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

Google no longer providing original URL in AMP for image search results

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 566 posts

Re: Google no longer providing original URL in AMP for image search results

#261

Post by SquareWheel »

radium3d wrote: post #144
kelvin0 wrote: post #130

Non-web coder here. I searched 'google amp', and I can't really understand what it's supposed to do? Can anyone explain what problem AMP is supposed solve, or what features it brings to the table?

Amp is supposed to reduce file size and script overhead. Its seemingly innocent goal was to speed up page loading on slower mobile devices and reduce bandwidth usage. Google then cached entire amp versions of articles on their servers and never load the original when searchers or Google news app users click to read an article. It means the authors of the articles web pages never get hit by readers. This is I think th…

You're only half right. While Amp is designed to create small pages, what's more important is that they should be safely-embeddable. That means there's no potentially unsafe scripts or asset requests. That why Amp uses a subset of HTML as defined via WebComponents.

>Google then cached entire amp versions of articles on their servers

That's the Amp Cache. The cache allows vendors like Google, Microsoft, and Cloudflare (who each run their own caches) to automatically preload these pages in search results without there being any risk to the user. Yes, Bing runs a copy too.

Re: Google no longer providing original URL in AMP for image search results

#262

Post by nielsole »

nothis wrote: post #247
ralmidani wrote: post #127

I got a new computer (Mac Mini) last week and, as the ritual usually goes, I opened Safari and was about to type “google.com/chrome”, then stopped myself and went to “getfirefox.com” instead. It’s been a while since I gave FF a serious look, and so far I haven’t felt like I’m missing anything. Next up, I need to change my default search engine to DDG. What’s a good privacy-oriented, web-based email service? I’ve hear…

>What’s a good privacy-oriented, web-based email service? I’ve heard of ProtonMail but haven’t used it. Been Firefox user out of conviction for 10+ years, made the switch to DuckDuckGo as my main search engine with about a year ago, no regrets. But Gmail? It's sticky. I have so much stuff tied to my email account and it just sucks looking for alternatives. I'd even happily pay. The main difficulty is finding a servic…

The good thing is you never need to drop your Gmail. I use Fastmail since 4? Years and still get all the mail from all private accounts I've ever had. And they have excellent guides for migration, or so I recall (it's been a while)

Re: Google no longer providing original URL in AMP for image search results

#263

Post by SCdF »

googleimagesguy wrote: post #256

Hi all! I'm an engineer who worked on this feature. I can't speak to the general concerns about AMP, but I can say that we didn't remove the original url here intentionally - we actually never added it to the Images version. Sorry for the oversight, we're working on bringing it back now!

https://www.ruinedby.design/

Please read this book. The future internet will thank you.

Re: Google no longer providing original URL in AMP for image search results

#264

Post by Kalium »

throwaway2048 wrote: post #255
joshuamorton wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll bite: how does signed exchanges provide control to Google?

Because its cover to allow them to subsume content and serve it solely from google.com, and deny the originating page any traffic or recognition, or swap it out transparently when they feel like it. This is literally already happening with the info sidebar, the reason signed exchanges matter is so they can throw up the smokescreen about how its cryptographically verified to come from the original page, so why are peo…

As I understood signed exchanges, a correct implementation makes it impossible for the intermediary to inject, alter, replace, or otherwise swap out any part of the page without failing verification. This would mean the original server gets to do all the branding and get all the recognition and integrity in transit that its controllers might wish.

I've clearly missed something. Can you help me?

Re: Google no longer providing original URL in AMP for image search results

#265

Post by joshuamorton »

throwaway2048 wrote: post #255
joshuamorton wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll bite: how does signed exchanges provide control to Google?

Because its cover to allow them to subsume content and serve it solely from google.com, and deny the originating page any traffic or recognition, or swap it out transparently when they feel like it. This is literally already happening with the info sidebar, the reason signed exchanges matter is so they can throw up the smokescreen about how its cryptographically verified to come from the original page, so why are peo…

> swap it out transparently

> cryptographically verified to come from the original page

Elaborate.

Re: Google no longer providing original URL in AMP for image search results

#266

Post by zenexer »

Malte Ubl from Google responded via Twitter:[0]

> Just heard from the Image Search team that this is an oversight and they'll add the feature! Sorry about that and thanks for the report!

[0]: https://twitter.com/cramforce/status/1265688067706245120

Re: Google no longer providing original URL in AMP for image search results

#267

Post by iagovar »

snazz wrote: post #157
iagovar wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe, but I don't spend money on high end phones, I don't really see the point if you are not going to play games. I have an LG G4 and honestly, don't really need more.

Are you running LineageOS on it? How are you getting security patches? I wouldn't be comfortable having the device with my most sensitive information on it running an out-of-date operating system, but maybe that's just me.

I'm running Android, and nothing sensitive. Use it as 4g modem, maps, browsing, and communicating.

Re: Google no longer providing original URL in AMP for image search results

#268

Post by throwaway2048 »

Kalium wrote: post #264
throwaway2048 wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because its cover to allow them to subsume content and serve it solely from google.com, and deny the originating page any traffic or recognition, or swap it out transparently when they feel like it. This is literally already happening with the info sidebar, the reason signed exchanges matter is so they can throw up the smokescreen about how its cryptographically verified to come from the original page, so why are peo…

As I understood signed exchanges, a correct implementation makes it impossible for the intermediary to inject, alter, replace, or otherwise swap out any part of the page without failing verification. This would mean the original server gets to do all the branding and get all the recognition and integrity in transit that its controllers might wish. I've clearly missed something. Can you help me?

AMP already heavily restricts what the original page is allowed to put inside, including things like ads, javascript and branding. You can be certain anything google implements around this proposal will have similar very tight restrictions.

Re: Google no longer providing original URL in AMP for image search results

#269

Post by king_magic »

googleimagesguy wrote: post #256

Hi all! I'm an engineer who worked on this feature. I can't speak to the general concerns about AMP, but I can say that we didn't remove the original url here intentionally - we actually never added it to the Images version. Sorry for the oversight, we're working on bringing it back now!

Are you and your team generally aware of the concerns about AMP? What does the AMP team think about how negatively pretty much the entire world views it?

Re: Google no longer providing original URL in AMP for image search results

#270

Post by schnable »

ralmidani wrote: post #127

I got a new computer (Mac Mini) last week and, as the ritual usually goes, I opened Safari and was about to type “google.com/chrome”, then stopped myself and went to “getfirefox.com” instead. It’s been a while since I gave FF a serious look, and so far I haven’t felt like I’m missing anything. Next up, I need to change my default search engine to DDG. What’s a good privacy-oriented, web-based email service? I’ve hear…

What's wrong with Safari?
Post reply on HN