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

AMP: the missing controversy

ferdychristant.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 143 posts

Re: AMP: the missing controversy

#101

Post by stevenicr »

mulmen wrote: post #36
pasbesoin wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends on the platform, and on ongoing developments in law, regulation, and third-party cooperation (one big way U.S. governments get around their own restrictions is by soliciting (often, paid) data from third parties not bound by such restrictions). Anyway, they may well have this data. Some other data, more likely not. And, even where they may have -- or have access to, this data, retention periods may be sign…

Ok but what is the alternative for online communication?

I think there are many pieces of that puzzle floating around. Fastest replacement might be if someone can make an app to encrypt on device replies via email.

but that's not all.. if a pw protected chunk was sent back to a buddypress activity or message reply and could be decoded there... then people could setup a wordpress/buddypress for family and a separate install for friends..

Options to get rss read of activity, or get emailed activity and replies. Could just email a reply back with a plugin, but that's currently in the clear. It could just be a notice that ScreenName X posted a reply on the Activity Group Y.. click to read.. and it's trivial to make those things private / login needed kind of privacy at that point.

So solve email encrypt on device, send to server which I think can hold data encrypted with php 7, and it would need to be decrypted within wordpress/buddypress for friends / family there when they logged in .. then there are most of the other pieces for mutliple messaging different contacts and groups.. it's all there.

I am sure there are other similar projects with similar hooks where a similar thing could be streamlined / integrated with just on device email, with options to beef up the privacy to make it better. Would be nice to addin sms texting to the mix for notifications and replies somehow.

most people know using email, and buddypress can be very similar to fbook for layout, so familiar to most I think. It's all close.

Re: AMP: the missing controversy

#102

Post by devgutt »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #2

We were discussing with the AMP project tech lead over on GitHub trying to suss out details about governance and the like, and it's even scarier than we thought when it came to AMP4Email: Gmail is implementing AMP in email "the way they want to", and AMP Project is just deciding whether or not they want to support it/publish a 'standard'. I strongly recommend this for reading: https://github.com/ampproject/amphtml/is…

The solution is not in the websites, but in search itself. Search needs to be broken down. One centralized search, once good, now is really dangerous for the open web.

Re: AMP: the missing controversy

#103

Post by robin_reala »

tombrossman wrote: post #95
robin_reala wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I closed my G Suite account today because of Google’s announcement of AMP for Email. Luckily I didn’t have a huge Google presence in the first place beyond email which is easily IMAPed over to another server. Takeout allowed me to extract the rest: my docs as ODF, YouTube subs as RSS and contacts as ICS. If anyone’s interested I wrote up my investigation into potential replacement mail services: http://www.robinwhitt…

> In the end I went with Runbox, will see how they perform but I’m happy so far. I tried Runbox back in 2013 after a fair amount of research and they looked great. After signing up, they sent a confirmation email with all my account info with user-name and password in clear text. I cancelled immediately after seeing this, but I wonder if they are still doing it? I ended up switching to Fastmail, which I still use and…

I didn’t get that this time at least. It’s worth pointing out that while that’s not great, if they send the password before encrypting it for saving in the database and only send it internally to their own mail server then there’s little security risk. But it’s not best practise as it trains users to expect it from other sites.

Re: AMP: the missing controversy

#104

Post by ballenf »

mulmen wrote: post #37
jadedhacker wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right, being the kind of citizen you want to be is undeniable a good thing, but it's also undeniably useless. It individualizes a collective problem, thereby being an ineffective solution. The only way to resist power is with collective action that substantially challenges it.

I disagree with your defeatist message and I consider it harmful if spread. Individual action is the foundation of our entire social system. It is not "useless" by any measure. I don't want to use AMP in email so I'm not going to. It's just that easy. What are you doing and what do you suggest the rest of us do? Is voting with our wallets not a thing any longer?

