> For effective censorship, one would need to first determine that the article indeed is anti-Google You might call that "sentiment analysis". Google has publi

> For effective censorship, one would need to first determine that the article indeed is anti-Google You might call that "sentiment analysis". Google has published papers on it. They've refined it so much that they even turned it into a well-documented feature of their Natural Language API [0]. > Google could probably pull it off but for what? Google hate drives views, and ironically, these are commonly monetized by Google itself. If you could assign a monetary value to showing someone an advertisement (or several), would you? Google has. If you could assign a monetary value to someone's knowledge about government/justice actions against yourself, would you? If you could categorize sentiment into something that can generate revenue... or perhaps something that could hurt revenue... would you? There's money in censorship. > Anyways, searching "artificial 2 second wait to non-AMP ads" is inconclusive Let me make it much less inconclusive . The two searches [1] [2] both reveal the lawsuit by the Texas AG which has explicit allegations [3]. [0]: https://cloud.google.com/natural-language/docs/sentiment-tutorial https://cloud.google.com/natural-language/docs/sentiment-tut... [1]: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Google+AMP+second+delay+lawsuit https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Google+AMP+second+delay+lawsuit [2]: https://www.google.com/search?q=Google+AMP+second+delay+lawsuit https://www.google.com/search?q=Google+AMP+second+delay+laws... [3]: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/images/admin/2020/Press/20201216%20COMPLAINT_REDACTED.pdf https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/ima...