[eska]

When I attended the Drupal Europe 2018 conference I had the opportunity to talk to Barb Palser of the AMP global relations team. I asked her in an intentionally innocent way: "I thought AMP is supposed to replace RSS, but from the presentation it seems like it's trying to be a better HTML?" to which she replied yes. I acted all optimistic, so she wouldn't be defensive, but this conversation sent chills down my spine and I remember it to this day.

[gowld]

Why? AMP was promoted as a better HTML (a "good parts" subset plus a tiny extension) from day 1. It never had anything to do with RSS.

[ec109685]

What would it even mean to be better RSS? The idea is sites can preload an AMP page safely so that when you click on it, it can display to the user instantly.

In that specific case, isn’t Barb correct, no chills needed?

[UweSchmidt]

The fundamental change is that now the content comes from Google's servers. Google is hosting the Internet.

Of course Google can't host illegal content on their service, right? And won't host content that goes against a future AMP user agreement...

From there they can tighten the screws against competitors, or future attempts at privacy, or basically anything they get away with.

[joshuamorton]

Do you also think that CDNs are bad, since you end up accessing content from the first parties?

[UweSchmidt]

With CDNs I can decide which to use for my site, if any. If AMP gets established as the "new HTML", the new way Internet content is provided, then it's under Google's control.

[lern_too_spel]

Your concerns don't give them any more power than controlling the search results already gives them. They are free to deindex anything.