Chronotope’s avatarChronotope’s Twitter Archive—№ 52,593

                                              1. Google understands that caching ads on pages is inherently antithetical to the ad market *they* set up, right?
                                            1. …in reply to @Chronotope
                                              Like... I don't need Google to be my Varnish caching 2.0 layer. I need them to f*cking fix DFP and their programmatic market.
                                          1. …in reply to @Chronotope
                                            By pushing 3rd party caching, Google manages to take even more control away from publishers seeking personalization tools and ad tech.
                                        1. …in reply to @Chronotope
                                          "Any sites using AMP HTML will retain their choice of ad networks, as well as any formats that don’t detract from the user experience."
                                      1. …in reply to @Chronotope
                                        OH WILL THEY NOW? What gives Google the right to decide which of the ad formats they have pushed on us we get to monetize now?
                                    1. …in reply to @Chronotope
                                      AMP is the sort of massive multi-organizational dick move that is only possible because publishers gave up control of their own income flow
                                  1. …in reply to @Chronotope
                                    "Implement embedded third-party content, such as amp-youtube, amp-ad, and amp-twitter." Oh, so forget about using embedded non-YouTube video
                                1. …in reply to @Chronotope
                                  AMP is some West Coast enlightened-self-interest bullshit. Of course Twitter signs on because now you're locked into Twitter if you use AMP.
                              1. …in reply to @Chronotope
                                Can't use a Twitter competitor, if one ever emerges, because then your speed-up software won't work. We're getting locked in and locked out.
                            1. …in reply to @Chronotope
                              This manages to be MORE offensive than FB Instant Articles. Now Google & its social partners gets to decide what is or is not on your page.
                          1. …in reply to @Chronotope
                            And the reason they get to, is because of shitty ads they set up a shitty ecosystem to serve to publishers...
                        1. …in reply to @Chronotope
                          Publisher content isn't what's slowing down the web. Google's ad network is. AMP isn't a solution, it's just one more way to exert control.
                      1. …in reply to @Chronotope
                        And by publishers not caring about how to monetize the web until it was too late, we basically asked for this.
                    1. …in reply to @Chronotope
                      I'm just waiting to hear about the big IAB support of Google's AMP. Then we'll really know for sure that it's a scam.
                  1. …in reply to @Chronotope
                    What's even worse? Google is basically proposing to lazyload the entire internet. Forget archiving tools, forget about the open internet...
                1. …in reply to @Chronotope
                  All AMP pages are, at least partially, inherently unreadable without Google's scripts running on your page. What if they stop?
              1. …in reply to @Chronotope
                Remember Google Author? This is an even more massive tech investment entirely on publishers. What happens if Google stops supporting AMP?
            1. …in reply to @Chronotope
              You have a bunch of <amp-img /> tags that don't load anymore. Your site doesn't work. No one has archived it, because it is unreadable...
          1. …in reply to @Chronotope
            ... and you'll have to hurry up and change everything back. Woo.
        1. …in reply to @Chronotope
          Not that it matters, because the minute one large publisher adopts AMP, we all will or risk Google and the rest de-listing us...
      1. …in reply to @Chronotope
        ... or just turn entirely to Facebook.
    1. …in reply to @Chronotope
      "But Google already rewards publishers whose pages load quickly, he said. So do the math." recode.net/2015/10/07/google-unveils-amp-its-answer-to-facebooks-instant-articles/?utm_medium=twitter via pkafka
  1. …in reply to @Chronotope
    Too bad publishers have long seemed inherently unable to do any math when it comes to Google.
    1. …in reply to @Chronotope
      In a world where speed decides who shows up first on Google & who gets traffic, What way can you avoid using AMP & preferring its partners?
      1. …in reply to @Chronotope
        1. …in reply to @Chronotope
          AMP bans tracking pixels ampproject.org/how-it-works/ - but I bet DFP will be able to get full metrics anyway. Sorry other ad servers.
          OpenGraph image for ampproject.org/how-it-works/
          1. …in reply to @Chronotope
            As far as I can tell, Google's AMP is a massive rewriting of the way the web works on Google's terms and in Google's interests. Terrifying.
            1. …in reply to @Chronotope
              1. …in reply to @Chronotope
                Confirmed via jbenton that AMP at least supports parallel pages, still a lot of tech investment to take on for pubs github.com/ampproject/amphtml/blob/master/examples/article-metadata/json-ld.amp.html#L19
                OpenGraph image for github.com/ampproject/amphtml/blob/master/examples/article-metadata/json-ld.amp.html#L19
                1. …in reply to @Chronotope
                  1. …in reply to @Chronotope
                    1. …in reply to @Chronotope


Search tweets' text