2 ms·
One solution punishes people, the other one rewards people and provides a nice framework where every improvement benefits everyone using it. For example, at I/O
by ehsankia 9y ago
One solution punishes people, the other one rewards people and provides a nice framework where every improvement benefits everyone using it. For example, at I/O, they announced that new changes to AMP was able to speed up rendering of all AMP based by 200%, and that's without any work being done by any of the people using it.
- jacquesm 9y agoGoogle is already using the ranking system to promote certain websites over others, this would be just one more factor (and presumably it already is a factor of sorts, but with a different weight). Even if AMP pages would render 1000 times as fast it wouldn't matter, it would still be an abuse of power. The relationship between a reader and the source of their content should not be mediated by Google. What point is there in HTTPS everywhere campaigns and such if Google MITMs every news article you read? What point is there for a content provider to even have a website if Google will end up serving the content? This is simply bad, the only upside is the speed gain and that is one that could be sorted out by the market with a gentle nudge from Google rather than by some kind of monopolistic end-game on their part.
- ehsankia 9y agoIt's literally a CDN. So in your mind is Cloudflare also abusing their power by rehosting people's content?