I agree with the premise that publishers should get of AMP and have been a critic of the framework since its inception. Yet we have to concede that in 2015 it

I agree with the premise that publishers should get of AMP and have been a critic of the framework since its inception. Yet we have to concede that in 2015 it actually solved an important problem. Being on the mobile web necessitates prioritizing lightness and low latency access to content for publishers. But none of them where equipped for that in the second age of the mobile web. Even now, while you can prioritize access to content and create lightweight mobile experiences, publishers still opt in to loading megabytes of paywall scripts and delay the content render until typography has finished loading. Back then it was difficult to convince your publisher's board that investing a big project to make a light mobile experience and give content away (as they saw it). But "having" to invest in a Google built reimplementation of your content delivery because "Google needed it" was a much easier discussion. I still think that we should man up and just build the self discipline in our orgs to create lightweight content experiences (like HN for example) and stop depending on Google to force us to do the right thing.