191–200 of 204 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I use duckduckgo on Firefox and I don't see any AMP pages. Give them a go.
DuckDuckGo users are going to be a minority for a long time.
What do you want, to search for stuff or to feel that you're supporting the winning team or something?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Basically, because it isn't actually possible to make a website that loads in under 100ms on poor connections any other way. For reference, on the fast university wifi I am currently connected to, news.ycombinator.com loads in 499ms. When I switch to my phone's hotspot, that rises to 2.38 seconds, and on a simulated slow 3G network, that rises to 6.51 seconds. I haven't tested a 2G connection in India, but wouldn't b…
This is the most well-informed comment about AMP I've ever read. Disclosure: I work on AMP.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Basically, because it isn't actually possible to make a website that loads in under 100ms on poor connections any other way. For reference, on the fast university wifi I am currently connected to, news.ycombinator.com loads in 499ms. When I switch to my phone's hotspot, that rises to 2.38 seconds, and on a simulated slow 3G network, that rises to 6.51 seconds. I haven't tested a 2G connection in India, but wouldn't b…
This is the most well-informed comment about AMP I've ever read. Disclosure: I work on AMP.
And the worst thing is, without these publishers, Google would have no content and therefore no value.
Yes, sub-100ms is attractive. But what do you compromise to achieve that goal?
Who pays the price? Publishers who are already struggling, so that the only content on the web becomes content farm affiliate sales shit?
Why doesn't Google treat all websites that load under 100ms at par with an AMP site? They keep using the ruse that AMP is important because it is all about fast loading sites and less frustrating user experience but they have page speed insights, and already rank sites based on load speed so why force this non standard on everyone? If they just said we'll give you a bolt icon and the perks for a site that loads under…
Basically, because it isn't actually possible to make a website that loads in under 100ms on poor connections any other way. For reference, on the fast university wifi I am currently connected to, news.ycombinator.com loads in 499ms. When I switch to my phone's hotspot, that rises to 2.38 seconds, and on a simulated slow 3G network, that rises to 6.51 seconds. I haven't tested a 2G connection in India, but wouldn't b…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't accept this excuse. Google engineers are smart people. It's not like they are not aware of what they are building.
with the exception of the very few people who know how to manage upwards, when you are the bottom rung of the totem pole org chart (and i'm not talking about developer or engineer levels), you have zero say over what comes down from 2 or 3 levels above you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the most well-informed comment about AMP I've ever read. Disclosure: I work on AMP.
> Disclosure: I work on AMP. Do you all just not think about the long-term implications of what you're building? It's going to destroy the open WWW. Web publishers (and other people who are paying attention) don't want AMP or Portals, but they are being strong-armed into it under threat of losing their traffic.
More AMP bullshit. But, as a pretty staunch anti-Google company, why does DDG send me to AMP links? Give me the ducking (autocorrect pun!) canonical URL!
> why does DDG send me to AMP links? As a DDG user, I've never noticed this. Can you link an example?
I'll try to find an example and note down the site that it happens on.
I think that all of this: AMP, AMP Stories, mini apps[0] and recently announced Portals is a road to create behavior and ecosystem similar to WeChat where user can do as many things as possible without leaving the app. The problem is that google doesn't have popular chat app, but hey... they have incredibly popular search engine.. [0] https://venturebeat.com/2019/05/08/googles-mini-apps-are-app...
Further away I can see devices completely disappearing. Surfaces of all kinds, contact lenses serve as information overlays. Eventually the physical world and that information layer might become indistinguishable and just sort of combine to create the new reality.
/complete guesswork
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It depends. Most people, only want the answer to the “question” they typed. And if that is answered in a widget, cloaking the original content, they don’t care. That’s what google realized.
Earlier today I wanted to search for info concerning whether a person had to turn in everything they found in the street. Which one returned any relevant results? Bing: https://www.bing.com/search?q=do+i+have+to+turn+in+everythin... Google: https://www.google.com/search?q=do+i+have+to+turn+in+everyth...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the most well-informed comment about AMP I've ever read. Disclosure: I work on AMP.
Would you say that the majority of design decisions at Google in recent times have been in relation to the idea of building services towards developing countries/economies where infrastructure is not necessarily as well developed, tailoring it towards those few billion soon-to-be newly connected people who previously have never had access to the internet before?