So Google can push through a gatekeeping approach to further controlling online content. After you take hostages, then you decide what kind of ransom you want. It's how every monopoly tends to behave, they push outward leveraging their position and try to put as many defensive moats into place as they can.
If speed was actually their concern, they happen to control a search monopoly that pretends to very much care about performance and speed. If any of that were really true, they can practically flip a switch and smash every slow site on the Web. Aggressively turn up the penalty on such terrible sites. In less than a year they'd all jump to and get in line, or they would die, banished from all search results (sorry, your site sucks so bad we're not even going to index that garbage). Google is happy to banish sites for political-ideological reasons based on the bias of their employees, but they can't be bothered for performance reasons? It reveals a lot as Google knows it would be easy to fix without AMP. Speed is not the primary agenda of AMP, control is; speed is an excellent cover story.
> So Google can push through a gatekeeping approach to further controlling online content. After you take hostages, then you decide what kind of ransom you want.
Just like Apple.
Fuck all of these companies. The DOJ needs to split them at the seams.
Edit: damn these downvotes. I typed out an essay as a response to someone asking about the Great Filter in another thread, and now HN is blocking me for posting due to getting so many downvotes.
I hate the Apple users censoring everyone that disagrees with them or points out negative things about their company. It's a huge problem.
The perfect analogy for Apple is the CCP. Developers have to behave exactly like Apple wants to distribute software, or they're toast. And Apple users rush to defend this. They're "protected" by big Papa Bear Apple. They don't see this as a reduction of freedoms or strong arming. They got what they wanted and they're fervent about it, and they don't see the bigger picture.
Apple isn't even protecting people. They're protecting their market lead. Apple users mean shit to them. They'd let us repair and install on our own if otherwise. The brand goes to people's heads just like other luxury brands (BMW, Dior, Gucci, etc.) - it's a lifestyle that needs to be signaled and defended.
Isn't it obvious that they're bad for the world?
Liberty or death. When did we forget that?
I really like Nintendo. I grew up with them. Zelda is the best thing ever. It's the Miyazaki of gaming. But you know what? They're fucking assholes to fans. They take down artistic endeavors that companies like Square Enix and Sega encourage. They're shutting down the vibrant Melee tournament scene. And for that, they've earned my scorn.
You can like something your favorite company makes but also hate their actions.
Apple isn't a loving mother. It's an enterprise and we're just users. They shouldn't have such power at their disposal. It's bad for all of us.
The computing sector shouldn't be Apple's own private fiefdom.
Exit since I still can't post responses:
I'm taking this up with Lucy McBath (D-GA) instead. I hope that everyone else that sees the incredible harm Apple is doing takes an hour to write their legislators as well. Spell out the problem so they can understand it. Arguing with people online isn't as effective as getting the DOJ to address the problem.
That's a terrible analogy. Apple offers products and services to customers who with to pay for them. The CCP controls a region.
With respect to the rest of your shotgun-spray of a commend, a similar argument could be made against people who hate on a company with no real measure of substance.
The “fuck you” anger in your comment + The hysteria in your edit is exactly why the global timeout exists: Sometimes it’s good to take a break and calm down from writing comments.
> I typed out an essay as a response to someone asking about the Great Filter in another thread, and now HN is blocking me for posting due to getting so many downvotes.
Save it in a file and post later because I want to read it.
Nintendo is also known to be a horrible company to work for. Like Apple their work is part of our personal histories. In the 90's I can remember hearing other students playing Zelda: "Volga needs food badly."
Someone is criticising your choice of analogy for Apple. May I suggest Church of Scientology as an alternate.
Like CoS, if you cross Apple, their outside counsel will come after you with a vengeance. Apple is the ultimate client. No other pockets are as deep.
Good luck getting DOJ or anyone to go after Apple. They have tremendous financial reserves and "celebrity endorsement".
So Google can push through a gatekeeping approach to further controlling online content. After you take hostages, then you decide what kind of ransom you want. It's how every monopoly tends to behave, they push outward leveraging their position and try to put as many defensive moats into place as they can.
If speed was actually their concern, they happen to control a search monopoly that pretends to very much care about performance and speed. If any of that were really true, they can practically flip a switch and smash every slow site on the Web. Aggressively turn up the penalty on such terrible sites. In less than a year they'd all jump to and get in line, or they would die, banished from all search results (sorry, your site sucks so bad we're not even going to index that garbage). Google is happy to banish sites for political-ideological reasons based on the bias of their employees, but they can't be bothered for performance reasons? It reveals a lot as Google knows it would be easy to fix without AMP. Speed is not the primary agenda of AMP, control is; speed is an excellent cover story.