|
|
Log in / Subscribe / Register

The Brave web browser

June 15, 2017

This article was contributed by Nur Hussein

The Brave web browser is a project from a new company called Brave Software. It was founded by Brendan Eich, who is the inventor of JavaScript and former developer and CTO at Mozilla; he hopes to dramatically re-invent the advertising model of the web while strengthening user anonymity and security. Brave's value proposition is that instead of being served advertisements from web sites that use the revenue to pay their bills, users can opt to directly pay the content providers of their choosing with cryptocurrency. Also, there is a recognition of the utility of targeted advertising, so users have an option of saving a local, protected profile that can be used anonymously to obtain targeted advertisements instead of having their online behavior tracked and sold by a third party.

Brave is an open-source browser derived from Chromium, and as such it is based on the Blink web engine. Advertisements and user tracking are blocked by default as a built-in feature in Brave, as opposed to other browsers that offer that functionality via plugins. In 2016, Brave announced that, on top of blocking advertisements, it would let users choose to replace them with other advertisements that are sourced from a curated list of partners. Revenue from these ads would go to Brave Software as well as being shared with the publishers and others.

When the idea of advertisement replacement was first floated, the concept rattled the online publishing industry so badly that there was a backlash. That resulted in a cease and desist letter to Brave from seventeen newspaper publishing companies to vehemently protest the advertising scheme. They said that what Brave was doing was illegal and brought forward claims of copyright violation, breach of contract, unfair business practices, and unauthorized access. It is unclear if any of those accusations has any legal merit; in any case, it has not slowed down Brave Software in building the Brave browser and raising funds for its development.

However, it is not publicly known whether Brave Software still intends to roll out its planned ad-replacement mechanism. If so, there remain murky ethical issues (and possibly legal issues) in replacing advertisements from a content provider for the financial benefit of an unrelated party without the consent of the publisher, even if some of the money is given back to the said publisher. This is the reason for most of the publisher outrage at the idea.

Solving the intrusive advertisement problem

Brave may seem similar in functionality to other browsers with ad-blocking plugins installed, but the underlying goal of Brave is to subvert the existing advertising and user tracking model. Serving advertisements on the web has grown to become a complex labyrinth of scripts, cookies, and other mechanisms that range from benign to unscrupulous to outright malicious. Advertisements also suck up bandwidth that users may have to pay for; that is a burden for mobile users with limited data plans, for example.

In addition, advertisers aren't just serving advertisements to prospective customers, but also mining the personal data of said customers so that marketing can be tailored and fine-tuned. While there is value to be had for consumers in the form of customized advertisements, there are legitimate concerns about the breaches in user privacy that such tracking entails. Worse still, some advertisements are written with predatory JavaScript that attempts to install malware on users' computers. Brave's raison d'être is to block such intrusiveness and offer an alternative model of payment for users, publishers, and advertisers, while providing a revenue stream for itself as well.

The Brave browser blocks all advertisements by default. This also includes blocking tracking pixels and third-party cookies. However, Brave Software has devised a mechanism to pay content producers to offset the loss of income from blocking advertisements on their site. Using cryptocurrency, users may opt to either pay content producers a monthly fee or enable "Brave Ads", which are ads from Brave Software's partners that are delivered via anonymous protocols so users cannot be tracked.

Revenue from Brave Ads is shared with content publishers (55%), Brave's advertising partners (15%), the users themselves (15%), and a portion goes back to Brave Software (15%). Currently, Bitcoin is used for these payments, but there are plans to replace the use of Bitcoin with a new cryptocurrency called Basic Attention Tokens.

The idea behind this new payment ecosystem is to eliminate the privacy-violating data collection that is currently inherent in getting advertisements to users, and for users to directly pay content publishers. The third parties who track user behavior hoard a vast collection of user-related data that advertisers have to pay for, which puts user privacy and security at risk. By making the browser the ultimate arbiter for advertising and payments for those advertisements, the bulk of the most objectionable part of the advertising ecosystem is reduced.

