5 ms·

As an end-user, AMP sites load faster and with less clutter. The only downside is a clunky URL, but I rarely care about that. AMP improved my mobile search exp

by ceras 6y ago

As an end-user, AMP sites load faster and with less clutter. The only downside is a clunky URL, but I rarely care about that. AMP improved my mobile search experience. The main AMP concerns seem philosophical, which I don't think OP was asking about.

doublerabbit 6y ago
And this is the problem for anyone outside of the CompSci field. To those it looks like URL non-sense but it's rooted far deeper then that. This isn't philosophical. By choosing to use AMP, you are ultimately choosing to destroy the internet. You're granting the power of one company to run and control what you visit, do, use. Your surrendering your data for them to make money off to use and abuse. Your supporting the downfall of innovation. Your eliminating development of opportunities and innovation. Denying fairness. Nothing there is philosophical, that's all real all because you choose to use Google Amp. --- The internet is made up from many devices connected somehow Without a search engine how would you locate information? You can't unless you knew Computer X has the information on what you need. Just as an encyclopedia has an index telling you to look which volume and page to open. A search engine crawls from computers to computers in hunt for information and then records it in a catalog. So when you search "dogs" this is then retrieved within the catalog for any computers that hold information on dogs. This costs money, so what's a way of making money? Sell search results. My information on dogs is not that useful but I do like users visiting my webpage because I may sell pet related items. So I pay google £100 to list my website at the top when someone searches "dog". Great, I am now top of the list. Others do the same and get their search results on the top too. However, my friend who is a vet has a information piece on if a dog is sick, and the remedy on what to do. Unfortunately they don't have the money to boost their page to the top, so it gets buried. Some pseudo science website makes a page about dog cures and pays for it's rank. The information I need on how to cure a dogs cold is now buried further but that's okay, I now have a fake remedy on how to cure a dogs cold. Next up is Google Amp. Amp is disguised to load the pages faster, but all it's really doing is collecting information about the user who visits, and redirects them to a branded copy-paste version of the original website and sells the users information. I'm really a company who sells placebo medicine for dogs, my medicine has killed a few dogs in the past but no worries, it's trusted because I'm with Google Amp. At the same time google implements a new policy "You must use AMP to be part of google search engine pages 1 to 6" -- This in return costs money to implement. So now the vet piece on how to cure a dog's cold is now on page 7. Who goes to page seven on google? The average user normally stops around page three. Well, now you've got to pay money to get a listing and now that anybody can cram an illegitimate idea into a web page and in which so long as it's encoded as AMP content – it'll look like it's from a legit new organization endorsed by Google. On top you are at Google’s mercy when it comes to how (and even if) your content is actually displayed. If google doesn't like your page, swipe, there goes your listing. Your a vet, you don't have money to implement AMP, nor do you have the money to get your page to the top which you now can't because your not using AMP. So the vet isn't getting any visitors, your vet practice is unknown in the world apart from local town folk. So not only are you crippling businesses from thriving because of Amp, your supporting a dominated chosen google market. Google wants you all within googles walled garden. Above is a jist of it. But AMP is bad, there is NO good coming from AMP. By supporting amp, your support death of freedom.
- walterbell 6y ago
  On the plus side, amp-specific text is now on the end of URLs, making it easier to delete before sharing the URL. The larger threat with Amp is signed content, where Chrome address bar drops URL and has only the legal name of the site owner.
  - joshuamorton 6y ago
    Why is that a threat?
    - doublerabbit 6y ago
      Because it makes way for Google to dictate how the internet operates.
      - joshuamorton 6y ago
        This doesn't follow. How does an open standard that, essentially, allows for CDNs to be more secure, let Google dictate how the internet operates?
        doublerabbit 6y ago
        Alright, an open-standard that allows Google to create a walled garden. But when has google ever been for an "open" internet? Never because an open internet doesn't make money, but then again that has never been Google's philosophy. AMP does dictate the internet in a way that forces the user to see and do how Google wants you to see and do. If Google was for open standards, I should have the ability to turn off google amp. No? If Google was for open standards, they wouldn't force features upon users without the ability to turn them off? If I host my own email server on my own IP range with in my colocation and send to GMAIL, I am instantly put in spam. Is that not dictating that my email to my mother is spam? And yes, I'll admit that I am hypocrite. I use google search because it's the only search engine that yields the results I require. I try to use DDG when I can but that fails. Bing is a pile of puke. I don't want to, but I am forced to which fine, I understand the conditions that they give me. However to boast that Google is for opens standards. That's what's laughable. Amp dictates the web and will as they see fit. But you work for google, so your bias anyway and that makes this whole discussion moot.

