Re:Google no longer requires AMP, but the replacement might ...
by fddddd on Monday June 28, 2021 @12:09PM
(#27663705)
adblockers like uBlocker Origin was even better for low speed internet than amp.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Google no longer requires AMP, but the replacement might ...
by topicseed on Monday June 28, 2021 @12:13PM
(#27663748)
Well, I do appreciate my ad revenue to pay my team members and myself so I won't be the one recommending that.
Re:Google no longer requires AMP, but the replacement might ...
by kuschku on Monday June 28, 2021 @04:00PM
(#27667093)
Of course, harming people always pays well, doesn't make it something you should be proud of.
Re:Google no longer requires AMP, but the replacement might ...
by my_usernam3 on Monday June 28, 2021 @04:20PM
(#27667457)
I read the comment in a different light. He or she is not exactly proud just admitting to the current circumstance. Specifically with this phrase
> so I won't be the one recommending that.
Re:Google no longer requires AMP, but the replacement might ...
by netr0ute on Monday June 28, 2021 @04:34PM
(#27667683)
Hot Take: If your website needs ads to survive, it wasn't that good to begin with.
Re:Google no longer requires AMP, but the replacement might ...
by topicseed on Monday June 28, 2021 @05:54PM
(#27668705)
Cold Take: I never mentioned survival, so take this word back to your imagination.
Re:Google no longer requires AMP, but the replacement might ...
by Google234 on Monday June 28, 2021 @05:01PM
(#27668059)
Let me guess, you also install paywall bypass extensions?
Re:Google no longer requires AMP, but the replacement might ...
by tomjen3 on Monday June 28, 2021 @04:19PM
(#27667447)
Turning of javascript completely breaks so many sites, but it is much, much, much faster to browse the web that way. I run Ublock Origin and it is great, but you are often still paying the javascript price.