I mean personally for myself, was gonna use Firefox regardless- I’d rather support the open source option and web engine that isn’t chromium based; the question for me was whether to use brave search, and if brave search was providing rights to web content to those who’d like to use it for AI training. I had generally liked brave search okay as my google replacement (though I will say I tired quant looking for a brave alternative because of this article, and qwant is pretty good too! I’ve been impressed!)
Not disclosing sites are being crawled is iffy, but I genuinely do understand the justification given in the email reply that the article updated to add- as long as they’re not selling rights to other people’s content for AI training.
I’m a little out of my depth here from a technical perspective so that probably doesn’t help, but honestly between the comment provided by brave and the original authors interpretation of the email response they received, the whole situation feels pretty muddy. The author and brave seem to be kind of fundamentally at odds about what they’re describing brave as doing, so it’s a little hard to gauge. Even if brave is accurately describing the product they provide (“it’s an api you can make calls to to get ai outputs based on web content”) which doesn’t seem totally consistent with some of the descriptions on their api products page, it still feels somewhat ambiguous because of the fact that websites can’t opt out of their content being provided through an api, whether it’s been filtered through a LLM or not. It all seems very, very mudy; hard to make heads or tails of. I’ll be curious to see any additional updates to the article.
Most of the claims in the article have been retracted after Brave responded
That’s not true, the author pretty explicitly maintained the most important claims…
and the issue didn’t affect users anyway.
So…? You can do unethical things without it affecting the user…? There’s an argument to be had around whether it’s unethical, but it not affecting the user is frankly kinda irrelevant.
Also, Brave is a completely independent search engine now
Indeed! That’s why I was using them. If folks are looking for a brave alternative with their own index though, I’d say qwant has seemed very competitive, and it like their interface even better, though they do lack the helpful ai summary tool- perhaps both for better and worse.
which is why they have web crawlers like the guy in the article is complaining about.
That’s definitely not what he was complaining about. He was complaining about how they’re crawling the web. Tons of people have crawlers, but most do a better job of respecting website consent than brave seems to (even if brave may have understandable reasons, which they might), and that’s especially important given the broader context of the story.
Brave Browser has an opt-in feature for that where sites you visit will be indexed by Brave Search.
Yes, that’s exactly what I was referring to… It’s a cool feature, and I wish Firefox would implement it and maybe use the results to make an open source web index that any alternative search engines could use to supplement their own indexes in order to support competition with bing and google.
Brave Search is the only real contender to be an actual competitor for Google Search
That’s an entirely baseless assertion, I literally listed 3 alternatives to brave, all of which have their own index (and I’m pretty sure there are others, but I may be mistaken), and of those 3 I’d say qwant provides very competitive search results with brave, maybe even better. I plan to keep testing them but its cool for there to be more than one decent private search engine that isn’t a meta search!
All of their arguments against Brave really aren’t serious and don’t affect users at all.
That’s the second time you make this argument and it still doesn’t matter. If were to steal the entirety of other people’s content and copy it 1-1 without attribution that doesn’t affect users either, but that sure as hell doesn’t mean its okay. And I already explained that it genuinely is ambiguous whether what brave is doing is okay- if they’re selling people’s content to train large language models, that’s definitely serious, and for right now it does remain kinda ambiguous whether they’re doing that or not
I get that you’re frustrated and feel like people are biased against something you like, but getting angry, making poor arguments to defend a corporation that doesn’t care about any of us, and calling everyone who says they prefer not to support Brave is more shill-like behavior than the folks you’re frustrated with, it might be worth dialing it back a bit.
Edit: adjusted wording for accuracy, and some of my original wording felt a little more passive aggressive than it need end to be (and some of it kinda still is but I’m tired and don’t wanna edit more 😅 apologies for tone that comes across as somewhat hostile)