People may not like a compromise approach, but I've switched to using standard IMAP-based mail readers with gmail. If more people did that instead of using the gmail app and web site, Google would maybe see that AMP'd email wouldn't reach a large number of their customers.

Then again, maybe AMP is their solution to this third-party interface "problem": create an incompatible "feature" that will encourage or force users to abandon standards-based tools.

Kind of like what's happened with Google Talk. God I miss the Mac's Messages app being able to interface with my work's gsuite chat.

FWIW, the iOS email client has improved a lot over the last few iOS versions. Worth checking out if you haven't looked at it for a while.

Re: AMP: the missing controversy

#105

Post by tscs37 »

username223 wrote: post #68
Avshalom wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how productive do you think "voting with our wallets" can be for a product we don't pay for from a company with more money than all of us combined?

You're "voting with your data," which for a company like Google is essentially the same thing. If you don't hand them data, they can't monetize it.

Google auotmatically collects data on you the moment you visit and site with Google Analytics or a +1 button or when using Google Ads. Or using youtube.

While it's certainly not totally impossible to vote with your data, you should remember that you are the product for google. The customers are advertisers. Not you.

Re: AMP: the missing controversy

#106

Post by tscs37 »

megous wrote: post #65
tankenmate wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A 501 return will cause an email bounce, so the sender will know that it has been refused. If you for example use "501 5.6.1 AMP format email messages not supported, please use a mail system that doesn't use AMP" then the sender will get that as the reason the mail was not sent.

I know, but AMP will be used mostly for automated email, and I'm not holding my breath many services that send me e-mail check their mailserver logs, if they even know such a thing exists. Bouncing to no-reply address will not help much either. And I need to receive e-mail from services I've registered to anyway, that's why I whitelist anything sent to a random email address that I assign to each service. Better to j…

>Bouncing to no-reply address will not help much either.

If someone does that, it's a good method to land on basically any spam blacklist out there.

Most larger providers like mailgun will tell you if you're bouncing a lot of mails and reduce your reputation. Same for gmail even.

Re: AMP: the missing controversy

#107

Post by lucio »

>The term “open source” is meaningless if the thing that is open source is harmful.

A note on "harmful" as an adjective: It depends on the speaker.

any open source project aiming to bypass the Great Firewall of China is "harmful", according to the Communist Party.

Re: AMP: the missing controversy

#109

Post by topbarcolor »

kllrnohj wrote: post #49
ddmd1 wrote: post #11

Google can't "simply preload resources of non-AMP pages". Using a CDN means they can get more consistent load times and avoid the inevitable privacy concerns that come with loading 3rd party content the user may never actually click on.

Chrome has been prefetching & prerendering links since 2013. IE11 has also been prefetching & prerendering as well since 2013 ( https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/ie/2013/12/04/getting-to-th... ) So it's not only possible to do, they've literally been doing it for 5 years now. Firefox doesn't appear to do prerendering, but it will happily prefetch as well and has since Firefox 23. AMP's cap on file sizes and other limi…

Provided the server Hosting the site to be prefetched uses HTTP headers correctly, you can even do it via ajax from any website, regardless of how the browser is configured or capable: ust load the page/image/whatever and throw away the result, now it's in cache.

Re: AMP: the missing controversy

#110

Post by lern_too_spel »

kuschku wrote: post #85
lern_too_spel wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What are you going to do when Google gets bored of supporting Chrome and disbands the team, leaving your web pages tied to a stagnating browser? The whole point is that AMP works on all major browsers as they exist today. Waiting for a new standard and then waiting for Apple to implement it is a non-starter.

Sure, just like Google Earth works on any browser, or Hangouts, or ... Google's always only supporting competing software just as much as absolutely necessary

Google might make web apps that work in only one browser, but publishers won't publish in a format that supports only one browser. That's why Microsoft, Baidu, Yahoo Japan, etc. also have AMP caches.

On the other hand, using the web package standard as the ancestor suggests would currently trap you to Google.

Post reply on HN