Basic Attention Tokens

Advertisers seek user engagement. Thus, users' attention becomes a currency, and Brave Software has devised a scheme to quantize and monetize it in the form of Basic Attention Tokens. Since the browser is able to record user interaction with advertisements, that interaction can be enumerated and recorded for the purposes of remuneration. Apart from direct user engagement, the algorithms used to determine user attention are based on how much of an advertisement is visible on screen, and for how long. The cumulative total of these engagements is tracked on-device by the browser, and will eventually add up to an amount where it can be rewarded with BATs.

Basic Attention Tokens are built on top of Ethereum, a decentralized blockchain technology that can be used to create any number of applications, including cryptocurrency. Ethereum provides "smart contracts", which consist of code that resides in a blockchain and executes based on conditions and events. These smart contracts are used to create BAT ledgers that pay content providers based on advertisement views.

Interest in BATs as a cryptocurrency is exceedingly high. On 31 May 2017, Brave Software held an initial online sale of BATs that raised about 35 million dollars, and sold out within 30 seconds. Purchases were made using ETHs (a cryptocurrency built atop Ethereum), and about 1.5 billion units of BATs were sold. Despite the large amount of money being exchanged, only about 130 people were able to buy the tokens, and half the supply was bought out by only five parties. That frenzied trading resulted in a big chunk of money for continued development of Brave's browser and infrastructure technology.

Anonymized user activity

One of the key selling points of Brave is how "user intent"—the browsing behavior of a browser user—will be profiled and kept (voluntarily) by the users themselves instead of being tracked and compiled by third parties. When a user opts-in for Brave Ads, they will want to get relevant, targeted advertisements without compromising their privacy. When enabled, the browser will gather browsing information and use it to create "intent signals" to Brave Ads, without any specific user identification or cookies. To prevent fingerprinting, only a small subset of information is used to signal intent.

Brave also has built-in defense against browser fingerprinting, although it is disabled by default as it breaks the functionality of some sites. Fingerprinting is the underhanded use of browser or operating system features to identify computers and track them across the web. In fingerprinting-protect mode, Brave will attempt to thwart fingerprinting attempts via canvas, WebGL, AudioContext, and battery status. That mode also disables WebRTC so that it cannot leak private IP addresses.

Browser experience

Brave feels similar to Google Chrome and other Chromium-based browsers. It is possible to start a different browsing session in each tab, and group tabs by session, which is useful for logging into two or more web accounts simultaneously. Private mode can also be started in a tab, instead of requiring an entirely new window like Google Chrome. The main feature is advertisement blocking, and when browsing sites such as The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal, I did not see a single advertisement. When browsing a more advertisement-heavy site like ZDNet, Brave manages to block most of the ads, but some still appear when they are presented in the form of "partner links".

Chrome's browser plugins and extensions are compatible with Brave, but the browser does not support directly using them. Instead, a curated list of extensions is included in the Brave browser download; the developers claim that having a list of approved, tested extensions is meant to maintain the security of the browser. Therefore, if users want an extension, they need to make a feature request to the developers.

[Brave Payments]

Since the use of BATs has not yet been implemented in Brave, Bitcoin is used for monthly contributions paid to web sites of the user's choosing. In the options screen, there is a tab called Payments where this can be enabled. A Bitcoin wallet is created automatically, and users can choose to deposit some of their own money into it if they want. When enabling Brave Ads and browsing participating web sites, payments from advertisers should be deposited into that wallet every 30 days. The Brave developers hope users will ultimately spend all of their collected payments on publisher web sites to help make this new payment ecosystem work.

If you want to try out Brave yourself, you can download it from the web site, where packages are available for Windows 7 or later, macOS 10.9 or later, and Linux. It is also available for Android and iOS in the appropriate app store. If you're running Linux, there are instructions that describes how to install it. Packages are available for Debian, Ubuntu, Mint, Fedora, and openSUSE. It can also be installed as a generic x86-64 binary or via a snap.

Conclusion

The brand new advertisement ecosystem that Brave is pushing is clearly designed to pressure existing players to improve their practices. Brave Software wants to position itself as the spearhead in disrupting the existing ecosystem, but will users, publishers, and advertisers hop on board the new model? Brave maintains that it will not engage in dodgy practices itself; the open-source nature of its browser will help ensure that. However, it remains to be seen if most users and publishers will agree to the new model, especially with Brave Software having the final word on the rules of the new game, which includes how much revenue is shared and with whom.

For now, only Brave incorporates this technology, and it will probably need more widespread adoption before the business model becomes sustainable for publishers. Also, as with all ad-blocking technology, there will be a pushback from advertisers and third parties relying on the user-tracking business model; perhaps they will find subversive ways to defeat ad blocking. It is an arms race, and it is unclear whether users, advertisers, or content publishers come out on top.


Index entries for this article
GuestArticlesHussein, Nur


to post comments

Comparison of economic models

Posted Jun 15, 2017 18:28 UTC (Thu) by Creideiki (subscriber, #38747) [Link]

It looks like Brave is doing pretty much the same thing as Flattr's current reinvention, with the only difference I can see being Bitcoins vs. Euros. Flattr has relied on a button added to each participating site since it started in 2010, but is moving to a browser-based zero-effort solution.

I assume, given the strong network effects, that it's easy to have such a system being wildly popular in one field and completely unknown elsewhere. In my corner of the Internet (which is inhabited by a fairly artsy crowd), Flattr's minimal-interaction model faded into obscurity several years ago, with the interaction-rich Patreon rising to prominence instead. Then again, the example screenshot in the article shows only news sites, and maybe Patreon has the wrong model for them.

Is Flattr still being used elsewhere? What other popular micropayment systems are there, and how are they different?

Chromium versus Firefox

Posted Jun 16, 2017 7:28 UTC (Fri) by epa (subscriber, #39769) [Link] (12 responses)

I find it interesting that even someone with deep knowledge of Firefox internals chose to start by forking Chromium instead of Firefox. Is the Chromium code so much easier to work with?

Chromium versus Firefox

Posted Jun 16, 2017 7:49 UTC (Fri) by roc (subscriber, #30627) [Link]

It's less tied to one particular application, at least, since the Electron community is pretty large.

Also, using Chromium is lower risk because they don't have to worry about Google accidentally or deliberately making their Web properties favour Chrome.

Chromium versus Firefox

Posted Jun 16, 2017 15:16 UTC (Fri) by ibukanov (subscriber, #3942) [Link] (7 responses)

One of the strongest reason for using Chromium was web compatibility. Too many sites assume something related to WebKit especially on mobile.

Chromium versus Firefox

Posted Jun 17, 2017 12:52 UTC (Sat) by intgr (subscriber, #39733) [Link] (6 responses)

Do you have first-hand information that this was their reason?

> Too many sites assume something related to WebKit especially on mobile

I've been using Firefox for Android ever since I got my first Android phone and don't remember any issues with websites. And then there are the hordes of mobile Safari users.

Chromium versus Firefox

Posted Jun 17, 2017 15:51 UTC (Sat) by ibukanov (subscriber, #3942) [Link]

Brendan Eich (he was my boss when I worked for Mozilla few years ago) has mentioned it either it his tweets or on HN or similar.

Chromium versus Firefox

Posted Jun 17, 2017 15:52 UTC (Sat) by zdzichu (subscriber, #17118) [Link] (3 responses)

Safari is WebKit.

Chromium versus Firefox

Posted Jun 23, 2017 16:25 UTC (Fri) by k3ninho (subscriber, #50375) [Link] (2 responses)

> Safari is WebKit.
Safari is currently the 'Internet Explorer 6' of contemporary browsers. Someone has to be the most-quirky and least-easy to use. It's also the one from the vertically-integrated-ecosystem company.

K3n.

Chromium versus Firefox

Posted Jun 23, 2017 20:01 UTC (Fri) by flussence (guest, #85566) [Link] (1 responses)

Safari is the new Opera; it seems to serve its users instead of third party companies, and there's a very vocal minority fanbase, but the price of admission will forever keep them a minority.

This generation's IE6 is Chromium, no room for doubt. Beneath that surface veneer it's horribly buggy, it claims to support web standards but half-asses them (the *first* css-grid layout I tried didn't work in 60.0), and it crashes both itself and graphics drivers frequently. If not for the massive speed difference it brings, I wouldn't put up with any of that at all.

Chromium versus Firefox

Posted Jun 29, 2017 19:01 UTC (Thu) by ssmith32 (subscriber, #72404) [Link]

Also, Google + Chrome has office apps that break in subtle, not subtle, always annoying ways in any ecosystem not their own.

