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

Lawmakers Want to Protect Local Newspapers From Google, Facebook

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 59 posts

Re: Lawmakers Want to Protect Local Newspapers From Google, Facebook

#21

Post by dynamite-ready »

BiteCode_dev wrote: post #18
gravypod wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amp, for whatever you might feel about it, is the best content loading experience for people with poor internet. Launch up an AVD and set it to use a 3g roaming profile and try and load up NY Times AMP and non-AMP. I'm not a fan of the implementation personally but something like this needs to exist for developing markets. I didn't know how bad this was until I started working with someone in Brazil and saw he has 2M…

Wouldn't the invisible hand of the market solve this? If your site is slow, either the share of good customers plummet and you fix it, and customers you don't want leave and you are happy.

The parent post still makes a fair point. I can't understand why they were down voted, tbh. I more agree with your reply (custom optimisation and consumer choice), but some W3C standard to encourage the creation of highly optimised pages, perhaps an extension to web workers, might be a good idea.

As for the problem of the existence of AMP, I don't know how you change that. It might actually be 'to big to fall's now, unfortunately.

Re: Lawmakers Want to Protect Local Newspapers From Google, Facebook

#22

Post by amelius »

cute_boi wrote: post #15
ffpip wrote: post #3

Google gives special preference to AMP sites in search, images and google news. Google is also removing non-AMP URLs from Google News. fucking everything is loaded from their servers nowadays

ads is literally destroying internet and these ads company are milking so much profit and we cannot do anything otherthan using adblocker and firefox :(

Yes, it seems that ads are at the root of many problems (e.g. user tracking, overconsumption). Perhaps this is what the senate should be addressing instead.

However, currently ads are also a driving force behind the internet.

Re: Lawmakers Want to Protect Local Newspapers From Google, Facebook

#23

Post by vkaku »

IMO:

Any protocol or mechanism written by Google is surely to give it more control over the Internet, hence advertising and hence revenue.

Not only AMP, but HTTP 2, QUIC, DNS over HTTPS are all things that Google wanted to have control over. I certainly hope the free internet moves into Tor and the rest of the dark web, and is certainly not indexable by Google.

Also, stop using Google Chrome if you wish to do the web a favor.

Re: Lawmakers Want to Protect Local Newspapers From Google, Facebook

#24

Post by Google234 »

mhh__ wrote: post #16
ffpip wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reddit's AMP implementation makes me think they genuinely stopped giving a fuck about users.

They must have calculated they can't survive at their current ad impression rates, hence the forcing people onto their app at literally any cost these days. It wouldn't be as much of a problem if the app actually worked well, but it doesn't

Are there more ads on the app?

Re: Lawmakers Want to Protect Local Newspapers From Google, Facebook

#26

Post by izacus »

BiteCode_dev wrote: post #18
gravypod wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amp, for whatever you might feel about it, is the best content loading experience for people with poor internet. Launch up an AVD and set it to use a 3g roaming profile and try and load up NY Times AMP and non-AMP. I'm not a fan of the implementation personally but something like this needs to exist for developing markets. I didn't know how bad this was until I started working with someone in Brazil and saw he has 2M…

Wouldn't the invisible hand of the market solve this? If your site is slow, either the share of good customers plummet and you fix it, and customers you don't want leave and you are happy.

AMP is the "invisible" hand of the market solving this - a private company taking up an initiative to make internet usable for people who aren't MacBook 5G toting Sillicon Valley hipsters.

It's also a perfect example why "invisible hand of market" can be an absolutely terrible and abusive way of trying to fix infrastructure for people who aren't privileged rich people.

Re: Lawmakers Want to Protect Local Newspapers From Google, Facebook

#27

Post by qz2 »

vkaku wrote: post #23

IMO: Any protocol or mechanism written by Google is surely to give it more control over the Internet, hence advertising and hence revenue. Not only AMP, but HTTP 2, QUIC, DNS over HTTPS are all things that Google wanted to have control over. I certainly hope the free internet moves into Tor and the rest of the dark web, and is certainly not indexable by Google. Also, stop using Google Chrome if you wish to do the web…

Agreed. But I think we should go back to Gopher for content and the old wild west style Internet which wasn't consolidated into silos like now. It's cheap, efficient, understandable and obtuse enough not to be able to leverage people into silos for commercial purposes.

Re: Lawmakers Want to Protect Local Newspapers From Google, Facebook

#28

Post by tester34 »

vkaku wrote: post #23

IMO: Any protocol or mechanism written by Google is surely to give it more control over the Internet, hence advertising and hence revenue. Not only AMP, but HTTP 2, QUIC, DNS over HTTPS are all things that Google wanted to have control over. I certainly hope the free internet moves into Tor and the rest of the dark web, and is certainly not indexable by Google. Also, stop using Google Chrome if you wish to do the web…

>Also, stop using Google Chrome if you wish to do the web a favor.

It's very risky and tricky, but I think it is completely opposite.

Do not use Firefox/DDG or other non-google competitors if you wish to do the web a favor.

edit.

>to do the web a favor (by splitting Google).

Re: Lawmakers Want to Protect Local Newspapers From Google, Facebook

#29

Post by throwaway189262 »

gravypod wrote: post #17
ffpip wrote: post #3

Google gives special preference to AMP sites in search, images and google news. Google is also removing non-AMP URLs from Google News. fucking everything is loaded from their servers nowadays

Amp, for whatever you might feel about it, is the best content loading experience for people with poor internet. Launch up an AVD and set it to use a 3g roaming profile and try and load up NY Times AMP and non-AMP. I'm not a fan of the implementation personally but something like this needs to exist for developing markets. I didn't know how bad this was until I started working with someone in Brazil and saw he has 2M…

All Google has to do is de-rank slow sites and everything would be fast within weeks.

But they won't. Because ad tech is most of what's making sites slow. They would end up de-ranking sites using lots of Google advertising.

Speed is just a shitty excuse to force AMP on everyone. There's countless other levers they could pull if they actually cared about performance

Re: Lawmakers Want to Protect Local Newspapers From Google, Facebook

#30

Post by tester34 »

I still remember reading article about how Google tried their first quasi AMP service around 2005 or something like that

As far as I've read they were serving pages to people with other people's data like "Hello, {username}" and stuff, generally security nightmare.

Unfortunely I do not remember how it was named...

edit.

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Web_Accelerator

>Google Web Accelerator sent requests for web pages, except for secure web pages (HTTPS), to Google, which logged these requests. Some web pages embedded personal information in these page requests.

>Google received and temporarily cached cookie data that your computer sent with webpage requests in order to improve performance.

>Google crawled every web page it came across leading it to inadvertently deleting web pages.[1]

>In order to speed up delivery of content, Google Web Accelerator sometimes retrieved webpage content that the user did not request, and stored it in the Google Web Accelerator cache[2]. Some law experts and IT authors affirmed that Google would "combine personal and clickstream data with existing search history data contained in Google's own cookie"[3]

>Google Web Accelerator is no longer available for, or supported by, Google as of January 20, 2008. As of 2008 the Google Web Accelerator is not compatible with Firefox 3.0. Google Web Accelerator is still available for download from other websites. The Labs experiment launched in 2005 was discontinued and no longer supported by Google, since January 2009

Post reply on HN