Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Thursday May 25 2017, @05:48AM   Printer-friendly
from the the-more-you-tighten-your-grip... dept.

There's been a good deal of ongoing discussion about Google AMP – Accelerated Mobile Pages.

Quite a few high-profile web developers have this year weighted in with criticism and some, following a Google conference dedicated to AMP, have cautioned users about diving in with both feet.

These, in my view, don't go far enough in stating the problem and I feel this needs to be said very clearly: Google's AMP is bad – bad in a potentially web-destroying way. Google AMP is bad news for how the web is built, it's bad news for publishers of credible online content, and it's bad news for consumers of that content. Google AMP is only good for one party: Google. Google, and possibly, purveyors of fake news.

[...] What it is, is a way for Google to obfuscate your website, usurp your content and remove any lingering notions of personal credibility from the web.

If that appeals to you, here's what you need to do. First, get rid of all your HTML and render your content in a subset of HTML that Google has approved along with a few tags it invented. Because what do those pesky standards boards know? Trust Google, it knows what it's doing. And if you don't, consider yourself not part of the future of search results.

Why a subset of HTML you ask? Well, mostly because web developers suck at their jobs and have loaded the web with a ton of JavaScript no one wants. Can't fault Google for wanting to change that. That part I can support. The less JavaScript the better.

So far AMP actually sounds appealing. Except that, hilariously, to create an AMP page you have to load a, wait for it, yes a JavaScript file from Google. Pinboard founder Maciej Cegłowski already recreated the Google AMP demo page without the Google AMP JavaScript and, unsurprisingly, it's faster than Google's version.

-- submitted from IRC


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Thursday May 25 2017, @06:06AM (6 children)

    by fyngyrz (6567) on Thursday May 25 2017, @06:06AM (#515310) Journal

    Oh good grief. Just... I hate to say it but... Google it.

    Or don't. Life is short, web surfing is hard. Here: https://www.ampproject.org [ampproject.org]

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 25 2017, @06:12AM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 25 2017, @06:12AM (#515313)

    All that verbiage in the summary, but you have to "google it" to figure out what it's yepping about?

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by fyngyrz on Thursday May 25 2017, @03:10PM (2 children)

      by fyngyrz (6567) on Thursday May 25 2017, @03:10PM (#515493) Journal

      All that verbiage in the summary, but you have to "google it" to figure out what it's yepping about?

      No, I didn't have to Google it. You had to Google it. The summary clearly identified what it was talking about, even deconstructing the TLA, AMP. (Should I have linked TLA for you?) From the summary:

      Google AMP – Accelerated Mobile Pages.

      Yeah, there could have been a link in the summary. No, it wasn't a serious issue, because in the very first line it told you exactly what you needed to know if you needed to find out more. It also said - accurately - that "there's been a good deal of discussion of AMP", which is true (and is why I didn't have to Google it.)

      It took the complainant more time to complain about it than it would have to drag, copy, hit Google, paste, and click search. Or on a Mac, drag, right-click, and select "Search with Google" from the context menu. It was a pitifully lame and lazy complaint. Should Javascript have been linked? Google itself? HTML? Fake news? Web Developers? Just how much of the basics have to be presented wrapped in ribbons?

      Look. Learn to use the (incredibly easy to use) tools at your fingertips. It's a good thing. The time to complain about the summary is when it's incoherent and you can't figure out how to get up to speed on the things it's talking about. That's not the case here, at least, not WRT AMP.

      • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday May 25 2017, @04:37PM (1 child)

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Thursday May 25 2017, @04:37PM (#515541) Journal

        "It was a pitifully lame and lazy complaint."

        THIS IS SPARTA!!! WE HAVE NO PITY FOR THE LAME OR THE LAZY!! THROW HIS ASS TO THE WOLVES!

        Oh, wait. This isn't Sparta, is it? Soylent is New York, right? My mistake. Just put his ass on a table at the clinic, play some soothing music, and let him die. Painlessly, if you insist.

        • (Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Thursday May 25 2017, @08:23PM

          by fyngyrz (6567) on Thursday May 25 2017, @08:23PM (#515685) Journal

          THIS IS SPARTA!!! WE HAVE NO PITY FOR THE LAME OR THE LAZY!! THROW HIS ASS TO THE WOLVES!

          Sometimes I wish it was Sparta.

          Sad, and a terrible reflection of my inner thought processes, but true.

  • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Thursday May 25 2017, @11:20AM (1 child)

    by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Thursday May 25 2017, @11:20AM (#515389) Homepage
    Looks beautiful! http://fatphil.org/tmp/amp_rules.png
    --
    Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 25 2017, @10:23PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 25 2017, @10:23PM (#515735)

      I like Google's cached pages because I can add markup, highlighting stuff that is particularly applicable to a point I am trying to make.

      I find the &strip=0 version of the page to often be especially desirable.
      Those remove (unnecessary) scripts, (unnecessary, IMO) images, etc.

      In those pages, Google also strips out some tags.
      Accessibility guidelines say that (for blind people who use screenreaders) you're supposed to use em and strong (instead of i and b).
      Google strips out em and strong from those pages (and doesn't replace them with the tags which it chooses to support).

      I've noticed that Google also strips out dd and dt.
      This subset of stuff that they choose to respect sometimes makes those pages look goofy compared to the original.

      This is what Google AMP will bring more of (as your screenshot demonstrates).

      -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]