Chromium versus Firefox

Posted Jun 17, 2017 18:13 UTC (Sat) by MattJD (subscriber, #91390) [Link]

>> Too many sites assume something related to WebKit especially on mobile
>I've been using Firefox for Android ever since I got my first Android phone and don't remember any issues with websites.
It's been somewhat rare (and especially rare of late), but I have seen sites broken/not render as mobile because it wasn't Webkit. I've also had a little trouble getting both Chrome and Firefox to behave on Android for a site I was developing, though nothing major and nothing like dealing with IE.

Chromium versus Firefox

Posted Jun 16, 2017 16:31 UTC (Fri) by flussence (guest, #85566) [Link] (2 responses)

It's more likely due to Blink being the only embedding API in town. Nobody else wants people to use their browser as much as Google does.

Chromium versus Firefox

Posted Jun 19, 2017 9:30 UTC (Mon) by epa (subscriber, #39769) [Link] (1 responses)

But here they are not embedding a web control into something else, but making a whole browser. That could be done by forking Firefox as well as by forking Chrome.

Chromium versus Firefox

Posted Jun 20, 2017 6:55 UTC (Tue) by flussence (guest, #85566) [Link]

Projects that try to build on Firefox as a base have historically turned out badly: most of them just tweak the branding, settings and addons.

The only real forks left are Pale Moon, which is lagging years behind on web standards support due to how much it's diverged; and Seamonkey, whose volunteer maintainers are already struggling to keep up. With the impending death of XUL neither are likely to survive the winter - not a very good advertisement for the platform.

The Brave web browser

Posted Jun 16, 2017 7:33 UTC (Fri) by ngiger@mus.ch (subscriber, #4013) [Link]

Thanks for the article. I was always annoyed that I could visit the NZZ (Neue Zürcher Zeitung), a very informative newpaper, for which I am subsribed in paper form. It has a lot of publicity on its site, which sometimes even obscures parts of a headline or picture. With brave loading was a snap and no ad was shown.

I needed to start it via brave --no-sandbox on my debian stretch client.

The Brave web browser

Posted Jun 16, 2017 11:12 UTC (Fri) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] (18 responses)

So as a vitriolic hater of the current web ad infrastructure I was extremely strongly in favour of Brave when I started reading. I wasn't by the time I finished.

Using Bitcoins, or anything remotely like Bitcoins, is suicide for general adoption. That huge numbers of BATs were sold in seconds says nothing other than that there is a huge bubble in cryptocurrencies right now and a few people are trying to do something with massive numbers of bitcoin they made back in the early days (since bitcoin is brazely structured as a pyramid scheme to reward early miners). Unless you *want* the value of your currency to fluctuate crazily and for it to be usable only by a dedicated few, you shouldn't be relying on anything Bitcoin-related at present. The value of users' attention does not fluctuate by a factor of a thousand, and most users are not technically adept and/or do not want to go anywhere near the shark-and-theft-infested wasteland that is cryptocurrencies, so this is probably a bad decision. Using a major existing currency like Euros, which hundreds of millions of people have instant access to and the rest can get acces to easily, was far more sensible. (Also... the advertisers don't *want* cryptocurrency, they want real currency. The two are not terribly interconvertible, and the convertibility plunges whenever yet another massive cryptocurrency scam or mega-theft breaks open.)

And then I discover that they intentionally broke their browser by disabling installation of Chrome extensions. Yes, thanks, very secure, I'm sure, but that just means you're dictating that I not run my preferred ad-blocker but rather run yours and that I have to *change browser* to change that decision. (And I tried Brave a few months back and frankly its adblocker is much worse at its job than uBlock, so I'd be paying to not see ads -- if I could pay, which I can't, because I don't have a Bitcoin wallet because I'm not crazy -- but *still* seeing ads the adblocker is not smart enough to stop. The worst of both worlds. No thank you.)

The Brave web browser

Posted Jun 16, 2017 12:52 UTC (Fri) by dw (subscriber, #12017) [Link] (14 responses)

You're advocating for an online micropayments system based on real currency, there have been numerous attempts and I guess by now if a popular option for this doesn't exist yet, then perhaps there are some fundamental issues with this approach (and no, it's not an invitation for you to ask me to list them all out, it's a suggestion to go do your research).

