8 ms·

Please don’t let your excitement take your focus off this part of the story: > The good news gets even better; non-AMP pages make considerably more revenue per

by numair 5y ago

Please don’t let your excitement take your focus off this part of the story: > The good news gets even better; non-AMP pages make considerably more revenue per pageview than AMP pages. Initially, I assumed this was due to the nature of how ads load on AMP, however, recent Antitrust lawsuits have proposed that hindering ad competition was a feature and that all non-amp ad tags, such as my company, Ezoic’s, were delayed by 1 second to make them less effective. It is also alleged that Google let their own exchange win, even when someone else bid more! Somewhere, in a parallel universe, people are going to jail and paying substantial fines for this behavior. In this universe, however, politicians don’t seem to think there is a moral hazard in the fact that those of us who work in this industry see what happened and think, “if you get big enough, it doesn’t matter if you get caught.”

dannyw 5y ago
There are active lawsuits going on by something like 49 out of 50 states. That's how damning evidence like this -- as well as Facebook offering to share unencrypted WhatsApp messages with Google (through the "backup to Drive" feature) -- came out to light. Unfortunately a lot of HN readers are dismissing this or calling it partisan grandstanding, just because it's Texas that filed it.
- propogandist 5y ago
  > Facebook offering to share unencrypted WhatsApp messages with Google where can I read more on why they allowed this?
  - burkaman 5y ago
    I haven't found any statements about it from either company, but here's a decent article: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/whatsapp-google-drive-backups-plaintext,37718.html https://www.tomshardware.com/news/whatsapp-google-drive-back...
    - hedora 5y ago
      According to that article, they also snoop on the content of any files stored in Drive. To think, just a decade ago, this article seemed paranoid, to the point where even the author seemed to think it was an oversight in the Terms of Service: https://techland.time.com/2012/04/26/will-google-drive-snoop-inside-your-data-google-needs-to-be-clearer/ https://techland.time.com/2012/04/26/will-google-drive-snoop... Interestingly, they give (gave?) themselves redistribution and performance rights for Drive contents at the same time. How long until they start openly using those rights, I wonder?
      - alisonkisk 5y ago
        Where does the article say they snoop? Drive is unencrypted because it is indexed for personal search. What is the snooping part? > redistribution and performance rights for Drive This is completely standard and required so that they can provide syncing and sharing.
  - nerbert 5y ago
    It's written in your whatsapp backup settings.
    - propogandist 5y ago
      I meant leaks or new information exposing how/why FB intentionally made backups unencrypted when storing on Google Drive. I am aware that Whatsapp does this and have avoided Whatsapp’s Google Drive backup overall.
- tomComb 5y ago
  It is partisan because Oracle told us so. They have bragged that they ran a decade long well financed effort to make all these actions against Google happen, and what we see now is the culmination of that. I don't doubt they "won" in the end, but I'm baffled that they brag about "competing" like that.
  - tomComb 5y ago
    Here's some evidence... Oracle for years secretly lobbied states, Justice Department to sue Google - Bloomberg (2020-12-23) https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-23/oracle-for-years-secretly-lobbied-states-justice-department-to-sue-google https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-23/oracle-fo...
Trufa 5y ago
I’m as much against AMP as the next YC user, but jailing seems really excessive.
- tobr 5y ago
  This is clearly a separate discussion, but it’s interesting to consider why we’re always so eager to jail people for street crime, but it “seems really excessive” when it’s a white-collar crime.
  - emn13 5y ago
    We empathize with "people doing their job" perhaps a little too much? But part if is must also be just how inhumane jail sentences have become. Prisons are terrible places in the US, and sentences really disproportanate. With that framing, maybe it feels harsh to send somebody to prison for years for "just playing hardball a little too much". I don't know, but the US penal system needs a revamp anyhow.
    - tobr 5y ago
      The question is still the same, why do we feel it’s fair when blue-collar criminals are treated inhumanly, but harsh when applied to white-collar criminals?
      - ddingus 5y ago
        The same reasons lie behind why we also tend to ignore many external costs.
      - Spooky23 5y ago
        The personal violation you feel as a victim of a mugging or a burglary is more visceral and real, whether someone steals a dollar or ten thousand dollars. The perp takes something from your psyche, and we want to extract the same. When some character fudges a spreadsheet or sets up a viscous cycle in business, it is more abstract. We’ve all done it to some degree (received an undeserved discount, more change than owed, etc), and the black and white “wrongness” varies. Another consideration is that the punishment for white collar crime is very severe in terms of loss of agency and autonomy. Once you’re convicted of a felony, you’re kryptonite — you’re trading your comfy middle class existence for something riskier and worse. Typical suburban punter is losing most of your friends and probably your home and spouse. The kids lose their nice school or get stuck in a grubby apartment. White collar criminals have more to lose, so the punishment standard is different.
