4 ms·
It makes their serving of AMP less transparent, which is a good thing for them. I guess.
by tuwtuwtuwtuw 6y ago
It makes their serving of AMP less transparent, which is a good thing for them. I guess.
- anticristi 6y agoI'm starting to wonder when the EU will raise the anti-trust flag. It seems obvious to me that Google tries to use it's start page market dominance to become the only webpage served on the Internet.
- nerdponx 6y agoThis is the only economically rational explanation I can think of. Unless it ties into other user-abusive projects they have planned.
- ubercow13 6y agoWhat about reducing phishing? Seems more obvious
- guerrilla 6y agoWhy assume good intentions when profit and lock-in already explain it?
- guerrilla 6y agoWhy assume good intentions when economic incentives (which we already know they have) already explain it?
- ubercow13 6y agoWhat are the other browsers' intentions then, who are doing almost the same thing? What about the economic incentive of generally increasing trust in the web and ecommerce, which is highly relevant to their core business? Also consider the sibling comment about AMP - looks like they already have special behaviour for that so this is barely relevant.
- hk__2 6y agoNo, they already did that last year: https://www.androidpolice.com/2019/04/16/amp-pages-will-now-show-original-url-in-chromes-address-bar/ https://www.androidpolice.com/2019/04/16/amp-pages-will-now-...