Hacker News Reader

Comment by barnabee | Hacker News Reader

Reader mode proves that "exatly as sent" is the opposite of what I want.

I would like browsers to reinterpret what is sent for me (and noone else, definitely not for the browser maker) and display something more readable and useful (lightweight, queryable, cross-referenced, hyperlinke, actionable, etc.).

I'd love to never see the site owner's design or interact with their UX 95% of the time (if you're an artist or musician I probably want to see what you designed, that's about it). Reader mode probably makes it 50% but is not designed for any kind of interactivity so I still have to use horrible booking pages, shopping sites, etc. I'd love my bropwser to extract the ueful and completely standardise the UI every time.

View on HN

I actually largely agree with you. I should clarify my original comment a bit, I think.

I want my browser to display the page exactly as sent until I tell it not to. It should be serving pages to me as-is, and things such as ad/content blockers, and reader mode, should be my choices. I don't want the browser making those decisions for me ahead of time and without my input.

This is fair, or at least, if they do make those choices ahead of time they should be well publicised and configurable, or it should be a specialised, single purpose browser.

To that extent, I think if Brave is open and honest and says "we're a browser that reformats pages in this way" that is ok. It's sneaky shit, dark patterns, bundling things you want with things you might not, etc. that make me distrusting of them.

I think it's one thing to strip out content or ads, but an entirely different beast to replace ads with your own. There are arguments for blocking ads, both ethical and security based. But replacing the ads with your own is basically the same as stealing the content for your own profit. Brave is a shitty company with no moral leg to stand on.

This is the crucial part. Is brave inserting ads on the SAME PAGE that it stripped out of? If so I agree completely. I thought brave had some sort of notification system though, which is a bit different IMO.

No, Brave does not display ads on publisher properties. Brave blocks trackers (which impacts most third-party ads), but does no in-situ substitution. First-party ads are generally untouched. Brave acts as a content-filter out of the box (similar to uBlock Origin), protecting the user and their data from third-party harvesters and more.

Brave does offer an optional feature called Brave Ads, which enables users to view privacy-respecting ads (as notifications, and high-quality New Tab Page wallpapers) for 70% of the associated revenue. This revenue (in the form of BAT rewards) can then flow out to verified publishers as a form of support. No user data is collected; ad-matching happens on-device, and in accordance with user-specified constraints.

Brave does not replace (meaning, display in-situ) third-party ads. Those are blocked, as you stated, for ethical and security reasons. Brave offers an opt-in feature of the browser called 'Brave Rewards' and 'Brave Ads'. This feature enables users to opt-in to ad-notifications (displayed as native prompts on the device; not shown on the pages you visit). Ads are displayed on every 4th new tab page for participating users (again, no ads on publisher properties). The user consents to these, receives 70% of the revenue for their attention, and sets threshold limitations for how many ads can be displayed in a given period. Brave has never replaced ads on pages; that would be highly unethical.

what impossible fantasy! you expect software you use, which a for profit company made to,, lemme get this right,, respect your requirements, wants and make your life less terrible? and not distract you? make things easier? hah! if only our big tech overlords meant what they said about caring for us /s

I'm not dead set on it being made by a for-profit company but otherwise yeah, that's about right.

Dream big, they say :)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com