and that would kill any form of revenue model, so why even bother trying to come up with something that can't work.

>>1058699

why even use computers at all if youre going to limit yourself to text browsers? only boring nerd shit works in them and its only usable with a keyboard.

>>1058634

websites dont need revenue faggot. anything that gets revenue doesnt deserve to be on the web

>>1058733

>only boring nerd shit works in them

Like 8chan?

>>1058766

how do you solve the picture captchas in a text only browser

>>1058634

Hosting a website cost like 5$ a year. You don't need to torture others for that cash.

Websites should block Brave users for their own good.

>>1058784

Brave isn't currently collecting information from users. They don't even have telemetry. And they have said that this will not change in the future. It is the only browser remaining that blocks ping tracking by default.

>>1058769

you use Links in graphics mode instead of being another retard parrotting a false dichotomy

>>1042106

Just because it calls back to google for some fonts doesn't make it spyware you fucking paranoid tard. Why would you want to disable auto-updates anyways? That article doesn't point out any true spyware methods just 'muh Umatrix is bettur' you're equivalent to those redditors who think dropping a link means they auto won the argument.

>>1042262

>malicious

Any evidence for that or just bullshit shilling?

>>1058792

Read >>1042258

I made a tool to automate instantiating a large number of brave browsers running on x11vfb into a group, and rotate each group out 6 times a day to maximize ads viewed per machine. Steal the idea I don't give a fuck. I'm considering routing all the traffic of each one through Tor/privoxy so it never uses a bareback VPN ip as well. I only fully learned how BATs work after I finished, since it was so simple. There's a hard cap of 21 ad notifications received per browser per day. Literally the only thing they could do about this is start banning massive ranges of IP addresses from viewing their ads.

The wallet built into Brave Browser is currently one-way only. Meaning, you can accept coins from external wallets e.g. shitcoin exchanges and gain coins by viewing ads, but you are not able to withdraw them from the browser. Not yet, at least. I did a bit of digging and apparently there are plans to make it two-way 'eventually', but I wasn't able to find much details about this. The developers hardly interact with their community at all. The built-in BAT wallet addon in Brave is managed by the third party Uphold, who make it clear in their ToS that there's a 1 wallet limit per user (to the effect of "write us if you absolutely require a second wallet") but I obviously don't give a shit about that. The thing that would foil this plan, however, would be making all Brave users require signing up with Uphold with KYC information in order to receive their coins (which would completely deanonymize the entire Brave experience rendering the browser and its associated cryptoshekels the laughing stock of the internet for decades to come.)

Anyone here, by any chance, know any solid details about this?

My main Brave browser on my host machine still hasn't paid out (says it pays out on the 5th) , so if it doesn't even pay out, my IP's either fugged or they're having problems since ads were just implemented into the stable channel a week or so ago.

>>1042102 (OP)

>Free money if you just take this survey and tell us all about yourself

Yeah no thanks I'll happily be out the 300$ a year if it means having an enjoyable browsing experience

>>1042223

"Free" is too confusing, use libre instead.

>>1062033

>going through all that effort for bison bucks that you can't spend anywhere

>>1062062

No it's not. People understand free software as gratis software because this is what many in society are first taught. Therefore we can improve understanding by establishing the context of freedom whenever we (the free software activist) refer to free software. I personally use terms like "freedom respecting software" and "software that respects the users' freedom".

>>1058794

text browsers are shit. textmode in a UNIX braindamage shell is literally just as bad as any modern GUI. web means static content. static content is text, but also images and videos (yes they are static despite that they have animations you fucking retarded autist who's about to "debate" me on this). Links in graphics mode is the best approximation of how the web should be.

>>1062037

now imagine if you payed $300/year for a browser. just kidding it would still be absolute dogshit

>>1058791

phoning home is malicious you cock sucking faggot. you just wouldn't notice this because you're too used to your garbage software doing much worse things

>Why would you want to disable auto-updates anyways?

because thats what the distro is for. the only one fucking thing UNIX does right. you shouldnt need to update plugins either because you shouldnt have any plugins

>inb4 hurr durr i use 100000000 LOC noscript/umatrix instead of just setting javascript.disabled=0

>>1062136

Actually things like umatrix/ublock are useful even with javascript off. You can dynamically change the content of a page like if there's a html tag that gets enabled since you don't have javascript you can auto remove it. Or if there's CSS you hate the guts of you can auto disable/change it. Its still fucking retarded you need something like this instead of it being builtin to the browser to autoadjust such things.

