←back to thread

Brave taking cryptocurrency donations “for me” without my consent

(twitter.com)
323 points plusCubed | 1 comments | 21 Dec 18 17:48 UTC | HN request time: 0.209s | source
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 #
rchaud ◴[21 Dec 18 21:37 UTC] No.18736888[source]▶
Tom Scott did not explicitly sign up for this service. Brave is not even telling users that Tom Scott is not signed up, and Brave has no automated way of contacting him to let him know that someone donated. The system is engineered to move the money towards Brave, with neither the benefactor nor the beneficiary being aware of that. How is that ethical?
replies(3): >>18737550 #>>18739375 #>>18744500 #
throwaway12231 ◴[22 Dec 18 06:59 UTC] No.18739375[source]▶
I don't want to muddle into the legal discussion, but I would like to add that I've been a happy Brave user for several months and have never felt any misunderstanding about where my tips are going. It is very clear to me who is a -verified- publisher and who isn't one. It was also made clear to me that unverified publishers were getting their tips stored in escrow as a carrot to entice them to enroll. Since I obviously like this model as a Brave user, I am also pleased with this approach.

I'm kind of confused as to why everyone here is up in arms. The UI denotes whether a publisher is verified or not. I never believed that Brave was trying to mislead me to where my donations were going. This feels like a simple misunderstanding.

replies(1): >>18740021 #
detaro ◴[22 Dec 18 10:46 UTC] No.18740021[source]▶
Can you show screenshots of that? What do the prompts from https://twitter.com/ummjackson/status/1076221401353207808 look like for a verified publisher?
replies(2): >>18741760 #>>18743572 #
kdbg ◴[23 Dec 18 00:45 UTC] No.18743572[source]▶
http://se.ri0.us/2018-12-22-184516548-9adee.png

It has a pretty obvious mark under the name if they are verified.

replies(1): >>18744808 #
pull_my_finger ◴[23 Dec 18 06:44 UTC] No.18744808[source]▶
Maybe instead there should be a big red "X" or something if they _aren't_ verified
replies(2): >>18745351 #>>18749009 #
kdbg ◴[23 Dec 18 23:06 UTC] No.18749009[source]▶
Just to kinda follow up, this is exactly what Brave has added.

It has a grayed out message and a link to learn more about what happens to unclaimed funds: http://se.ri0.us/2018-12-23-170628027-eb454.png

replies(1): >>18756961 #
1. detaro ◴[25 Dec 18 11:05 UTC] No.18756961[source]▶
Thanks for sharing the screenshots!