51–60 of 238 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hope not. Regional based internet could become the next major factor when it comes to inequality. For example, don't hire people from Region A because they can't access the best resources located in Region B.
Hm? I think Parent is just hoping Google is required by law not to rank results this way. It would not bar access to anything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the future the EU chose when they started imposing EU law on foreign internet companies.
If you serve something in another country, you abide by their rules. Be it a physical product or a virtual one, which includes a website or webservice.
Imagine that I call you over the phone, old school style, with voice. Would you or would you not want the governments on either end of the phone line to eavesdrop on our conversation so they can make sure it meets their local laws? What if we communicated by SMS? Email? Posting on a message board?
Some people will have an "obviously yes, I want the government to be in charge, are you dumb?" reaction. Others will say "of course I want privacy, are you dumb?"
Early Internet chose privacy. Modern internet is increasingly choosing regulation. But this is far from the obvious truth you are claiming it is, if only because the prevailing opinion changed in recent memory.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To me, nobody would willingly give up the most important part of their page's real estate (the top X pixels) and the branding value of what it says in the url bar...unless there was a tradeoff that made it worth it. As far as I can tell, carousel placement was that tradeoff. Until recently, you weren't allowed in unless you were on AMP. Also, I'm not sure this is well known, but if you navigate to a web page from the…
There's nothing about AMP that requires anyone to give up any part of their page. The presentation you are talking about is a feature of only certain AMP hosting services. A lot of organizations host their own AMP sites, like Conde Nast magazines. Example: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/06/qualcomms-new-snapdr...
Edit: As for Conde Nast, I found this article: https://technology.condenast.com/story/the-why-and-how-of-go... The diagram[1] suggests the Google AMP cache is (or was) in front of users, and they also say this:
"AMP helps us satisfy these needs. AMP increases the visibility and discoverability of our content by allowing it to be included in Google’s Top News Carousel, as well as improving the experience of regular Google search results"
That sounds a lot like what I said.
[1] https://media.condenast.io/photos/59a57e16cf742825d0b02891/m...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hope the EU competition authority gets Google to change this. At least inside the EU.
Does that mean more pop ups to accept?
AMP was great for those with very low speed internet. The philosophy and implementation of AMP can be questioned (URL masking, content stored away from the origin) but it did show that users really wanted to click on pages that loaded fast. Core Web Vitals, as a publisher myself, are a nightmare. But at least we know what goes wrong as it's clearly laid right in front of the developer's eyes. So we go and fix thing a…
How? No user has ever chosen to open a link as AMP.
AMP was great for those with very low speed internet. The philosophy and implementation of AMP can be questioned (URL masking, content stored away from the origin) but it did show that users really wanted to click on pages that loaded fast. Core Web Vitals, as a publisher myself, are a nightmare. But at least we know what goes wrong as it's clearly laid right in front of the developer's eyes. So we go and fix thing a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My opinion is regularly "unpopular" here on HN, but I happen to love AMP. Sometimes constraints can be a blessing. Don't want to over engineer? Use AMP. Of course you can over engineer anything, but why would you when [almost] everything you need is easy to grab a la carte.
To me, nobody would willingly give up the most important part of their page's real estate (the top X pixels) and the branding value of what it says in the url bar...unless there was a tradeoff that made it worth it. As far as I can tell, carousel placement was that tradeoff. Until recently, you weren't allowed in unless you were on AMP. Also, I'm not sure this is well known, but if you navigate to a web page from the…
AMP was great for those with very low speed internet. The philosophy and implementation of AMP can be questioned (URL masking, content stored away from the origin) but it did show that users really wanted to click on pages that loaded fast. Core Web Vitals, as a publisher myself, are a nightmare. But at least we know what goes wrong as it's clearly laid right in front of the developer's eyes. So we go and fix thing a…
>it did show that users really wanted to click on pages that loaded fast. How? No user has ever chosen to open a link as AMP.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you propose they source that data from other browsers? Do you e.g. think Apple and Mozilla would provide them with a suitable feed, at a high enough granularity to be useful? And if they did, what do you think the public reaction would be to such data sharing?
That's phrasing the problem in a format where the only solution is Google. Re-phrasing it as "What else can a search engine do to stop being gamed?" opens up a lot more options. The real problem here is not 'gamed search engines' but too much centralisation, with Google owning the search engine, the browser, and the ad platform. This solution makes that problem worse, not better.
It's like I've fallen into a crazy parallel dimension. For more than *five years* HN commenters have been ranting about how AMP is not needed, and all that's needed is using page speed as the signal. And now when that happens, it's suddenly an outrage.
