Live data from Hacker News

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

wptavern.com

171–172 of 172 posts

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

#171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would only like a bit more than the endless negativity, that's all. If you can't even offer that much, then why would I ever expect anything more? It's easy to blame others and excuse yourself, but if I could find the will to get a job at Mozilla to try to help the company to a better end, then why can't some of you folks who always act like you have all the answers? If we aren't willing or able to do better than M…

> if I could find the will to get a job at Mozilla Is that a purely hypothetical if, or another way to say "since I could..."? If the former, then what gives you more right to criticize the GP than they have to criticize Mozilla?

The latter. This isn't about freedoms or who is better than who. It's about being part of the change you want to see, versus dragging everything down with endless negativity. I'm no one special, but I at least put my money where my mouth was. I know there are others who could do the same, yet they choose not to because it's easier to merely act like they care.

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

#172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, yes, and yes. Have you? The claims quoted in this article were provided without any documents from Google, let alone a mechanism for how the non-AMP ad delay worked. I described the mechanism. What part of the description did you not understand, so I can clarify it for you? The author made the elementary mistake of blindly trusting the prosecutor without putting on his engineer hat to figure out if the prosecuto…

>> Have you ... and ...? >> Or have you even read the article? > Yes, yes, and yes. Not so much on that last "yes": > The author ... without putting on his engineer hat >>> Sarah Gooding Putting on her engineer hat.

I realized that after I had commented but could not correct it due to the edit button going away. HN guidelines require you to "respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."
Post reply on HN