concordDance 5y ago
Ads being delayed seems like a win for consumers though.
- coffeefirst 5y ago
  Not at all. It makes the page slower and jumpier.
  - jefftk 5y ago
    > jumpier Not on AMP pages. AMP's design prevents user-visible reflow. (Disclosure: I work on ads at Google, speaking only for myself.)
    - jefftk 5y ago
      Normally, the way that late loading adds cause reflow / layout shift / jumpiness is that you don't know what size an ad slot is going to be until after the auction. You could run an auction just for a single size, but you'd have fewer bidders and make less money, so publishers generally choose to offer a bunch of sizes. On a regular page, this looks like an ad coming in and shifting all the other content on the page. AMP had several design goals, one of which was that it should be impossible to create pages with certain types of bad user experience, including reflow. An AMP page requires that every element on the page be sized only by information directly visible in the HTML (including inline CSS, but no inline JS) which allows the browser to lay the whole page out immediately. When an ad loads off screen there can be a request to the AMP runtime to resize the slot, but the runtime will reject the request if the resize might cause user visible effects. More details: https://blog.amp.dev/2020/04/16/cumulative-layout-shift-in-amp/ https://blog.amp.dev/2020/04/16/cumulative-layout-shift-in-a...
  - tristanperry 5y ago
    Not anymore. Many ad networks have rolled out their 'CLS' solutions for the upcoming Google Web Vitals algo change, and ads don't jump about anymore on these networks. Example ad networks that work well with delayed ads (that don't jump) include Mediavine and AdThrive.
izacus 5y ago
So basically you want people to go to jail for not blasting ads into your face immediately and actually loading web content first? Seems like a horribly awful world to me - would you extend this to Ad blockers as well? And when was the last time you've seen how horrible mainstream web is, with its autoplaying video popups? AMP isn't the best solution, but what you're proposing is just horrifying. If anything, we should standardize this behaviour in browsers and make sure the ads never interfere with loaded contents. Let's not destroy the web even more so ad peddlers get more money.
- alexvoda 5y ago
  I downvoted you because you are deviating the conversation. I find it hard not to attribute hidden intentions behind what you posted. The parent comment quoted saying they were loading their ads before ads from competitor networks. Noone said anything about when the content was loaded. Google is the largest ad peddler. You are obviously trying to shift the conversation away from how Google controls AMP and apparently used it to gain an advantage in the ad market (basically an antitrust issue) towards a generic conversation of ads are bad, but Google is good. The parent was complaing about corporations being large enough to ignore antitrust legislation.
  - izacus 5y ago
    > You are obviously trying to shift the conversation away from how Google controls AMP and apparently used it to gain an advantage in the ad market (basically an antitrust issue) towards a generic conversation of ads are bad, but Google is good. That is a really horrible accusation of something I haven't done. The OP is the one proposing jail-like punishment for actions that only lower the ad revenue and actually benefit the customer. It has nothing to do with defending Google (especially since I'm also talking about AdBlockers, which could easily fall into "coporation allows adblockers to lower revenue" interpretation). Please don't look for hidden agendas where there aren't any.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
Stratoscope 5y ago
> Somewhere, in a parallel universe, people are going to jail and paying substantial fines for this behavior. My fear is that they are not going to jail or paying fines, they are being exiled... to our universe!
hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
> all non-amp ad tags, such as my company, Ezoic’s, were delayed by 1 second to make them less effective This is really not true. I was able to find the previous discussion on HN where someone linked to the Github issue about this design decision: https://github.com/ampproject/amphtml/issues/3133 https://github.com/ampproject/amphtml/issues/3133 . Note the root goal of this was actually to get non-AMP ads to run faster. This was all fully transparent, and was not some nefarious hidden functionality that Google tacked on in the hopes of tanking other ad networks. Look, I hate AMP as much as your average HN poster, and I don't really disagree that Google is willing to make "technological improvements" as long as they hurt the other guy, and not Google. But I think the discussion gets better, not worse, when folks are more honest about the real reasoning behind why something is implemented the way it is.

