[highace]

I know Brave has their own arguably evil agenda, but their Android browser right now is simply amazing. It blocks all ads and trackers, without needing to set up VPNs or proxys or companion apps that mess with your settings and don't always work. If you prefer Chrome over Firefox on your Android then for ad-free browsing it can't be beat.

[androidgirl]

Slightly off topic, but if you're okay with a bit of setup, there's a cool F-Droid app called Blokada that's like a personal pi-hole.

I had an issue where my firefox browser was great, but the other apps on my phone were extremely noisy with ad networks. This would compliment an ad blocked Brave/Firefox browser nicely.

[rapnie]

Super! Thanks. For reference:

https://github.com/blokadaorg/blokada https://blokada.org

[3PS]

I second this. I've tried Blokada and DNS66 via F-Droid, and Blokada in particular has worked wonders. It blocks ad hosts at the DNS level, which is more battery-efficient than a traditional adblocker, but that also makes it necessary to clear out your DNS cache. I've only had one notable issue that required me to disable Blokada - adding a bank account to Venmo wouldn't work for some reason.

[BrendanEich]

Domain blocking is still crucial, absolutely necessary -- but in our experience no longer sufficient. The adversary has wormed its way into 3rd party domains that sometimes must be allowed in certain 1st parties; it has even wormed its way into 1st parties via actual inside-1p-firewall code, or CNAME hacks to hide in subdomains.

Nothing against Blokada, but as a realist using ad blockers (not just Brave), I need more than domain blocking these days.

[rmkoek]

I like how you mentioned fdroid. I am a loyal user. I use Firefox klar. + Duckduckgo.com for all net activities. 100% private and 0 adds and 0 tracking.

[wewake]

Wow, you're a saviour! Blokada is exactly what I've been looking for ever since I switched to a non-rooted android phone.

[jonathansampson]

> I know Brave has their own arguably evil agenda…

Why do you think this? What have we done to give you this impression? Our primary focus is to protect the user's rights online, and to create a sustainable experience for content creators.

[HBlix]

I think given what the advertising industry has been for years, it’s arguable that attempts to sustain them are fairly evil. Being able to opt-in to it is still far less laudable than promoting ad-blocking (but of course that doesn’t allow for you to go ICO and rake it in). It’s not as bad as opt-out, but it’s still wretched, and no amount of “for the content creators” hand-wringing or tokenizing changes that. I do see how blending an ICO with this has the potential to make the people behind Brave richer regardless of long-term success or adherence to current ethics.

[BrendanEich]

Nobody at Brave is getting richer right now, we are a startup. My salary walked back to late 1990s level. The tokens locked up for the team and advisors are nothing compared to years of RSUs at Google or FB.

Anyway, as the last sentence reminds, attacking us based on compensation shows a strange double standard. The huge super-surveillance companies pay people way more than we make, and they do it by raiding user privacy, page load time, radio and so battery life and data plan, and safety from malvertising.

We are out to transplant -- with user consent always, creator too if they are involved -- the necessary minimum viable ads components into a clean ecosystem, to capture some of the huge funding from ad spend ($100B in US on digital this year) and give 70% or 85% to user or user+creator. See other replies on how our ad model preserves privacy.

[HBlix]

Nobody at Brave is getting richer right now, we are a startup.

“Right now” is doing some terribly hard work in that claim.

[BrendanEich]

My Mozilla vow of poverty (look at form 990s to see what top person makes; hardly poverty but more than I ever made) is over. Anyway, the ad hominem with a double standard vs. the huge tracking-dependent businesses is a bad look. Change it.

[nostrademons]

Random Brave annoyance: when I look at the Mozilla form 990 in Brave, it prompts me to download the PDF. When I look at it in Chrome, in views it inline. I'm fairly certain Brave is capable of viewing PDFs inline; I could swear I've had some load. What gives?

https://static.mozilla.com/moco/en-US/pdf/2014_Mozilla_Found...

[HBlix]

It’s hard to take image advice from someone who seriously goes from accusations of personal attacks to “Change it” in the same sentence. I’ll file that next to taking conflict de-escalation tips from Linus Torvalds. More topically, I have no problem with you trying to strike it rich down the line, only with the thin veneer of altruism you seem driven to coat those motives with.

[mixedCase]

How is offering a completely voluntary option to subject yourself to a more benign version of advertising than the standard, in order to fund the content you use, "wretched"?

