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

411–420 of 566 posts

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

#411

Post by NateThePirate »

fizixer wrote: post #383
AlexandrB wrote: post #109

Earlier 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.

How do you even get amp on reddit urls? I've never come across such a scenario (I use desktop browsers on linux).

I usually get them when I open a Reddit link on Google on iOS.

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

#412

Post by monadic2 »

hackmiester wrote: post #221
a-wu wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Use the Apollo app. Much better than the official Reddit app. It's more like what Alien Blue was before Reddit killed that.

Does that make the “open in app” button on the AMP pages work? Because I have the same problem and I’m basically willing to try anything.

No but it looks at the clipboard when it takes focus and offers to take you to the post.

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

#413

Post by JoshTriplett »

AlexandrB wrote: post #356
JoshTriplett wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At worst it's a bunch of random people in the cafe whose WiFi you're using - but these people don't have the resources to track your activity once you leave the cafe. Depending on what you're doing, one-time collection may be enough. Also, many captive portals are provided to businesses by companies whose own business interest is in tracking people, and they'll absolutely correlate the data. Rather than having to w…

Isn't this just imparting a false sense of security? The one party who I'm most worried about getting my data, Google, will still get it. I think you've still failed to answer my basic point - how is this not just a competitive moat that benefits Google? If we care about privacy and data collection, legislation is required because Google and Facebook have no reservations about sucking up everything they can. If it's…

It's not an argument against HTTPS.

If you use HTTPS, you know you're talking to the site you think you're talking to. If that site itself is sharing data in a way you don't want, including by pulling in third-party scripts, you have a problem with the site. That's not an argument against HTTPS; communicating in cleartext doesn't solve that problem, it just means that other people the site doesn't trust can also access that data.

Let's not let the perfect be the enemy of the good here. Universal HTTPS is an improvement.

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

#414

Post by monadic2 »

chipperyman573 wrote: post #304
nojito wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also allows for very easy tracking across the internet which is the real long term play. They will also be able to release "unblockable" advertising to amp pages eventually.

Why would Amp allow the ads to be less blockable? Extensions still run

They can package the ads in band with the content, although DOM based blocking might still work—at some point we’re going to have to write an ad detection AI just to use the internet.

The long term solution is stigmatizing ads—you can never ad block someone in the ear of a newspaper editor.

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

#416

Post by briandear »

TechBro8615 wrote: post #34

How 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…

Maybe read the actual page you are on? Clearly you have identified the Examiner and CNN despite a google url.

I am no fan of AMP, but this criticism is not particularly valid.

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

#417

Post by googlemustdie »

In my opinion everyone should do the following:

- Install an Ad Blocker, so Google will not be able to make money on your visits and chances you'll get a malware from ads will decrease - If you use Android, you can install Firefox and add uBlock Origin as extension, because Google abuse their power and prevent people from installing Ad blocker on Android. - Stop paying money for Google Ads - Stop using Gmail. There are plenty of alternatives (ex. outlook.com) - Use other search engines (bing.com and yandex.com). I noticed they work in many cases better than Google. For example, yandex.com is much better for semi-legal content which is blocked on Google and not available at all. - Stop using GCP. AWS and Azure are the better cloud providers. - Stop supporting AMP on your website - Don't pay money for integrating Google Maps into your website. There are much cheaper alternatives. - Office 365 is years ahead of Google Docs.

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

#420

Post by monadic2 »

joshuamorton wrote: post #353
DevKoala wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because now every asset you download from the web is a Google tracking resource. Is it really unclear what’s going on? When you perform a GET request for these assets you are being monitored. These requests end up being part of the profile built for you which is used for advertisement targeting and content recommendation. PS: You work for Google. Do you work on this project?

> When you perform a GET request for these assets you are being monitored. You'll only ever retrieve Google AMP cache results from the Google search page, where they were already able to track if you made such a request, since the link you clicked has trackers in it. So from that perspective, nothing changes. > PS: You work for Google. Do you work on this project? No, I work on mostly internal infrastructure. My inte…

AMP also offers traffic after the load, so this is in no way comparable to a click tracker (which is also none of their business, btw). This will also offer in-band ad obfuscation eventually.

I’m curious, what do you value about the services you consume? I like transactions where I know what I am giving to the service provider. Do you really want to push away from this reality for the benefit of a few MS load time leaving a search page? That’s essentially what you’re arguing for.

Post reply on HN