AMP: the missing controversy

Re:AMP: the missing controversy by IlPeach on Saturday February 24, 2018 @06:42PM (#16456174)

I don't even think AMP is the problem. It feels more like an symptom. So the question really goes as: what's the actual problem? To keep it very short, it really does feel like to be around how the ad revenue works on the web. But maybe I'm just mistaken and I'm missing some pieces of the puzzle.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:AMP: the missing controversy by spc476 on Sunday February 25, 2018 @04:07AM (#16457986)

I think the problem is Google. Between Page Rank, QUIC, HTTP/2.0 and AMP, Google is pretty much now dictating the terms of the Internet.

For instance, how much longer before Google only accepts email from the "Big Players?" (or drastically lowers the performance/acceptance of email from smaller sites?)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:AMP: the missing controversy by Waterluvian on Saturday February 24, 2018 @06:47PM (#16456199)

I think you're right that it's a symptom. Take a perfectly fine system like email and, from a profitability perspective, see a problem and an opportunity.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:AMP: the missing controversy by hyder_m29 on Saturday February 24, 2018 @07:37PM (#16456419)

I don't think there's a problem. From what I gather, websites simply adopt AMP for the preferential treatment Google gives AMP pages. It's an SEO-hack.

[ Parent | on HN ]