[HBlix]

“More benign” yet still cancerous, is the answer to your question. I’ve already explained that the majority of ad-supported content is hot garbage, more clutter than content. I’ve pointed out that the ad industry has decades of questionable-at-best track record, so “wretched” naturally follows. I’ll grant that it’s less wretched than the current state of advertising affairs, yet more wretched than currently available ad blockers.

[mixedCase]

> the majority of ad-supported content is hot garbage

I cannot argue with that, I very much agree. But plenty of people not only like consuming what I deem hot garbage, they're more than comfortable supporting it via ads; something I would never subject myself to if given a chance.

But I don't believe I should be able to dictate how other people experience their content or how they fund it, and there are still mountains of ad-supported content that is actually good and that would likely be non-viable on a patronage/subscription system due to things such as their target demographics.

So, Brave seems to tick our own boxes of "no ads" and provides the option for others to subject themselves to them. Unless we're arguing for going back to the old "pre-mainstream" Internet (to which I say, there are many places for that, and the Tor network is particularly fertile for fostering such a culture) then I say the Brave model improves the situation on every front.

[mattlondon]

+1

On android it is essentially identical to Chrome in every way apart from the Brave icon next to the address bar that controls the blocking.

I really like it.

I tried the desktop version though and did not like the look and feel of the UI - tabs under the address bar etc. Felt like it was a slavish copy of Safari and I did not like it. Much prefer Firefox on desktop.

I have also learnt of Brave's plans to replace a sites ads with its own ads which I do not like. Will move off of Brave on mobile when Firefox is workable on android (last time I tried it was awful, clunky and slow on android).

[BrendanEich]

Please see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18155960. No ads via Brave unless you opt in. Consent required by all parties involved in any of the optional token economics.

Try https://brave.com/download-dev for better desktop browser that is coming to stable very soon. Almost all chromium extensions work - any using Google accounts/sync do not.

[HBlix]

Opting-in by default is refreshing to see, and offering to share some portion of the spoils more equitably is too. Still, I fundamentally dislike advertising and find that content supported by it is often grossly inferior to other content. I’m not convinced that the middle path here is the right one, rather than evangelizing ad-blocking and forcing the internet to adopt alternative revenue streams. Slapping an ICO on the problem is certainly a good way to get people invested in defending Brave, but I’m not convinced that it has any lasting value.

Cutting advertisers off at the knees does, and as a stance it isn’t subject to being degraded through its relationship to advertisers and their money.

[BrendanEich]

If you dislike ads, then don't opt in. You are welcome to use baseline Brave and just block. But why comment as if you mean to tell others what to do?

If you think the web can do without $100B in US on digital this year, ~$250B globally that goes through ads, then please demonstrate replacement funding models, or just show some evidence of any that could scale that big.

We can't count ads out, but by lifting 3rd party to 1st ad context (avoids brand safety and reverse: bad ads on good content), aligning interests, and cutting out all the trackers and other intermediaries that evolved because browsers were passive slaves to the system, we hope to more than replace the value of our users to publishers that was "lost" via our users blocking by default.

[HBlix]

I think the web as it exists today is bloated with “content” that could never survive without that money, and the loss of that “content” would be a gain for the web. I’m hard-presses to think of many worthwhile examples of ad-supported content; certainly HN here doesn’t take that path.

[skinnymuch]

You could argue HN being an advertising platform for YC and certain YC posts being inserted early on like hiring posts are ads. So using HN isn’t a good example at all.

[onyva]

Absolutely. And the idea that he’s trying to convince us that as users we would like to support this “economy”, is preposterous. I want it to go away. If it needs ad revenue to exist, it’s very unlikely to be of value to me.

I’ll stick with Firefox, as Mozilla is the only organization users can truly trust today for their privacy

[matthberg]

I've been using Firefox on mobile and have no issues with it. I'd try it out again now, with quantum under the hood it's purring along smoothly for me.

Also (to anyone who doesn't know) you can install Firefox addons on Firefox mobile, so uBlock Origin works (can personally confirm it) to block ads.

[Sytten]

I have a low budget smartphone and its simply not usable. I switched to firefox focus which runs very smoothly, but it has its disadvantages too.

[BrendanEich]

Interested in whether Brave works well for you. Also phone details if you can share. Thanks.

[Sytten]

Idol 3 5.5, it works well.

[exadeci]

Firefox on android works with Ublock so it doesn't need any other setup.