/tech/ - Technology★

>Brave, now used by 2 million people monthly on laptops and smartphones, by default blocks ads as well as software that tracks your online behavior so ads can be more personally targeted toward you. But the company's eventual plan always has always been to deliver ads, too -- in a more privacy-sensitive way than what's typical today.

>That system will mean ad revenue for publishers eventually. But Brave already allows a cryptocurrency-like payment system it developed called the Basic Attention Token. BAT is a blockchain-based token that serves as a way advertisers can pay publishers, but Brave also plans to take a portion of the proceeds and share another portion with anyone using Brave.

>Brave's advertising system isn't up and running yet, but publishers can get a bit of revenue already with the system. That's because you can fund BAT payments to websites with BAT you buy yourself or get through a Brave BAT giveaway.

>Brave by default distributes BAT payments monthly, giving more of your payment to sites where you spend more time. Publishers, YouTubers and Twitch video game streamers can sign up to receive BAT payments for free.

>Under the partnership announced Wednesday, Dow Jones Media Group said it will become a verified publisher and plans to test "delivering content via Brave's blockchain-based digital advertising and services platform." Dow Jones Media Group is arguably better protected against difficulties with online advertising by the fact that it charges subscribers for access.

>>900361 (OP)

>browser that makes money by replacing regular ads with 'non-intrusive' (((targeted ads)))

>compromise its users' privacy

One cannot compromise what wasn't there to begin with

if you use brave before you are retarded if you use brave now you retarded nothing changed

>>900372

optional

>Basic Attention Token

Sounds Jewish. I don't think my "attention" is a resource for advertisers to claim.

>newspapers including The New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal -- the latter published by Dow Jones Media Group parent company Dow Jones -- called Brave's ad blocking "illegal."

What's the law that says that?

>>900481

The Right to Profit. If they add DRM they can use DMCA.

>>900481

If ads served by Dow Jones Media Group websites are added as default ad-blocking exceptions in Brave, Brendan Eich will be considered as a sellout.

>>900480

If all they want is to show you a banner with your consent that's fine. The issue is, we know that all the tracking and gathering of the user's data is already standard practice in modern online advertising, is Brave really not allowing them to keep doing it in their browser? Would they even want a deal where this is being denied to them?

>signs deal with

It's the chrome-fork from the jew who poisoned the internet with jscript.

The fork replaces ads on the internet with its own and pays users some cents which is fucking retarded because the entire point of an adblocker was to have 0 ads and the ads make way more than what the user gets and think about the damage of normies not viewing the site ads.

tldr: (((replacing other sites ads with your own by infiltrating the browser market)))

What did you expect. Not even worth a thread tbqh.

>I was thinking about switching browsers to Brave

You're one horrible normalfaggot OP.

>>900650

>You're one horrible normalfaggot OP.

Yeah, unfortunately most people don't have the time or energy to go full /tech/pilled, but isn't this browser an improvement over Firefox?

>>900361 (OP)

Does Brave collect information about it's users?

Ads do not really bother me. What bothers me is software that constantly collects my data.

>>900661

It's chromium based. You're better of with every other Chrome fork like SRWare Iron or whatever you like (who am I to decide which shit is the least smelly. The web and it's pseudo standards suck).

>>900662

Probably. He's a jew. He already pays you for viewing ads in places of ads which were used by websites to finance themselves thus ruining the internet and profiting from it.

I don't think the javascript(made in 10 days) inventor aka Brendan Eich fears making cash from your data too.

>>900361 (OP)

>thinking about switching browsers to Brave

Why? It blocks ads using ABP which is absolute dogshit. The only good adblocker is uBlock Origin and Brave clearly doesn't care about the end user or privacy. They said it themselves that they'll monetize the browser once it has 1 million downloads.

>>900661

It's only an improvement in speed, it fails in every other category just like all other chromium browsers. Brave seems fastest on benchmarks though, and it's open source. If you just need a fast browser you could make an effort of forking brave and removing the jew parts.

>>900729

Iron is malware and has been for the last 4-5 years.

>>900361 (OP)

When they were first launching it they made it sound like a way of screwing advertisers and making enopoly money in the process. At the end of the day the user's cut was negligible and the advertisers were still getting the lion's share. What is worse is their android browser didn't even have copy/paste implemented. Let that shit sink in.

The only good thing I can think of to say is they aren't Google or Mozilla.

>ad-blocking

>brave

>dow

lol a bunch of normalfag words. who cares? brave is bloated trash just like all the other big browsers

>>901745

>brave is bloated trash just like all th...

WELL ITS A GOOD THING MY PHONE HAS ENOUGH RAM TO RUN IT THEN, ISN'T IT??? WE WOULDN'T WANT TO HAVE ALL UNUSED RAM WASTED HMMM??!

>>901799

He's probably too poor for the latest Samsung Galaxy. "People" like him are holding us technology pioneers back.

>>900361 (OP)

non-human shill detected. How did it get past the captcha?

>>900373

What meaningful alternatives are there? Chrome is botnet, and Mozilla is infested with SJWs whose only concept of privacy involves aiding radical left wing cells through RiseUp. Thank God the EFF supports Tor otherwise I would have no hope in left-leaning privacy advocacy in the United States at all.

Brave signals a change towards a privacy conscious right wing movement in the United States. Brendan Eich was fired for Mozilla for donating $1000 to a political foundation that opposed gay marriage. That form of censorship alone makes me want to support whatever Eich does. Not only that, Brave is a good browser in addition to the social aspect.

