Despite claims over taking back control, UK is forced to comply with rules on which it has no say

  • Rambler
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Would you please explain your reference to amp and google?

    • towerful@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Google invented AMP.
      It had specifications for a webpage to conform to.
      In return, Google would serve a cached copy and rank your page higher - ie a bigger audience. So publishers had to play along.

      This article has some overviews on it.

      https://www.theregister.com/2017/05/19/open_source_insider_google_amp_bad_bad_bad/

      AMP developers produced something that is bad for the open web ecosystem because it destroys three sacrosanct elements of the web: the URL, the open web standard of HTML, and the decentralisation of the web.

      Whilst AMP is now open source, it’s still Google.
      I don’t know that any other search engines recognise AMP.
      I don’t think I’ve ever seen an “Always AMP” browser extension (tho I have seen many “de-amp” extensions).

      Personally , I will support the publishers by linking/sharing/viewing the actual article link instead of the AMP link.

      • chris@fedia.ioOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Apologies, I didn’t know this, I just thought it was served on a subdomain for some random reason and it didn’t matter. I’ll ensure my links are “clean” in future 🙂

      • Rambler
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        An interesting article - thanks for the link. I’m not exactly sure what options I have now though: I don’t use Google search, I don’t use their browser (or any of their software) - am I good to go?

    • setInner234@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      This is an old link, but contains all the information needed. They’ve watered it down a bit since, but you still see it pop up from time to time: https://www.theregister.com/2017/05/19/open_source_insider_google_amp_bad_bad_bad/

      edit: oh, someone else posted the exact same article, haha. I didn’t look at the context, just replied directly from my inbox. Well, I’m leaving it here, so everyone can see me embarrassing myself :)

      • Rambler
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        No need for feeling that - covers both bases an’ all. So all good, thanks for taking the time.