←back to thread

Brave taking cryptocurrency donations “for me” without my consent

(twitter.com)
323 points plusCubed | 6 comments | 21 Dec 18 17:48 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source | bottom
Show context
plusCubed ◴[21 Dec 18 18:03 UTC] No.18735107[source]▶
Edit: title was changed, I am not Tom Scott

I am not too familiar with how Brave and BAT (Brave Attention Token), so please chime in. Here's how Brave describes the BAT YouTube donations system: https://basicattentiontoken.org/brave-expands-basic-attentio...

From my understanding, users of the Brave Browser select which YouTubers to donate to, but they don't know whether the channels have opted in to receive donations? What does Brave do with unclaimed donations? Someone pointed out this concern in an earlier submission: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15730661

Furthermore, OP said that they might not be following GDPR due to collection of YouTuber data (to assign donations). IANAL, anyone know how compliant this is?

replies(2): >>18735736 #>>18736561 #
brandnewlow ◴[21 Dec 18 20:55 UTC] No.18736561[source]▶
I work at Brave. Tips to un-verified publishers sit in escrow for the creator to claim.

IANAL but GDPR refers to personal data collected from users. The only "Youtuber data" being "used" here is publicly gettable data from the Youtuber's channel.

replies(8): >>18736701 #>>18736743 #>>18736888 #>>18736940 #>>18737023 #>>18739592 #>>18739904 #>>18741982 #
AnabeeKnox ◴[21 Dec 18 21:13 UTC] No.18736701[source]▶
Search on this page for the word "fraud". Here's what I'd do in your position: remove anything on the internet which personally identifies you as an employee of your company. Nobody knows what is going to happen next, but be prepared for it.
replies(1): >>18736913 #
1. CryptoPunk ◴[21 Dec 18 21:40 UTC] No.18736913[source]▶
There is zero chance an employee is going to get in trouble because a browser company they worked for collected funds in an escrow account to be released in the event that an intended recipient signs up.
replies(4): >>18737184 #>>18738120 #>>18738284 #>>18741911 #
2. thinkmassive ◴[21 Dec 18 22:15 UTC] No.18737184[source]▶
Might want to hold off until we see what legal discovery turns up in chat logs, emails, etc
replies(1): >>18737742 #
3. jacques_chester ◴[21 Dec 18 23:42 UTC] No.18737742[source]▶
Incidentally, a reminder: pre-emptively destroying records under the apprehension that you might be served with a lawsuit is A Bad Idea.
4. jblow ◴[22 Dec 18 00:52 UTC] No.18738120[source]▶
I would think twice about hiring someone if their previous place of work was a scam company, at least because it tells me something about that person's ethical compass.
5. Obi_Juan_Kenobi ◴[22 Dec 18 01:28 UTC] No.18738284[source]▶
He calls himself VC, so he may be more liable than you think.
6. ubernostrum ◴[22 Dec 18 18:54 UTC] No.18741911[source]▶
There is a non-zero chance that a company in legal trouble will suddenly decide an employee wasn't authorized to speak on their behalf and so clearly misrepresent their perfectly legal and honest intentions, and throw that employee under a bus.

Best thing to avoid that, as I said in another comment, is to quit and get a lawyer.