Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

theregister.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 489 posts

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#211

Post by Kalium »

coldtea wrote: post #128
notgood wrote: post #7

"publication independence"? Really? The man who is famous among other things for supporting the most closed ecosystem there is around: iOS, where a single company decides what apps are worth publishing and wish ones doesn't. Or does newspaper publication independence is really that more important than software publication independence. The irony is so clear that it's weird that he didn't even mention it. That genie i…

> "publication independence"? Really? The man who is famous among other things for supporting the most closed ecosystem there is around: iOS, where a single company decides what apps are worth publishing and wish ones doesn't. First of all, that's an ad hominem. If publication independence is important, then it remains important whether Gruber is hypocritical about it or not. Second, one might want apps to be curated…

> First of all, that's an ad hominem. If publication independence is important, then it remains important whether Gruber is hypocritical about it or not.

I agree! It's a poison in the well lazy people use to discredit something they don't like without thinking about it.

However, in this particular instance it raises questions of whether or not Gruber is arguing in good faith. It lends credence to accusations that editorial independence might not be his overriding concern.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#212

Post by eridius »

Kalium wrote: post #211
coldtea wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "publication independence"? Really? The man who is famous among other things for supporting the most closed ecosystem there is around: iOS, where a single company decides what apps are worth publishing and wish ones doesn't. First of all, that's an ad hominem. If publication independence is important, then it remains important whether Gruber is hypocritical about it or not. Second, one might want apps to be curated…

> First of all, that's an ad hominem. If publication independence is important, then it remains important whether Gruber is hypocritical about it or not. I agree! It's a poison in the well lazy people use to discredit something they don't like without thinking about it. However, in this particular instance it raises questions of whether or not Gruber is arguing in good faith. It lends credence to accusations that edi…

No, it doesn't. I don't even understand why you're making such an argument. What exactly are you implying is his secret concern?

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#213

Post by H4CK3RM4N »

SL61 wrote: post #157
exergy wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Duckduckgo is a lovely idea with abhorrent search results. Like, unusably bad results, at least to the extent that I'm a reasonably tech savvy user. I'm often searching for papers as a grad student, or typing things "close enough" and hoping Google figures it out for me etc. Duckduckgo cannot keep up. I love Bangs, I love the idea, but the search is nigh-useless. That said, I use StartPage, who have a contract I beli…

It has greatly improved over the years. I remember it being unusably bad when I first tried it in 2013, but today I only have to revert to Google once in a while. That being said, there are rare occasions when it fails spectacularly, bringing up totally irrelevant results for simple searches. It seems to expect more precise queries, while Google is geared toward "close enough" searches. I've found that DDG is often p…

DDG feels like it's still using Google's early algorithms, whereas Google has moved to prioritising more question or natural-language based searches recently.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#214

Post by mort96 »

tomduncalf wrote: post #81

AMP needs to either be drastically rethought or killed. Nothing more annoying for me on my iPhone than clicking a link and it's AMP - as it means missing features, broken scrolling, masked URL and worst of all, in page search is totally broken on the iPhone! So annoying that there is no way to disable it - if Google persist in pushing it then it might push me to try alternatives!

Google's broken AMP crap is what made me switch to duckduckgo on iOS.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#215

Post by loup-vaillant »

coldtea wrote: post #161
cbsmith wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pointing out a seeming contradiction in an advocate's advocacy is not an ad hominem.

Having your central argument against his case focused on his personal contradiction, is: "That genie is out of the box, when you decided that you didn't mind a company gatekeeping which software you can install on "your" devices you opened that can of worms, the one where any company can gatekeep anything they want as long as it is "convenient" for most people."

That central argument you're talking about doesn't look like it was aimed at Grubber's case. I don't see any disagreement with Gruber's post. I believe it's an attack against Gruber himself, that says the hypocritical bastard got it coming, and even shares some responsibility for advocating the brand that single handedly popularised that kind of lock down.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#216

Post by tlrobinson »

MBCook wrote: post #197
tlrobinson wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Double tap. I think it only works with one tap if the address bar is already open.

No, it's a single tap on the status bar (where the clock is). It works almost anywhere in iOS there's a long scrolling thing.

No, in Mobile Safari if the address bar isn't visible you have to tap twice, once to show the address bar and once to scroll to the top.

It is a single tap in most other apps though.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#217

Post by askafriend »

cramforce wrote: post #165

With respect to scrolling: We (AMP team) filed a bug with Apple about that (we didn't implement scrolling ourselves, just use a div with overflow). We asked to make the scroll inertia for that case the same as the normal scrolling. Apple's response was (surprisingly) to make the default scrolling like the overflow scrolling. So, with the next Safari release all pages will scroll like AMP pages. Hope Gruber is happy t…

Is that really Apple's stance? I find the scrolling to be the #1 reason why I bounce from AMP pages. I would hate for them to make this a system wide behavior.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#218

Post by gommm »

blinkingled wrote: post #22
notgood wrote: post #7

"publication independence"? Really? The man who is famous among other things for supporting the most closed ecosystem there is around: iOS, where a single company decides what apps are worth publishing and wish ones doesn't. Or does newspaper publication independence is really that more important than software publication independence. The irony is so clear that it's weird that he didn't even mention it. That genie i…

Well, it is Gruber we are talking about. He believes in openness when it suits Apple - AMP outputs standard HTML5 which Safari renders - it does its own scrolling but he doesn't quite like it. Google doesn't 'respect' that closed platform. On that 'crime' Gruber has this to say - "If I had my way, Mobile Safari would refuse to render AMP pages." You might have valid reasons not to use AMP but Gruber's are merely that…

I actually had never noticed that it was possible to scroll with AMP because it's different from the way it normally should work. So, yes I think the scrolling issue is a real issue.

So, whenever I've seen AMP, I've just clicked on the link to get the hell out of it.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#219

Post by loup-vaillant »

mcphage wrote: post #14
notgood wrote: post #7

"publication independence"? Really? The man who is famous among other things for supporting the most closed ecosystem there is around: iOS, where a single company decides what apps are worth publishing and wish ones doesn't. Or does newspaper publication independence is really that more important than software publication independence. The irony is so clear that it's weird that he didn't even mention it. That genie i…

> Or does newspaper publication independence is really that more important than software publication independence Well, yes. It really is.

Err… No?

Software is ubiquitous now, and that tend to make it more important than basically everything else. It is also a means of expression (not the only one of course, but still). Finally, how software is build can alter how you read the news (start with profanity filters, then block Tienanmen or something).

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#220

Post by megablast »

aoeusnth1 wrote: post #122
jwilcoxson wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I get your point, your rebuttal is a pretty hardcore ad hominem.

It's not a rebuttal - he's not trying to say Scott is wrong. He's pointing out Scott is a hypocrite. An insult is not an instance of the ad hominem fallacy.

> "the cat is out of the bag".

This is where he says his argument is rubbish because he supports iOS.

Post reply on HN