As for whether the user ever need even know their $5 was turned into some magical sprinkling of bits behind the scenes, they don't, and this is firmly a UI problem.

As for the floating value of Brave's particular coin and how it may interact with the end user, I have no understanding of that, but Ethereum and derivatives are worlds onto themselves, at least I know that much

The Brave web browser

Posted Jun 16, 2017 16:52 UTC (Fri) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] (13 responses)

The primary problem with using real currency for microtransactions is the high transaction costs at payment processors, but frankly something like Brave (a single point through which all transactions flow) can agglomerate multiple transactions into one and reduce those costs greatly. However, precisely *because* real money is involved, piles of extra regulation would also land on Brave's desk -- they're basically acting as something between a payment processor and a bank (since they store agglomerated funds while disaggregating them) and obviously that means they can't be as wild and woolly as they might otherwise like to be.

But, alas, I suspect that this is going to be their real problem: neither their likely users nor the websites they want to interact with care about this cryptocurrency stuff, they'd like to be paid / pay in actual money. If cryptocurrencies become successful enough that a significant proportion of plausible users and websites are accepting it, wel, look, the regulation will come along with it. It *has* to, because no actual financial system will accept the sort of wild west mass theft nonsense that Bitcoin, Ethereum etc have been rife with up till now.

The Brave web browser

Posted Jun 17, 2017 4:17 UTC (Sat) by drag (guest, #31333) [Link] (12 responses)

cryptocurrency makes sense. It really does.

The low transaction costs are key and are the value that the money has in itself. Even if people limit their use of cryptocurrency simply as a way to bypass electric money transfers (transfer dollars into cryptocurrency to send, and then back again when done) and services like paypal then it has inherent value and will end up as a success.

I always figured bitcoin was doomed for failure, though. Why? Because it's the first time people have been able to try this stuff on a large scale. As far as pyramid schemes go and risk.. It's not a real pyramid scam, but the risk is part of how speculation works. Risk is critical for discipline in the market.. if you make it safe and guaranteed then there is no limit to the amount that people will try to drive the market to excess and exploit issues.

It's going to take a while and quite a few people getting burned on these sorts of markets before people really figure it out.

For any sort of business model that depends on micropayments then trying to base it entirely on Euro or dollars or anything else is just never going to work.

The Brave web browser

Posted Jun 17, 2017 12:08 UTC (Sat) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] (2 responses)

cryptocurrency makes sense. It really does.

The low transaction costs are key

So presumably you're no longer considering Bitcoin cryptocurrency, since transaction delays are now so huge that schemes have sprung up where you pay people to get agglomerated into their transaction, driving transaction costs up to frankly ridiculous levels.
As far as pyramid schemes go and risk.. It's not a real pyramid scam, but the risk is part of how speculation works.
I'm not saying it's a pyramid scheme because it's risky. I'm saying it's a pyramid scheme because the exponentially declining mining rate is an obvious way to ensure that whatever value Bitcoin gets is predominantly funnelled to early users who mined or hung onto coins before it got popular. (Of course, this only works if the early bitcoins doesn't get stolen by someone else, which given the state of IT security means they more or less have to be kept offline and disconnected from any powered-on device. So perhaps we should say that it is a pyramid scheme that funnels value to early users and miners, and thieves who prey on those people.)

The Brave web browser

Posted Jun 19, 2017 17:01 UTC (Mon) by drag (guest, #31333) [Link] (1 responses)

> So presumably you're no longer considering Bitcoin cryptocurrency,

No longer _successful_ cryptocurrency. I never had high hopes for bitcoin.

> I'm saying it's a pyramid scheme because the exponentially declining mining rate is an obvious way to ensure that whatever value Bitcoin gets is predominantly funnelled to early users who mined or hung onto coins before it got popular.

That's not really anything that is unique to bitcoin. You are just describing that is commonly called deflation. When the supply of money doesn't rise to meet the demand then the value of the money tends to rise. People are then incentivized to hold onto the money, which then (when the money gains acceptance) tends to get used in the form of loans and whatnot.

The creation of alternative 'coins' is then a good thing because it's a way to inflate the supply beyond the built-in limitations of bitcoin, but is still going to be something that is predictable. It encourages technological development in cryptocurrencies and discourages people from hording 'alt-coins' as long term investment. If people manage to create a technologically excellent 'alt-coin' then they can be rewarded by being a early-in.