by numair 5y ago

dannyw 5y ago

There are active lawsuits going on by something like 49 out of 50 states. That's how damning evidence like this -- as well as Facebook offering to share unencrypted WhatsApp messages with Google (through the "backup to Drive" feature) -- came out to light. Unfortunately a lot of HN readers are dismissing this or calling it partisan grandstanding, just because it's Texas that filed it.

propogandist 5y ago
> Facebook offering to share unencrypted WhatsApp messages with Google where can I read more on why they allowed this?
- burkaman 5y ago
  I haven't found any statements about it from either company, but here's a decent article: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/whatsapp-google-drive-backups-plaintext,37718.html https://www.tomshardware.com/news/whatsapp-google-drive-back...
  - hedora 5y ago
    According to that article, they also snoop on the content of any files stored in Drive. To think, just a decade ago, this article seemed paranoid, to the point where even the author seemed to think it was an oversight in the Terms of Service: https://techland.time.com/2012/04/26/will-google-drive-snoop-inside-your-data-google-needs-to-be-clearer/ https://techland.time.com/2012/04/26/will-google-drive-snoop... Interestingly, they give (gave?) themselves redistribution and performance rights for Drive contents at the same time. How long until they start openly using those rights, I wonder?
    - alisonkisk 5y ago
      Where does the article say they snoop? Drive is unencrypted because it is indexed for personal search. What is the snooping part? > redistribution and performance rights for Drive This is completely standard and required so that they can provide syncing and sharing.
- nerbert 5y ago
  It's written in your whatsapp backup settings.
  - propogandist 5y ago
    I meant leaks or new information exposing how/why FB intentionally made backups unencrypted when storing on Google Drive. I am aware that Whatsapp does this and have avoided Whatsapp’s Google Drive backup overall.
tomComb 5y ago
It is partisan because Oracle told us so. They have bragged that they ran a decade long well financed effort to make all these actions against Google happen, and what we see now is the culmination of that. I don't doubt they "won" in the end, but I'm baffled that they brag about "competing" like that.
- tomComb 5y ago
  Here's some evidence... Oracle for years secretly lobbied states, Justice Department to sue Google - Bloomberg (2020-12-23) https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-23/oracle-for-years-secretly-lobbied-states-justice-department-to-sue-google https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-23/oracle-fo...

Trufa 5y ago

I’m as much against AMP as the next YC user, but jailing seems really excessive.

tobr 5y ago
This is clearly a separate discussion, but it’s interesting to consider why we’re always so eager to jail people for street crime, but it “seems really excessive” when it’s a white-collar crime.
- emn13 5y ago
  We empathize with "people doing their job" perhaps a little too much? But part if is must also be just how inhumane jail sentences have become. Prisons are terrible places in the US, and sentences really disproportanate. With that framing, maybe it feels harsh to send somebody to prison for years for "just playing hardball a little too much". I don't know, but the US penal system needs a revamp anyhow.
  - tobr 5y ago
    The question is still the same, why do we feel it’s fair when blue-collar criminals are treated inhumanly, but harsh when applied to white-collar criminals?
    - ddingus 5y ago
      The same reasons lie behind why we also tend to ignore many external costs.
    - Spooky23 5y ago
      The personal violation you feel as a victim of a mugging or a burglary is more visceral and real, whether someone steals a dollar or ten thousand dollars. The perp takes something from your psyche, and we want to extract the same. When some character fudges a spreadsheet or sets up a viscous cycle in business, it is more abstract. We’ve all done it to some degree (received an undeserved discount, more change than owed, etc), and the black and white “wrongness” varies. Another consideration is that the punishment for white collar crime is very severe in terms of loss of agency and autonomy. Once you’re convicted of a felony, you’re kryptonite — you’re trading your comfy middle class existence for something riskier and worse. Typical suburban punter is losing most of your friends and probably your home and spouse. The kids lose their nice school or get stuck in a grubby apartment. White collar criminals have more to lose, so the punishment standard is different.

