It seems like you have to opt into their ad network.
If you are already planning on blocking ads, I don't see an ethics issue with allowing people to volunteer to watch ads in exchange for fake internet points.
I also don't see why they would bother to opt into it.
I can only aspire to build something worthy of such a waffling, incoherent takedown.
The author seems confused about what Brave does (it doesn't inject ads into websites), confused about how its ads are different (private because the targeting happens on your device), and confused about the point of the attention token (combining ad-supported and patreon/tipping models). I love to get mad about things I don't understand as much as the next guy, but even so this is a remarkable display of weaponised long-form ignorance.
I'm not even sure they actually disagree with Brave's model. One of the linked posts on the same site advocates for "voting with your wallet" by blocking ads, but contributing to the sites you visit monetarily. Gee, I wish someone could find a way to systematically do that and build it into a browser.
I'd like to end with this quote, from the same author: "But as often happens on the web, most of the energy so far has been focused on griping about the bad thing, rather than making productive steps toward replacing it with something better. The only thing that can really put a dent in web advertising is a better economic model."
Perhaps the truly brave thing to do would be to put down the boxing gloves and learn to read.
The author is correct that Brave is substituting one set of ads for another. The details of how Brave introduces these ads aren't relevant to the author's main argument, which is economic not technological. He does address problems with the hybrid ad/tipping model.
Not sure if the author reads this but I would really really like if he would write such an article about Coil.com. IMO they try to actually fix the problem but with a completely different approach. Would be great to read about that and about possible flaws in their system.
It seems like you have to opt into their ad network.
If you are already planning on blocking ads, I don't see an ethics issue with allowing people to volunteer to watch ads in exchange for fake internet points.
I also don't see why they would bother to opt into it.
Many users want to financially support the sites they visit, but don't trust those sites' ad networks.
I can only aspire to build something worthy of such a waffling, incoherent takedown.
The author seems confused about what Brave does (it doesn't inject ads into websites), confused about how its ads are different (private because the targeting happens on your device), and confused about the point of the attention token (combining ad-supported and patreon/tipping models). I love to get mad about things I don't understand as much as the next guy, but even so this is a remarkable display of weaponised long-form ignorance.
I'm not even sure they actually disagree with Brave's model. One of the linked posts on the same site advocates for "voting with your wallet" by blocking ads, but contributing to the sites you visit monetarily. Gee, I wish someone could find a way to systematically do that and build it into a browser.
I'd like to end with this quote, from the same author: "But as often happens on the web, most of the energy so far has been focused on griping about the bad thing, rather than making productive steps toward replacing it with something better. The only thing that can really put a dent in web advertising is a better economic model."
Perhaps the truly brave thing to do would be to put down the boxing gloves and learn to read.
The author is correct that Brave is substituting one set of ads for another. The details of how Brave introduces these ads aren't relevant to the author's main argument, which is economic not technological. He does address problems with the hybrid ad/tipping model.
Not sure if the author reads this but I would really really like if he would write such an article about Coil.com. IMO they try to actually fix the problem but with a completely different approach. Would be great to read about that and about possible flaws in their system.