>auto updates

Also known as phoning home, wasting bandwidth, and a backdoor all at the same time.

<the only one fucking thing UNIX does right

>unix doing anything right

Unbased unix hater is unbased. You shouldn't need a distro nor updates as your OS should be perfect and just work without bugs or errors. Distros are another bandaid to unix, and all software, braindamage because the developers used shit like C and left bugs in the code. Download/compile the software with the features you want and that's it no updates ever because its perfect would be the ideal.

>>1062140

>Actually things like umatrix/ublock are useful even with javascript off. You can dynamically change the content of a page like if there's a html tag that gets enabled since you don't have javascript you can auto remove it. Or if there's CSS you hate the guts of you can auto disable/change it. Its still fucking retarded you need something like this instead of it being builtin to the browser to autoadjust such things.

That would just be bloat if built into the browser. CSS has no real application aside from making brochures.

A web page should either conform to a language a static document viewer (such as Links) can interpret or be regarded as non-conforming. Non-conforming websites can be parsed by priveleg-isolated programs into useful categorized data.

>Also known as phoning home, wasting bandwidth, and a backdoor all at the same time.

The real OS will not require updates but will still have distros for layman users.

>You shouldn't need a distro nor updates as your OS should be perfect and just work without bugs or errors.

See unlike UNIX apologists I actually have a realistic software model. But yes, there actually are small parts that absolutely cannot have bugs. No matter how you slice it in any system and they should be isolated from untrustworthy code (no UNIX system does this).

>>1062154

>All the code on your system should be trustworthy you braindamaged cunt. If you don't control/understand/trust the code it shouldn't be ran.

No, that doesn't matter in capability-secure code or some forms of non-turing-complete code. Unless you're worried about side channels, but even in your shitty mainstream OS sidechannels are just as unsolved. In both cases you need to design critical components to remove side channels. There are still open questions like how side channels can be avoided with dynamic memory allocation and scheduler. When webshitters get their heads out of their asses and "web apps" are replaced with real software, that software will be run with minimal or no privileges. It does not need to be trustworthy since it processes no sensitive data.

>Look at systems used in engineering planes or medical devices for fucks sake

We're talking about general purpose computing, not medical devices (which are basically implemented as webshit right now, and yes they need a total system analysis to work).

>>1062159

You are a living example of unix brain damage

>that software will be run with minimal or no privileges. It does not need to be trustworthy since it processes no sensitive data.

Just because what it does internally need not be trusted does not mean the output, or even input, to it is so. Say you input text into a program you don't trust and out comes a fork bomb on a unix system. Well even if your entire system were perfect and that mythical fork bomb on such a system didn't do shit that doesn't change said program can affect the cycles your proccessor had to go through transfering the information from one place to another. From which information can be gleaned, i.e a side channel.

>There are still open questions like how side channels can be avoided with dynamic memory allocation and scheduler.

They can't. Use static memory as dynamic has side channels inherent by design. You will always have a cache of some sort for what physically goes to what virtually in dynamic memory models. Even if you had a device, like a second set of RAM dedicated to cache storage that is physically seperate from everything else, that physically stored the cache on said device and did not allow access except via certain methods, there will always be some way of accessing that cache which is a inherent side channel.

Sure you could take a hypervisor like the linux kernel and say only this region the linux kernel inhabits in RAM somwhere has commands to physically jump to the off device MMU cache, it is still accessable. Schedulers will always take control away from something else you do, unless you control the scheduler. So don't have any schedulers and if you do you must have control over them. See the specter vulnerabilities for proof of this fact.

Also wtf I just got the same captcha from like four times ago.

>>1062165

I'll just assume you're talking about injection attacks here because I'm not sure how else to sanely interpret your first paragraph. Injection attacks don't happen in real systems, only retard shit like SQL,shell scripts, and webshit. Programs in UNIX can't compose because they have to reserialize data between each other. Leading to shit like the MySQL vuln where a unicode apostrophe can defeat all escaping. Escaping doesn't even exist outside of braindamaged UNIX systems as there are far superior and simple methods of achieving the same thing.

Spectre was from superscalar braindamage and i already concluded such CPUs would lead to pervasive side channels 10 years before scepter was released. We can compute without cache and branch prediction and it will _STILL_ be hundreds of times faster than webshit.

>>1042232

I am willing to pay 30$ a month to NOT see adds.

Hopefully it's still free.

>>1042102 (OP)

> Not using Gab's new browser

>>1062181

I wonder what sort of botnet ailments m68k would be suffering from in CY+4 had Commodore decided to turn the Amiga into a hardware standard.