News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The End of AMP by alexvoda on Monday May 03, 2021 @07:35AM (#27023797)
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.

Re:The End of AMP by cjaybo on Monday May 03, 2021 @09:42AM (#27024961)
Are you spamming this comment using multiple accounts?
Re:The End of AMP by izacus on Monday May 03, 2021 @08:32AM (#27024224)
> 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.

Re:The End of AMP by ric2b on Monday May 03, 2021 @09:28AM (#27024805)
> for actions that only lower the ad revenue and actually benefit the customer.

False, it only does that for their competition.