[patrickaljord]

> Brave is not 'entitled' in any way nor should the world bend to make Brave possible.

I never said it was entitled, I said it had to balance things to survive.

> If I was to build a browser (which btw I am doing) I would put 100% user interest first, at the price of not succeeding in the market. That is the only way I could sleep well at night.

A quick look at the history of humanity will show you that even the most moral entities had at a point of their existence have to compromise with morality to survive, or made bad choices out of self-interest. Just like every single human being who has ever lived. I don't think you can never ever ever compromise on anything while accomplishing anything significant. By the way, do you plan on taking out mp4 and user freedom hostile features such as EME support in your browser?

[freediver]

You can balance things without making moral compromises. Making bad choices deliberately is different than making bad choices by a virtue of an honest mistake. For this particular feature Brave could have offered to split affiliate revenue with users 50-50. Then even if the idea was received poorly nobody could argue against the right to experiment and try to survive. Keeping 100% for yourself is greedy, shady and unnecessary not to mention uncovers that they don’t really put users first. Why not just run a bitcoin miner in the browser and keep everything for themselves? Where do you draw a line and say this company is not behaving like you are expecting?

[tripzilch]

> I don't think you can never ever ever compromise on anything while accomplishing anything significant.

I don't think you can never ever ever compromise on anything while accomplishing anything significant.

Not with that attitude you don't.