by ceras 6y ago

doublerabbit 6y ago

And this is the problem for anyone outside of the CompSci field. To those it looks like URL non-sense but it's rooted far deeper then that. This isn't philosophical. By choosing to use AMP, you are ultimately choosing to destroy the internet. You're granting the power of one company to run and control what you visit, do, use. Your surrendering your data for them to make money off to use and abuse. Your supporting the downfall of innovation. Your eliminating development of opportunities and innovation. Denying fairness. Nothing there is philosophical, that's all real all because you choose to use Google Amp. --- The internet is made up from many devices connected somehow Without a search engine how would you locate information? You can't unless you knew Computer X has the information on what you need. Just as an encyclopedia has an index telling you to look which volume and page to open. A search engine crawls from computers to computers in hunt for information and then records it in a catalog. So when you search "dogs" this is then retrieved within the catalog for any computers that hold information on dogs. This costs money, so what's a way of making money? Sell search results. My information on dogs is not that useful but I do like users visiting my webpage because I may sell pet related items. So I pay google £100 to list my website at the top when someone searches "dog". Great, I am now top of the list. Others do the same and get their search results on the top too. However, my friend who is a vet has a information piece on if a dog is sick, and the remedy on what to do. Unfortunately they don't have the money to boost their page to the top, so it gets buried. Some pseudo science website makes a page about dog cures and pays for it's rank. The information I need on how to cure a dogs cold is now buried further but that's okay, I now have a fake remedy on how to cure a dogs cold. Next up is Google Amp. Amp is disguised to load the pages faster, but all it's really doing is collecting information about the user who visits, and redirects them to a branded copy-paste version of the original website and sells the users information. I'm really a company who sells placebo medicine for dogs, my medicine has killed a few dogs in the past but no worries, it's trusted because I'm with Google Amp. At the same time google implements a new policy "You must use AMP to be part of google search engine pages 1 to 6" -- This in return costs money to implement. So now the vet piece on how to cure a dog's cold is now on page 7. Who goes to page seven on google? The average user normally stops around page three. Well, now you've got to pay money to get a listing and now that anybody can cram an illegitimate idea into a web page and in which so long as it's encoded as AMP content – it'll look like it's from a legit new organization endorsed by Google. On top you are at Google’s mercy when it comes to how (and even if) your content is actually displayed. If google doesn't like your page, swipe, there goes your listing. Your a vet, you don't have money to implement AMP, nor do you have the money to get your page to the top which you now can't because your not using AMP. So the vet isn't getting any visitors, your vet practice is unknown in the world apart from local town folk. So not only are you crippling businesses from thriving because of Amp, your supporting a dominated chosen google market. Google wants you all within googles walled garden. Above is a jist of it. But AMP is bad, there is NO good coming from AMP. By supporting amp, your support death of freedom.

walterbell 6y ago
On the plus side, amp-specific text is now on the end of URLs, making it easier to delete before sharing the URL. The larger threat with Amp is signed content, where Chrome address bar drops URL and has only the legal name of the site owner.
- joshuamorton 6y ago
  Why is that a threat?
  - doublerabbit 6y ago
    Because it makes way for Google to dictate how the internet operates.
    - joshuamorton 6y ago
      This doesn't follow. How does an open standard that, essentially, allows for CDNs to be more secure, let Google dictate how the internet operates?
      - doublerabbit 6y ago
        Alright, an open-standard that allows Google to create a walled garden. But when has google ever been for an "open" internet? Never because an open internet doesn't make money, but then again that has never been Google's philosophy. AMP does dictate the internet in a way that forces the user to see and do how Google wants you to see and do. If Google was for open standards, I should have the ability to turn off google amp. No? If Google was for open standards, they wouldn't force features upon users without the ability to turn them off? If I host my own email server on my own IP range with in my colocation and send to GMAIL, I am instantly put in spam. Is that not dictating that my email to my mother is spam? And yes, I'll admit that I am hypocrite. I use google search because it's the only search engine that yields the results I require. I try to use DDG when I can but that fails. Bing is a pile of puke. I don't want to, but I am forced to which fine, I understand the conditions that they give me. However to boast that Google is for opens standards. That's what's laughable. Amp dictates the web and will as they see fit. But you work for google, so your bias anyway and that makes this whole discussion moot.