News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Google digital advertising antitrust litigation [pdf]. Parent comment

Re:Google digital advertising antitrust litigation [pdf] by Vespasian on Sunday October 24, 2021 @03:51AM (#28975736)
If the allegations are true, they knew exactly what was happening and even took steps to make it seem like Google was not in full control of AMP.

Whether front line engineers knew isn't that important. AMP Leadership definitely did.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google digital advertising antitrust litigation [pdf] by beckman466 on Sunday October 24, 2021 @07:53AM (#28977081)
> AMP Leadership definitely did.

did they though? couldn't this be a small (artificial delay) library injected server side by some higher ups at Google?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google digital advertising antitrust litigation [pdf] by tmcw on Sunday October 24, 2021 @11:37AM (#28978900)
See page 90:

> Google ad server employees met with AMP employees to strategize about using AMP to impede header bidding, addressing in particular how much pressure publishers and advertisers would tolerate.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google digital advertising antitrust litigation [pdf] by ricktdotorg on Sunday October 24, 2021 @12:07PM (#28979194)
thank you for finding (and posting) this.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google digital advertising antitrust litigation [pdf] by brendoelfrendo on Sunday October 24, 2021 @08:28AM (#28977269)
I guess that depends: do we believe that AMP developers and leadership did this, possibly misguided by a promise from on high of “don’t worry, this is normal,” or do we believe that higher-ups were doing secret development work that went unnoticed by everyone else?

I think it’s easier to believe that the AMP team was simply naive, or willfully blind to the implications, or they didn’t care (probably all 3; teams are big enough that there’s room for all).

[ Parent | on HN ]