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

Web by Google (TM)

landshark.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 496 posts

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#411

Post by stjohnswarts »

JadeNB wrote: post #405
HeWhoLurksLate wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, the USA is working okay all things considered. There's not one right answer here.

> Eh, the USA is working okay all things considered. For many people, it probably is—the key to its longevity (and it's very young on the global stage) is working well enough for enough people enough of the time—but there are plenty of people for whom it's not working—me and plenty of other people in the US, but also the global victims of the international policies of the US. (Before the whataboutism comes in, this i…

Well please propose a solution. I see all kind of complaints, but never any solutions proposed other than nonsense like "we can form anarchy enclaves!" Enjoy your 2 or 3 years of existence before a much bigger despotic army rolls in and takes you over, good luck with research on fixing things like covid, ebola, and polio. We need to work in the system we have, we need protests and activistic populace who act to the benefit of the whole rather than "I got mine"

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#412

Post by stjohnswarts »

dmje wrote: post #303

Asking a rhetorical and irritating question - but one which web nerds need to be much better at answering: why, exactly does it matter? Don't get me wrong, I'm totally uncomfortable with a monopoly of this scale; I'm a Firefox user, a Pihole user, a non-FB user. But when people (non nerds) ask me why, it's hard to answer. They're all happy enough: Chrome is fast, AMP is faster, they get to find out the stuff they wan…

Because monopolies stifle progress and technology. They choke out the competitors that were driving that and when they're on top they're the only game in town and dictate unfair conditions and bribe politicians (at even higher rate) and generally become a cancer on society rather than a plus. Standard oil, railroads killing unionists, and on and on. People in power begin to crave power and will do absolutely anything to get more of it and eliminate any competitors.

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#413

Post by bonestamp2 »

dmje wrote: post #303

Asking a rhetorical and irritating question - but one which web nerds need to be much better at answering: why, exactly does it matter? Don't get me wrong, I'm totally uncomfortable with a monopoly of this scale; I'm a Firefox user, a Pihole user, a non-FB user. But when people (non nerds) ask me why, it's hard to answer. They're all happy enough: Chrome is fast, AMP is faster, they get to find out the stuff they wan…

Tracking. Chrome has so many more niche features than FireFox and Safari. For example, using WebUSB sounds really awesome, what could be wrong with lots of new features? These unique features, and people's use of them, provides so many more "fingerprint" elements to uniquely identify people as they move around the web.

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#414

Post by harpratap »

walrus01 wrote: post #406
harpratap wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no point in buying a Teleco today, with 5G any of the FAANGs can create one with the money they have. Infact Google, Amazon, Microsoft and Facebook have proven experience in web scale, so 5G will be right up their alley

If you think "5G" will replace medium and long haul DWDM fiber networks, as a backbone, you have some very great misperceptions about what real internet infrastructure looks like.

I never said that, I don't think you really understand how 5G works. The big 3 cloud already have extensive experience in creating DWDM fiber network as backbone, it's not really all that different from internet stack anymore.

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#415

Post by tannhaeuser »

dmje wrote: post #303

Asking a rhetorical and irritating question - but one which web nerds need to be much better at answering: why, exactly does it matter? Don't get me wrong, I'm totally uncomfortable with a monopoly of this scale; I'm a Firefox user, a Pihole user, a non-FB user. But when people (non nerds) ask me why, it's hard to answer. They're all happy enough: Chrome is fast, AMP is faster, they get to find out the stuff they wan…

Because the web is how we communicate in this day and age. HTML is used for legal, medical, personal, press, cultural, and educational purposes, like paper and pencil used to be, and stone and chisel before. We can't let our language allow to be taken over by a single commercial entity. We're already experiencing a loss of digital heritage from a decade or two ago. We think we are so advanced, but lack basic means of communication available to former generations. We're seeing digital media being used to influence people at a scale not possible before. We need widespread competence and broad representation for digital media. I guess you don't want to kiss the ring of an ad company if you want to tell and show your grandchildren how our time was like, do you?

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#416

Post by stjohnswarts »

jacquesm wrote: post #342
cheph wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Mozilla does not have a future. I would use Mozilla if the browser was just a little bit less bad. Currently it randomly takes me about 5 seconds to move my cursor in the hackernews input box. That is not Google's fault. Mozilla's future is mostly of their own making.

It's Firefox, not Mozilla in that context. Confusing, I know. Using Firefox here with a few hundred tabs open, working just fine. I suspect your setup has other problems.

Yeah he probably has some plugins causing issues. I have zero problems with firefox other than the occasional "chrome only" web pages and mostly user-agent fakeout extensions take care of that

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#417

Post by walrus01 »

harpratap wrote: post #414
walrus01 wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think "5G" will replace medium and long haul DWDM fiber networks, as a backbone, you have some very great misperceptions about what real internet infrastructure looks like.

I never said that, I don't think you really understand how 5G works. The big 3 cloud already have extensive experience in creating DWDM fiber network as backbone, it's not really all that different from internet stack anymore.

But none of them have their own ROW to do it, except around small specific regional campuses like Hillsboro. They have dark fiber leases, IRUs, and wavelength circuits. Show me a big FAANG owned and controlled cable from western OR or WA to Colorado, for instance. Doesn't exist. Show me a FAANG owned and controlled path from Hillsboro to Sacramento and the bay area. Doesn't exist. They have IRUs in infrastructure built by someone else (Zayo, level3).

Show me one FAANG with anything even 5% of the outside plant wholly contolled fiber route miles of the size and scope of the railway ROW sprint, qwest and level3 networks. Or legacy wiltel.

The only real exception, Google has successfully made a big deal of itself in submarine fiber by throwing its money and weight around.

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#418

Post by doublerabbit »

doublerabbit wrote: post #217
ceras wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an end-user, AMP sites load faster and with less clutter. The only downside is a clunky URL, but I rarely care about that. AMP improved my mobile search experience. The main AMP concerns seem philosophical, which I don't think OP was asking about.

And this is the problem for anyone outside of the CompSci field. To those it looks like URL non-sense but it's rooted far deeper then that. This isn't philosophical. By choosing to use AMP, you are ultimately choosing to destroy the internet. You're granting the power of one company to run and control what you visit, do, use. Your surrendering your data for them to make money off to use and abuse. Your supporting the…

Amusing, It looks like I whipped up controversial storm.

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#419

Post by doublerabbit »

joshuamorton wrote: post #395
walterbell wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the plus side, amp-specific text is now on the end of URLs, making it easier to delete before sharing the URL. The larger threat with Amp is signed content, where Chrome address bar drops URL and has only the legal name of the site owner.

Why is that a threat?

Because it makes way for Google to dictate how the internet operates.

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#420

Post by [deleted] »

zelly wrote: post #312
doublerabbit wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google Amp. Whenever you see the amp symbol, avoid visiting that site.

AMP is a subset of HTML and JavaScript which can be safely rendered server-side and runs fast on mobile phones. I find it ironic that the pro-Mozilla neckbeards who typically complain about bloated JavaScript websites also complain about AMP, for no reason other than it was developed by G. AMP is actually good for users.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN