[AndrewKemendo]

Can you give an unbiased concrete example (eg. tainted baby formula, collapsed bridge, corrupted hard drive from virus) of something that has benefited google to the direct harm of one of it's users?

The biggest argument I've seen is that people don't like that they aggregate the data you give to them.

[RubberShoes]

AMP. This is entirely what the AMP argument has been all about.

[AndrewKemendo]

Really? Nobody benefits from AMP? I mean I get the complaints from developers and publishers, but even on HN I have seen support for AMP.

This goes to the broader point though that Google wants to service the end user better based on their feedback (most sites are too big/load too slowly), so they created something simple that gives end users a faster, better and cheaper (lower mobile data cost) solution.

In fact Google seems to be moving faster here because companies keep creating large websites to serve rich content that users find annoyingly slow.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/oct/11/google-amp-fac...

[eveningcoffee]

>even on HN I have seen support for AMP

There are also many people that actively support Chrome. Does it mean that Chrome dominance is therefore beneficial to the future?

[ferongr]

As a user I like AMP. it loads faster than the normal bloated websites and doesn't freeze my device while megabytes upon megabytes of scripts try to run.