I didn't think they did those anymore. True, though, they've tried endless very slimy business models - anything that works until they get caught or called out.
We never replaced ads on web pages. The binance.{us,com} auto-complete affiliate code was a bug and we renounced any (tiny) revenue that might come from it.
I think it's slimy to do what you just did. Why'd you do it? We didn't do the first thing you said, and we shipped and then fixed the bug on the second. I don't see how you can excuse your action.
Because I don't believe you. For example, I followed up on your claim about the second when it happened and it appeared clear to me that it was not a bug.
I'm now familiar with how you aggressively and dishonestly attack people who call out Brave's actions. I know I'm not special - that's just how you do business - but you aren't going to intimidate me.
I will make one concession to your attack though, I will declare that I'm not affiliated with any party in this and am simply doing my best to objectively judge the facts.
If you don't believe me, then there's no point in talking. But you can verify for yourself that we've never replaced ads in publisher pages. On the binance.{us,com} autocomplete with affiliate code, it was a blunder where two entries in a table had the wrong flag passed in. Not sure how to prove intent, so again: no point talking if you don't believe me but my work has been in the open for 23+ years and I stand behind it.
I'm not stupid: I'm not going to discard my judgement based on careful examination of independent parties in favour of how you want me to judge it. (Even if I hadn't seen that you are not trustworthy and will aggressively attack people for speaking the truth.)
> If you don't believe me, then there's no point in talking.
I didn't refer you to independent parties. You can check Brave (we provide old versions on github) and you won't ever find us replacing ads in publisher pages. We're all open source on the client side, so you can read revision histories too. If you don't check for yourself, then how do you know what you said is true?
It would help if you named your "independent parties" plural you're relying on. It seems you can't inspect our product or code for yourself. Are you sure you have a reliable and independent source who has checked our work? Hint: not David Gerard.