The Brave web browser

Posted Jun 29, 2017 10:14 UTC (Thu) by davidgerard (guest, #100304) [Link]

Ethereum is already showing transaction clogs - it's about 3 TPS average (capacity is presently 14 TPS), but the Bancor and Status ICOs both rendered the network unusable for several hours.

Ethereum is not going to cope with an even slightly popular dapp, and that particularly includes BAT on Brave if it gets any appreciable number of users.

You could postulate BAT hopping from crypto to crypto as they fill, I suppose ...

The Brave web browser

Posted Jun 18, 2017 22:18 UTC (Sun) by neilbrown (subscriber, #359) [Link] (8 responses)

> The low transaction costs are key and are the value that the money has in itself.

What an interesting claim...

I have wondered where the value of money comes from... once it was gold, but not for many years.
I read a suggestion that the value of "legal tender" currency is that the government accepts it to pay taxes, and that seems credible, at least.

But "low cost of transactions" being the value.... If that is true - and I do see sense in the idea - then it explains the instability. There seems to be a positive-feedback in the idea that "it is used because it is used", and positive feedback is bad for stability.

The Brave web browser

Posted Jun 19, 2017 7:11 UTC (Mon) by niner (guest, #26151) [Link] (5 responses)

I've always found it curious that people accept the value of gold but not the value of fiat money.

Why is gold valuable?

People think it's sorta pretty, but certainly not _that_ pretty. It's a reasonably good conductor, but there are better. As metals go it's relatively soft. A cool property is that gold leaf can be beaten extremely thin, but that's hardly enough to give it the value it has. Gold is one of the few noble metals and that is certainly worth something. But frankly, silver beats it in most applications.

No, really the factor that contributes most to gold's value is its limited availability. And that is something that is e.g. much more true for Bitcoin.

The Brave web browser

Posted Jun 19, 2017 9:13 UTC (Mon) by Sesse (subscriber, #53779) [Link] (1 responses)

You may have noticed that the world has moved away from the gold standard.

The Brave web browser

Posted Jun 19, 2017 10:53 UTC (Mon) by niner (guest, #26151) [Link]

You may have noticed that I even mentioned that fact by talking about fiat money.

FWIW I responded to this: "I have wondered where the value of money comes from... once it was gold", which assumes that gold has some inherent value.

The Brave web browser

Posted Jun 19, 2017 17:15 UTC (Mon) by drag (guest, #31333) [Link] (1 responses)

All money is is a commodity that becomes very widely accepted.

Lots of stuff has been money in the past... cows, goats, wheat, tobacco leaves, various stones, feathers, etc etc. Some of them, like tobacco, ended up being the basis of paper money will some fairly sophisticated schemes to allow trade and movement of tobacco and savings in tobacco without it going bad while in storage.

Metals, as you can imagine, has some advantages over those things. It's divisible... you can take a gold coin, cut it in half, and it's still worth the same as it was before. You can't do that with a cow.

It also doesn't rot, doesn't really tarnish. Gold and other precious metals don't tend to rust. Gold is extremely chemically stable. It's also convenient to store and move. You can have a lot of wealth in gold and still be able to lock it up or carry it around with you. Can't do that with, say, granite.

Prior to regulation typically you had multiple competing currencies, though. Silver was far more popular then Gold ever was for most the history of the USA.

Crypto currency and The Brave web browser

Posted Jun 20, 2017 1:30 UTC (Tue) by neilbrown (subscriber, #359) [Link]

> All money is is a commodity that becomes very widely accepted.

True, but that doesn't tell the full story of why it is considered to be valuable.
Begin easy to divide, easy to transport, easy to store, short in supply and hard to forge are necessary conditions, but they aren't sufficient.

I think that understanding the dynamics of value is important for understanding stability, and hence long term value. Some of the things you listed only worked as money in localised settings (local in both time and space). Others work more broadly.

I'm particularly interested in value from the perspective of stability - probably because I'm hoping for a comfortable retirement in a few years. I can see that while bitcoin clearly has value (to some people), it is no where near as stable as, e.g. the US or AU dollar.
I imagine that if a crypto currency was backed by a more solid currency, then the low transaction cost could be expected to raise its value a little above the underlying currency (2% discount if you pay in bitcoin), but as bitcoin is backed by nothing and the *only* value is in the low transaction cost .... I won't be using it for my retirement savings.