>>900361 (OP)

Brave doesn't block ads, it spies on your habits and replaces a site's ads with its own.

>>901859

I wouldn't say that it spies on you more than any other browser spies on you.

>>901859

>Brave doesn't block ads

It does though.

>it spies on your habits

Brave is an open source project, please point out where it spies on you.

>and replaces a site's ads with its own

Entirely optional and not a default setting.

>>901847

palememe, links

>second paragraph

but brave is shit and Eich is a nobody

>>902236

the only browser that can meaningfully be considered open source is Links

>>902239

>but brave is shit and Eich is a nobody

Oh, I see now! You're a Mozilla cucks who needs to resort to ad hominem attacks instead of making purposeful critiques of Brave.

Opinion discarded.

>>902334

Then elaborate on why should people switch to Brave like how you want. As far as I'm concerned, Brave doesn't offer anything noteworthy that warrants a switch from mainstream browsers, or privacy focused browsers for that matter. Waterfox, Ungoogled Chromium, Iridium, Firefox ESR with privacy modifications, Tor Browser Bundle and Links are noteworthy replacements to everyday browsers. Each one of them offer significant, distiguishing features which interests different auditions. Compared to the browsers I have listed, what does Brave offer? Opt-out "non-tracking" ads which might earn you 0,01 shekels for every ad click? Don't make me laugh. This is why Eich is a nobody. Now lets listen to your point of view of why we should use Brave. Your response will be received much better if you don't involve Jews, bankers, merchants George Soros and SJWs in your argument.

>>900789

>Iron is malware and has been for the last 4-5 years.

How?

>>900789

Because of that one stupid info graph which also names Brave as near perfect browser?

>>902350

Soros? Where?

The only website to be censored for legally protected speech so far has been the Daily Stormer. Think about that.

>>902386

>The only website to be censored for legally protected speech so far has been the Daily Stormer

You very well do know that was not the only site that has been censored in the whole history of the internet. It is crazy to think otherwise.

>>902391

The only one that I know to be censored for legally protected speech. Nice omission mate.

Even Tor hosts wanted to block users from accessing the site. How fucked up is that?

>>900481

>What's the law that says that?

don't question the law goy

>>902869

>speeds up your browser

This is an erroneous claim. Do you even know how adblockers/uMatrix work?

What you should be doing is using a hosts file blocking method, or installing unbound/BIND and then using it to filter ad domains. A caching DNS resolver will *actually* speed up browsing, adblockers don't. But yes - an adblocker is far more convienent (and it updates automatically, this is essential for a normalfag).

>>902876

>convienent

Sorry, convenient.

>>902884

>When uBlock launches, it loads all selected filter lists, parses the content, eliminates duplicates, then instantiates the filters using efficient internal representation. This parsing of the filter lists requires a good amount of temporary memory.

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Myth:-uBlock-consumes-over-80MB

If you filter ad domains through your router/DNS cacher there is _zero_ hardware penalty. When you load a website and have an adblocker, it has to check the blocklist before actually loading it - this is CPU/memory demanding. Yes, this penalty is ephemeral, but some of us use old hardware and want to avoid unnecessary hardware spikes. It is much less taxing than a regular adblocker though; that much is true.

>>902869

Wait until that one normalfag comes. He is the frequent visitor to a website that gets yellow triangle warning from uBlock and demands a refund. Actually when I was younger and had fucked with shit around, this warning placeholder page pissed me off and I thought it had something to do with browser built-in blocklists. Turns out, it was an adblocker. The only thing Gorhill didn't change for all these years yet, is put uBlock icon instead of yellow warning triangle for it to not be extremely confusing.

[spoiler]Shouldn't I be filling a pull request issue instead of blogposting here?[/spolier]

oh fuck my dyslexia

>>902892

Also, all of the images you posted are misleading. The first one shows that having an adblocker will limit your exposure to third-party servers. Duh? this is obvious - the same happens if you use a router/DNS cacher/hosts blocking method. The second one shows that ublock is less strenuous on the hardware compared to other adblockers. Oh, wait - not having an adblocker is the least strenuous. The last one tests "high traffic pages" - I'm assuming this is ad-ridden cancer like Facebook. If they were to test a site with just one or two ad banners, having no adblocker would be tested as better. There is also no mention of the hardware spike when an adblocker checks its blocklist before loading a page.

>>902884

Brave speeds up browsing too. What's the issue here?

>>900361 (OP)

Using Brave is irresponsible as it hurts businesses. Also it's run by a facist.

>>903225

Learn how to read, then come back and check my first post, and you'll find out.

>>903249

le fascist meme

>>903249

>Also it's run by a facist.

By your criterium pozilla is best

>>900373

It's FOSS though

>>900361 (OP)

They're selling your browsing history to these tech soyboys

>tfw not retarded

>tfw never used brave

>tfw using FF

nu-/tech/ will never know this feel

>>900361 (OP)

it literally mines cryptocurrency.

>>902869

Sounds great. Also, please remember to advise people into de-Googling their lives.

>>904161

What is wrong with degoogling?

>>904185

Legitimate question.

>>904185

Nothing, I'm telling him to promote degoogling.

>His browser supports javashit

Links/Lynx and Mothra for life.

>>904575

I thought you were sarcastic. Carry on.

I don't think that people who are tech-savvy enough to have installed Adblock would be interested in DNC propaganda.

>>900485

I'm not sure what this markoff chain is trying to say but it's triggering me.

>>905617

>installing adblock

>tech savvy

lol