concordDance 5y ago

Ads being delayed seems like a win for consumers though.

coffeefirst 5y ago
Not at all. It makes the page slower and jumpier.
- jefftk 5y ago
  > jumpier Not on AMP pages. AMP's design prevents user-visible reflow. (Disclosure: I work on ads at Google, speaking only for myself.)
  - jefftk 5y ago
    Normally, the way that late loading adds cause reflow / layout shift / jumpiness is that you don't know what size an ad slot is going to be until after the auction. You could run an auction just for a single size, but you'd have fewer bidders and make less money, so publishers generally choose to offer a bunch of sizes. On a regular page, this looks like an ad coming in and shifting all the other content on the page. AMP had several design goals, one of which was that it should be impossible to create pages with certain types of bad user experience, including reflow. An AMP page requires that every element on the page be sized only by information directly visible in the HTML (including inline CSS, but no inline JS) which allows the browser to lay the whole page out immediately. When an ad loads off screen there can be a request to the AMP runtime to resize the slot, but the runtime will reject the request if the resize might cause user visible effects. More details: https://blog.amp.dev/2020/04/16/cumulative-layout-shift-in-amp/ https://blog.amp.dev/2020/04/16/cumulative-layout-shift-in-a...
- tristanperry 5y ago
  Not anymore. Many ad networks have rolled out their 'CLS' solutions for the upcoming Google Web Vitals algo change, and ads don't jump about anymore on these networks. Example ad networks that work well with delayed ads (that don't jump) include Mediavine and AdThrive.

izacus 5y ago

So basically you want people to go to jail for not blasting ads into your face immediately and actually loading web content first? Seems like a horribly awful world to me - would you extend this to Ad blockers as well? And when was the last time you've seen how horrible mainstream web is, with its autoplaying video popups? AMP isn't the best solution, but what you're proposing is just horrifying. If anything, we should standardize this behaviour in browsers and make sure the ads never interfere with loaded contents. Let's not destroy the web even more so ad peddlers get more money.

alexvoda 5y ago
I downvoted you because you are deviating the conversation. I find it hard not to attribute hidden intentions behind what you posted. The parent comment quoted saying they were loading their ads before ads from competitor networks. Noone said anything about when the content was loaded. Google is the largest ad peddler. You are obviously trying to shift the conversation away from how Google controls AMP and apparently used it to gain an advantage in the ad market (basically an antitrust issue) towards a generic conversation of ads are bad, but Google is good. The parent was complaing about corporations being large enough to ignore antitrust legislation.
- izacus 5y ago
  > You are obviously trying to shift the conversation away from how Google controls AMP and apparently used it to gain an advantage in the ad market (basically an antitrust issue) towards a generic conversation of ads are bad, but Google is good. That is a really horrible accusation of something I haven't done. The OP is the one proposing jail-like punishment for actions that only lower the ad revenue and actually benefit the customer. It has nothing to do with defending Google (especially since I'm also talking about AdBlockers, which could easily fall into "coporation allows adblockers to lower revenue" interpretation). Please don't look for hidden agendas where there aren't any.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]

Stratoscope 5y ago

> Somewhere, in a parallel universe, people are going to jail and paying substantial fines for this behavior. My fear is that they are not going to jail or paying fines, they are being exiled... to our universe!

hn_throwaway_99 5y ago

> all non-amp ad tags, such as my company, Ezoic’s, were delayed by 1 second to make them less effective This is really not true. I was able to find the previous discussion on HN where someone linked to the Github issue about this design decision: https://github.com/ampproject/amphtml/issues/3133 https://github.com/ampproject/amphtml/issues/3133 . Note the root goal of this was actually to get non-AMP ads to run faster. This was all fully transparent, and was not some nefarious hidden functionality that Google tacked on in the hopes of tanking other ad networks. Look, I hate AMP as much as your average HN poster, and I don't really disagree that Google is willing to make "technological improvements" as long as they hurt the other guy, and not Google. But I think the discussion gets better, not worse, when folks are more honest about the real reasoning behind why something is implemented the way it is.