The Brave web browser

Posted Jun 21, 2017 15:59 UTC (Wed) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link]

And that is something that is e.g. much more true for Bitcoin.
Bitcoin is too scarce. Gold is hard to produce (by mining) but also very hard to destroy. It's high per-volume value pretty much guarantees that if it's stolen and/or lost it could be returned with some effort. Bitcoins... not so much.

The Brave web browser

Posted Jun 19, 2017 7:23 UTC (Mon) by cladisch (✭ supporter ✭, #50193) [Link] (1 responses)

> I have wondered where the value of money comes from

Money is a universal medium of exchange, i.e., its value is that everybody else accepts it. This usually requires that it is hard to counterfeit and easy to transport and exchange.

(Please note that "value" is a subjective measure. The price of something is what somebody actually pays for it, and this is objective; the value is what what some specific person is willing to pay for it, and in the general case, this cannot be measured without the transaction actually taking place.)

> I read a suggestion that the value of "legal tender" currency is that the government accepts it to pay taxes

"Legal tender is a medium of payment recognized by a legal system to be valid for meeting a financial obligation." (Wikipedia) So this applies not only for debts to the government, but to all other debts (because you would ultimately use the courts to enforce contracts).

The Brave web browser

Posted Jun 29, 2017 15:02 UTC (Thu) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link]

"Legal Tender" as I understand it was introduced by us Brits when we moved from Gold Coin to Pound Notes.

There was a problem with lenders refusing to accept notes - despite them prominently containing a notice that the Bank Of England would swap them for gold on request - "I promise to pay the bearer on demand the sum of one pound".

So Parliament created legal tender. If a debtor proffered "legal tender" in settlement of a debt, the creditor *had* *to* take it - or forfeit their right to take the debt to a court.

I've actually used this to my advantage on one occasion - I ordered a load of goods mail order, and the supplier completely cocked up taking payment (I tried to pay by debit card). After a couple of requests for payment, which I tried to comply with, they sent the matter to their lawyer who sent me an email nastygram. I replied "I've tried to pay. Here's the details. I wouldn't see me in court if I were you - legal tender you know. You need to talk to your accounts department and tell them if they've got any sense they'll write the debt off." They did :-)

Cheers,
Wol

The Brave web browser

Posted Jun 16, 2017 20:14 UTC (Fri) by k8to (guest, #15413) [Link] (2 responses)

Yeah pretty much. I'd love to pay for content instead of being assaulted with untrustworthy byte streams, but bitcoin et al don't have my trust.

When I last looked into the hoops I'd have to jump through to be able to own some bitcoins (provide my banking account details etc, or jump through a large number of technical hoops), I realized I didn't want them badly enough. And that leaves aside the way it's designed for speculation, and the way the algorithm has been defeated by a majority stakeholder permitting falsification of the trust chain. And so on.

I'm all for finding a way around the unreasonably high fees of visa and mastercard, but it's unclear if there's a low-cost high-reliability path for achieving that.

The Brave web browser

Posted Jun 16, 2017 20:58 UTC (Fri) by MattJD (subscriber, #91390) [Link] (1 responses)

> the way the algorithm has been defeated by a majority stakeholder permitting falsification of the trust chain.

Are you talking about the design of bitcoin, where a miner with a majority share of the hashing power can create a false chain? Or is there some specific example? And if the second, can you provide a link? A quick Google doesn't reveal anything about someone actually doing that.

The Brave web browser

Posted Jun 29, 2017 10:16 UTC (Thu) by davidgerard (guest, #100304) [Link]

Emin Gun Sirer sets out a pile of attacks a selfish miner can make on a proof of work blockchain, from 25% of hashpower up:

http://hackingdistributed.com/2014/06/16/how-a-mining-mon...

The Brave web browser

Posted Jun 17, 2017 1:34 UTC (Sat) by ssmith32 (subscriber, #72404) [Link]

If 15% of the Brave ad revenue is going back to the advertising partners, where is the money coming from?

Or is it just a silly way of saying the ads are 15% off the second price?


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds