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

Where Am I? NYTimes or Google?

theinternetbytes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 381 posts

Re: Where Am I? NYTimes or Google?

#131

Post by markosaric »

raverbashing wrote: post #114
twhitmore wrote: post #15

The whole AMP thing seems anti-competitive and hostile to the open web. It's a really bad look on Google's part to be pushing this.

I am conflicted Yes, AMP is an anti-competitive move by Google At the same time AMP is "faster" because it gets rid of all the nagware and JS crap that the original page has. So yeah, I don't like what Google is doing but I don't like what NYT is doing neither

It is ironic considering that 7 out of top 10 most used third party connections on websites are owned by Google.

So you can see why there must be some kind of internal struggle at Google. They understand the value of a faster web but they also cannot go after the main cause of the slow web. And this is how technology such as AMP gets invented and makes things worse.

https://markosaric.com/google-amp/

Re: Where Am I? NYTimes or Google?

#132

Post by dredmorbius »

asveikau wrote: post #87
lalos wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Don't be evil", using primary colors in the logo to bring that kindergarten familiarity, fun doodles, a dumb funny movie and quirky April Fools projects were a great marketing strategy to distract your average person in lowering their guard and feel safe to give all the data to an advertisement company. I wonder if they currently teach this case in marketing/PR classes.

I am sure tons of people here know Google history better than I. What was the year they fully turned on the advertising spigot? I feel like in the first few years it was not yet an advertising giant. Wikipedia says they had small text ads in 2000, but seems to imply that the advertising didn't get really huge for them until after IPO. Correct me if I am wrong, I was not following super closely in those years. But tha…

Aquisition of Doubleclick, in my book, 2007, though Google ads preexisted that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DoubleClick

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google#Advertising

Re: Where Am I? NYTimes or Google?

#133

Post by tsimionescu »

rocho wrote: post #126
wmf wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Users don't see DNS records. In the old world they click on a nytimes.com link and get something served from a Fastly server, but in the future AMP world they click on nytimes.com and get it served from a Google server. It isn't different.

It's very different. And the difference lies in the URL bar. When you use a CDN, your visitors will still see your domain. With Amp, they see google.com.

That's exactly what Google wants to change, and what Mozilla is opposing.

Re: Where Am I? NYTimes or Google?

#134

Post by Sephr »

kebman wrote: post #118
gsnedders wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With Signed HTTP Exchanges, for Google to modify the content that is served, Google would need access to a private key for a certificate for nytimes.com, no? Either nytimes.com has handed over that key or Google would have to create a key/certificate for nytimes.com. Believing Google would maliciously issue certificates seems a stretch to me. I don't like AMP nor much of how Google has behaved with it ( http://exple.…

I don't get this. Clearly the contents is served by Google, and so they can do whatever they like with it. How is an end user going to know whether the message was signed before it was passed on or not?

> How is an end user going to know whether the message was signed before it was passed on or not?

Your web browser will show a scary warning and refuse to display the bundle if it's not correctly signed. Google is not going to fake signatures for other sites, as certificate mis-issuance would open up Google to legal consequences.

Re: Where Am I? NYTimes or Google?

#135

Post by lern_too_spel »

Abishek_Muthian wrote: post #46

I think the main issue is limited AMPCache providers and inability for the publisher to choose their own AMPCache providers. Which is being exploited the two search engines. AMP project by itself is open-source and it explicitly states 'Other companies may build their own AMP cache as well'.[1] There are only 2 AMP Cache providers - Google, Bing. Further, 'As a publisher, you don't choose an AMP Cache, it's actually…

The link aggregator, not the publisher, must control the AMP Cache in order to prerender pages from it safely.

Re: Where Am I? NYTimes or Google?

#136

Post by lern_too_spel »

twhitmore wrote: post #15

The whole AMP thing seems anti-competitive and hostile to the open web. It's a really bad look on Google's part to be pushing this.

In what way is it anti-competitive? Google's competitors also consume AMP pages and prerender them using AMP caches. Anti-competitive would be requiring the publishers to integrate directly with Google like Apple News, not asking the publishers to publish pages that all link aggregators can consume.

Re: Where Am I? NYTimes or Google?

#137

Post by nxnews »

Spivak wrote: post #5
superasn wrote: post #2

Yes this has been a big issue for a very long time now. Google wants to push a release where it will display the hostname of the amp site even if the content is being served from google.com[1]. Mozilla (and Apple) are strictly against it and thank god for Mozilla. If Google had a bigger market share this would already be something we would have been living with. I'm sure there are better sources for this, but here is…

I don’t really think Google’s plan is that weird. And it would be amazing for decentralized networks, archiving, and offline web apps. Google can’t just serve nyt.com — they can serve a specific bundle of resources published and signed by nyt.com verified by your browser to be authentic and unmodified.

Why would it be amazing for decentralized networks and offline web apps?

Re: Where Am I? NYTimes or Google?

#138

Post by remexre »

nxnews wrote: post #137
Spivak wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t really think Google’s plan is that weird. And it would be amazing for decentralized networks, archiving, and offline web apps. Google can’t just serve nyt.com — they can serve a specific bundle of resources published and signed by nyt.com verified by your browser to be authentic and unmodified.

Why would it be amazing for decentralized networks and offline web apps?

If I publish mycoolthing.com/thing, it could be mirrored over a P2P network as peer1.com/rehosted/mycoolthing.com/thing, peer2.com/rehosted/mycoolthing.com/thing, etc., in a way that would make it evident to end-users not familiar with the protocol that the content is from mycoolthing.com.

Re: Where Am I? NYTimes or Google?

#139

Post by remexre »

CGamesPlay wrote: post #125
8organicbits wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Archive.org makes it clear you are on archive.org. The URL shows archive.org. The page content shows archive.org at the top. [1] Google AMP doesn't show Google on the page. Google is pushing for the URL to show the origin site's URL instead of Google[2]. If an attacker poisons a nytimes.com article served by Google AMP, how does a browser's domain blacklisting help? Block google? Block nytimes.com? Neither makes sens…

I believe you might be misunderstanding the idea behind signed exchanges. To be clear, Signed Exchanges are how AMP should have worked all along. example.com generates a content bundle and signs it. Google.com downloads the bundle and decides to mirror it from their domain. Your browser downloads the bundle from google.com, and verifies that the signature comes from example.com. Your browser is now confident that the…

I think the concern was more that if I can XSS example.com, Google is now serving that for some period of time after example.com's administrators notice + fix this. (In the absence of a mechanism to force AMP to immediately decache the affected page(s), that is.)

Re: Where Am I? NYTimes or Google?

#140

Post by remexre »

matheist wrote: post #106
dqpb wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't this basically like a CDN or a PoP cache?

Not if nyt hasn't authorized google to act on their behalf. "Yes we will serve your stuff on your behalf at your request, now that you have stuck your sign on our door via a DNS record" vs "We're putting your sign on our door because as the authors of a browser we can do that, whether you like it or not".

NYT in fact has to go through non-trivial technical effort to authorize Google to act on their behalf.
Post reply on HN