4 ms·

I agree. What concrete steps can I — and other technical people like me — take to help hasten its demise?

rkagerer 6y ago
Last paragraph in the article has a few suggestions: Or you could fight back. You could tell them to stuff it, and find ways to undermine their dominance. Use a different search engine, and convince your friends and family to do the same. Write to your elected officials and ask them to investigate Google’s monopoly. Stop using the Chrome browser. Ditch your Android phone. Turn off Google’s tracking of your every move. And, for goodness sake, disable AMP on your website.
- jimmydorry 6y ago
  So I read this as being a fight that only the web publishers can wage then. A minuscule fraction of people are going to write to officials and change their browser / search engine. Even far less of that fraction are going to throw away an expensive flagship phone (And what are they going to buy? Apple? That's sure to go down well amongst the hackernews crowd).
  - amelius 6y ago
    Well if there were one big website aimed at developers that was out of reach of Google, that could be a start. Imagine a service like stackoverflow, except it's (suddenly) not accessible through Google Search and Google Chrome. That could trigger a lot of developers to move away from Google.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
mkj 6y ago
Use Firefox instead of Chrome, then Google have less control over web trends.
rapnie 6y ago
Google's big argument for AMP is that web pages are big, bloated messes of large javascript chunks an unoptimized images, etc. And indeed they are. Single pages that weigh 10-20 MB are quite common. There is a trend to go back to simplicity and lightweight, elegant sites consisting of mostly plain html, some css and with just a sprinkle of JS in them. These sites are oftentimes faster than AMP versions. There is a broad toolset of static site generators to choose from, and still have sites that look & feel like a SPA. Other than that in many cases you don't even need the frameworks and tools, and could hand-craft in a text editor.
- manquer 6y ago
  If that was the case , they should show fast light pages even without amp higher , amp is not only to make pages faster and lighter . If preference was anything fast then I would agree with you, instead of just amp
  - rapnie 6y ago
    The argument Google uses to shove AMP down our throat would not exist anymore. If the page is light, w3c-compliant, accessible and has good SEO and still Google says "turn this into less-light, less-simple AMP for our convenience and your page-ranking" then it would strengthen an anti-trust against them.
    - dmitriid 6y ago
      That's exactly what Google is doing: you can't get into the carousel at the top of the search unless your page is AMP.

Last paragraph in the article has a few suggestions: Or you could fight back. You could tell them to stuff it, and find ways to undermine their dominance. Use a different search engine, and convince your friends and family to do the same. Write to your elected officials and ask them to investigate Google’s monopoly. Stop using the Chrome browser. Ditch your Android phone. Turn off Google’s tracking of your every move. And, for goodness sake, disable AMP on your website.

jimmydorry 6y ago
So I read this as being a fight that only the web publishers can wage then. A minuscule fraction of people are going to write to officials and change their browser / search engine. Even far less of that fraction are going to throw away an expensive flagship phone (And what are they going to buy? Apple? That's sure to go down well amongst the hackernews crowd).
- amelius 6y ago
  Well if there were one big website aimed at developers that was out of reach of Google, that could be a start. Imagine a service like stackoverflow, except it's (suddenly) not accessible through Google Search and Google Chrome. That could trigger a lot of developers to move away from Google.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

mkj 6y ago

Use Firefox instead of Chrome, then Google have less control over web trends.

rapnie 6y ago

Google's big argument for AMP is that web pages are big, bloated messes of large javascript chunks an unoptimized images, etc. And indeed they are. Single pages that weigh 10-20 MB are quite common. There is a trend to go back to simplicity and lightweight, elegant sites consisting of mostly plain html, some css and with just a sprinkle of JS in them. These sites are oftentimes faster than AMP versions. There is a broad toolset of static site generators to choose from, and still have sites that look & feel like a SPA. Other than that in many cases you don't even need the frameworks and tools, and could hand-craft in a text editor.

manquer 6y ago
If that was the case , they should show fast light pages even without amp higher , amp is not only to make pages faster and lighter . If preference was anything fast then I would agree with you, instead of just amp
- rapnie 6y ago
  The argument Google uses to shove AMP down our throat would not exist anymore. If the page is light, w3c-compliant, accessible and has good SEO and still Google says "turn this into less-light, less-simple AMP for our convenience and your page-ranking" then it would strengthen an anti-trust against them.
  - dmitriid 6y ago
    That's exactly what Google is doing: you can't get into the carousel at the top of the search unless your page is AMP.