undefined | Better HN

0 pointsolingern5y ago0 comments

The problem is ownership. Google is “stealing” or caching content for what they consider a better web.

I don’t support ads but I also don’t support Google serving a version of the page that steals money from content creators. So, therein lies the problem: choice.

I can imagine a future where amp is ubiquitous and Google begins serving ads on amp content. Luckily, companies have to make money and amp is not in most people’s or company’s best interests.

If amp was opt-in only, this would be much more ethically sound.

0 comments

gregable5y ago

Signed exchanges guarantee that the content cannot be modified by the cache, such as ad injection.

Google has never injected ads into any cache served AMP document (technically if the publisher uses AdSense, this is false, but that's not the point you are making).

It's difficult to follow what definition of theft is being suggested. The cache does not modify the document rendering, it's essentially a proxy. In a semantic sense, this is no different than your ISP delivering the page or your WiFi router.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse