AMP is the one reason why Duck Duck Go is now my default search engine on mobile.
Google no longer providing original URL in AMP for image search results
321–330 of 566 posts
Re: Google no longer providing original URL in AMP for image search results
#322Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm really concerned about Chrome's 'signed exchanges' where they can fake the URL completely. They're not faking the URL; a signed exchange contains data that can only have come from the original site. It's a secure way of handling caching/CDNs/etc, and it'll be a net improvement for security that allows sites to put less trust in third-party servers and scripts.
> a net improvement for security that allows sites to put less trust in third-party servers and scripts. Third parties like Google, right?
Yes.
Signed Exchanges mean the publisher signs the content using their private key. A third party can provide delivery like a CDN, but they cannot modify the content, or the signature would no longer match. The useragent (browser) enforces this. This gives the secure control of the content back to the publisher, unlike the trust model of CDNs or the AMP Cache.
Re: Google no longer providing original URL in AMP for image search results
#323Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I hope they get smacked down for it in the upcoming anti-trust lawsuit. People have been saying this for years, and it never happens.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_vs._Google - Things take time, but Google did get fined in the past and there's a good chance they get fined again (and forced to change things).
Fined ≠ "smacked." To Google, EU fines are just a cost of doing business. Like FedEx eating parking tickets.
Until Google is fined to a degree that it impacts its share price, nothing will change.
Re: Google no longer providing original URL in AMP for image search results
#324Earlier quoted context omitted.
The worst thing I've seen recently is amp URLs for reddit threads. It's one bad thing (new reddit UI) wrapped in a worse thing (AMP), and getting back to classic reddit takes a lot of gymnastics. The stupid part is that the amp page is indistinguishable from the (new) reddit page (the AMP page comes complete with the "download our app" popup). So I don't see how it's providing any speed/experience benefit.
I can never get the Open In Reddit app button to work. I’m on iOS and have the latest version of the official reddit app. Which btw is painfully filled with ads.
Boost for reddit has been working good for me some quite some time now https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.rubenmayay...
Re: Google no longer providing original URL in AMP for image search results
#325Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'll bite: how does signed exchanges provide control to Google?
Google can choose today which site (original or AMP cache) to show in their search results. Today, as an end user, I know, via the URL, when I land on a Google AMP site. That said, Google already has control of every AMP page because the spec REQUIRES you to load a piece of Google controlled/hosted JS onto your page. That JS can change at any time without "signed exchanges" being aware.
This concern, Google controlled/hosted JS, is independent from Signed Exchanges and specific to AMP.
At the same time, the AMP project is actively working to move the origin (control/host) of the AMP Javascript to the publisher's own domain, as well as allow a version served on an origin owned by the OpenJS Foundation, rather than Google.
Re: Google no longer providing original URL in AMP for image search results
#326Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just had a discussion with someone on Lobsters about the actual cost of a lower-end iPhone versus a similarly-priced Android phone and the iPhone appeared cheaper: > The Pixel 4 is $799 and the Pixel 3a is $399 (although it may be on sale right now depending on your region). The iPhone 11 is $699 and the iPhone SE (2nd generation) is $399. Both provide additional discounts if you trade in your current phone (and si…
Maybe I've been really unlucky, but I haven't seen an iPhone realistically surviving more than 3 years with real usage. Buttons dying and the battery barely surviving a day was pretty common. I know there will be survivor examples out there, but without knowing the average it's hard to compare them.
I have an iPhone 5 in my immediate family that is in daily use. It was bought on launch day in 2012. (I know because I stood in line for it.)
Re: Google no longer providing original URL in AMP for image search results
#327I’m not an expert in the details of Chrome permissions vs. other browsers, and setting aside for the moment the market power of Google/Alphabet, this seems fairly fixable, along the same lines as email spam or ad tracker networks, and a clear case for “caveat emptor”.
How about rewriting any AMP urls in the browser location bar to redirect to the canonical location as an end-user extension, or as an in-content script?
Re: Google no longer providing original URL in AMP for image search results
#328Another one of those weird "mistakes" that always, always flows towards Google and against everyone else.
Re: Google no longer providing original URL in AMP for image search results
#329Earlier quoted context omitted.
I kept seeing comments on HN about how DDG was as good as Google, so i've switched on one of my machines. It isn't. For stuff that doesn't matter too much, or is an easy search, i use DDG, then fall back to Google if i don't find what i need. For anything serious, i just open up a Google tab :(
Well, sometimes what you're used to matter too. For me DDG is better (expect for local searches, in which case I've got to include my city's name). Every time I search anything in someone else's computer (with google) I find it much harder to find what I'm looking for, sometimes I can't find and just go to DDG. The only times I use !g is when I find some pretty obscure programming errors and no (useful) results on DD…
It's interesting that there are such diverse experiences of DDG vs Google. I'm also in the camp of finding DDG to be better at finding what I'm looking for.
I wonder if the difference has to do with variations in search strategy or interests, or a combination of both. In any case, DDG does seem to have been improving, and I don't see any reason to believe that the trend won't continue. Particularly since Google seems hell-bent on making their search useless.
Re: Google no longer providing original URL in AMP for image search results
#330How does anyone think this is a good idea? It should be clear which news site I am reading when I'm reading an article. Otherwise, how do I know which bias to apply? On iOS, the title bar says "google.com" whether I'm reading an article from CNN.com or WashingtonExaminer.com. Of all the anti-competitive actions google has taken around search results, AMP is by far the worst. I hope they get smacked down for it in the…
> How does anyone think this is a good idea?
A while back on one of the AMP discussions here, someone from Google weighed in. They said the data was clear: users not only accept it, they love AMP.
I asked how they knew that, because if it was, say, just tracking how many people tried the 2-3 tap process to get to the original URL compared to how many people just engaged whatever you showed them, then the data might be showing you something else (and in fact, I wasn't clear how you'd get from accept to love in any other way than a focus group or survey).
No response. Not clear if that's because revealing data would run afoul of internal confidential disclosure, or because this basically hadn't been thought through.
> Apple for refusing to change the URL bar like Google does on Android.
Apple has its own problems with the URL bar -- they keep the domain but drop the rest of the URL. Not as bad as replacing the domain, but not great.