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

AMP Has Irreparably Damaged Publishers’ Trust in Google-Led Initiatives

wptavern.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 172 posts

Re: AMP Has Irreparably Damaged Publishers’ Trust in Google-Led Initiatives

#81

Post by mschuster91 »

petee wrote: post #58
pmontra wrote: post #14

If they are really displeased with Google, and I'm sure they are, they should run a campaign to invite users of their sites to install a browser different than Chrome. If they manage to destroy Google's quasi monopoly on the browser they'll make Google less powerful overall.

Maybe developers could stop designing websites that only work on Chrome too? I'm tired of seeing "your browser is unsupported" and denied access while using a chromium based alternative. Or broken features because someone had to have their bells and whistles

> Or broken features because someone had to have their bells and whistles

Like it or not, at least Google blazes ahead and brings new features to the browser sphere. It's not like innovation can be expected from Firefox any more, not with them cutting costs on the development team.

Re: AMP Has Irreparably Damaged Publishers’ Trust in Google-Led Initiatives

#82

Post by acdha »

riffraff wrote: post #18
DevKoala wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

During the last antitrust suite against Google it was confirmed that Google developed AMP to combat header bidding in order to protect their price arbitrage cut in their ad exchange. Publishers are now weaponizing against Google.

Isn't the antitrust suite still ongoing? I thought we're still talking of accusations, not proven facts (tho I believe them true).

You’re right: those were claims that the state attorneys general are comfortable defending in court so presumably they have pretty good evidence but we’ll see how they hold up under defense.

Re: AMP Has Irreparably Damaged Publishers’ Trust in Google-Led Initiatives

#83

Post by tyingq »

grey-area wrote: post #33
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It decreases load times for sites pulling in 20+ third party scripts. The purpose of AMP is to cut away that hot garbage. Sadly it hasn't worked at shaming these poorly designed sites into correcting their ways.

That is not the purpose of AMP, that’s the superficially plausible line used to sell you on it.

Yes. A trojan horse has to be pretty, else nobody will pull it inside their gate.

Re: AMP Has Irreparably Damaged Publishers’ Trust in Google-Led Initiatives

#84

Post by matheusmoreira »

DeathArrow wrote: post #21

>what he identified as Google’s “vision for the web’s future and examples of best-in-class web experiences.” I'm not sure Google should be the only one to decide the web's future. Since they quasi monopolized the browser, they act like they own the web.

> I'm not sure Google should be the only one to decide the web's future.

I'm sure Google should not decide anything at all. We should decide what's right and impose it on them.

Re: AMP Has Irreparably Damaged Publishers’ Trust in Google-Led Initiatives

#85

Post by aembleton »

petee wrote: post #58
pmontra wrote: post #14

If they are really displeased with Google, and I'm sure they are, they should run a campaign to invite users of their sites to install a browser different than Chrome. If they manage to destroy Google's quasi monopoly on the browser they'll make Google less powerful overall.

Maybe developers could stop designing websites that only work on Chrome too? I'm tired of seeing "your browser is unsupported" and denied access while using a chromium based alternative. Or broken features because someone had to have their bells and whistles

What websites do that? I'm sure they exist, but I've not come across them on Firefox for a few years now. Certainly not tiring of them.

Re: AMP Has Irreparably Damaged Publishers’ Trust in Google-Led Initiatives

#86

Post by fmajid »

ashtonkem wrote: post #30

Honestly at this point, if you trust google you’re a fool. It’s demonstrated itself to be unreliable, capricious, and absolutely willing to break the law if it thinks it can get away with it. Do business with them if you absolutely must, but under no circumstance should you actually trust them.

As a middleman, it is in Google’s interest to commoditize its complements, namely the publishers. Given how the incentives are not just misaligned but actually completely opposed, it was always the height of folly for publishers to assist Google (or Facebook).

Re: AMP Has Irreparably Damaged Publishers’ Trust in Google-Led Initiatives

#88

Post by isoprophlex »

benrapscallion wrote: post #39
ashtonkem wrote: post #30

Honestly at this point, if you trust google you’re a fool. It’s demonstrated itself to be unreliable, capricious, and absolutely willing to break the law if it thinks it can get away with it. Do business with them if you absolutely must, but under no circumstance should you actually trust them.

Seconded. As such, I’ve switched to Safari, DuckDuckGo, and Fastmail. But how does one escape their ubiquitous presence all over the web (Google analytics, ads)??? They’re like a creepy neighbor who keeps following you around.

DNS-level blocking of Google bullshit on all your devices and/or directly in your router

Re: AMP Has Irreparably Damaged Publishers’ Trust in Google-Led Initiatives

#89

Post by fmajid »

ctack wrote: post #20
DevKoala wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chrome’s stronghold on the web and their ability to delay the death of the cookie allows advertisers to continue doing micro targeting and thus paying more per impression. Publishers would be shooting themselves in the foot if they steer users away from Chrome.

If they’re paying more per impression how is that shooting themselves in the foot?

Publishers sell ads, they don’t buy them.

That said, Google and Facebook captured most of the value from targeted advertising and left only crumbs to publishers, so they don’t really have an incentive to maintain the status quo. The use of invasive tracking technology is forced onto them by advertisers.

Re: AMP Has Irreparably Damaged Publishers’ Trust in Google-Led Initiatives

#90

Post by DeathArrow »

wisniewskit wrote: post #78
DeathArrow wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Recognizing that Firefox is sucky is the first step to make it unsucky.

Yet if all you ever do is talk about how sucky it is, then you're effectively just part of the PR wings of Firefox's competition.

Telling someone he might have a grave disease might convince him to go to a doctor and seek treatment.

Firefox is not dying because HN users criticize it. HN users might even use Firefox in a greater proportion than the general public.

We try to protest, we try to raise awareness of the current situation.

If instead of doing that we would actually said that Firefox is dead, it would be more detrimental. Users will try it and make a lot of bad publicity. Mozilla Foundation management will use it to demonstrate they are doing a great job while continuing putting Firefox in danger.

We can't take ownership of Firefox but we can pressure towards it getting better stewardship.

Post reply on HN