because they have been asleep at the wheel for almost two decades now, letting tech companies privatize and eat away at the open nature of the internet, so now we have to live in tech giant fiefdoms where they can determine the very form and content of everything displayed on the web because they're the ones who control every access point and standard.
Google was saying they were trying to solve a real problem, and it isn't easy (for me at least) to have known their true goals. Now if you read the the Texas anti trust suit -- and I recommend it to anyone who is interested-- it seems pretty clear that their motive for AMP was to improve their ad revenue.
It can be both. AMP legitimately sped up a lot of crappy news sites. That put pressure on non-AMP sites to get their game together. It was probably a net positive at first. But then Google abused their position.
Absolute market dominance corrupts absolutely. Even, and in spite of, efforts to the contrary from within the company.
The minute these publishers weren't getting as much search/news traffic anymore, they would have capitulated, making their sites run faster immediately, the same way they quickly capitulated to AMP.
As proven by AMP, when Google says jump, the entire interest responds by saying "How high?"
Can anybody give me a single non-nefarious reason for why AMP was necessary instead of simply enforcing page weight/loading-speed factors via the algorithm?
Your marketing department wants another tracking script? no can do. Your exec wants a javascript "click the monkey" promo? not on the AMP site. The UX folks want parallax webGL spinning logos? Sorry AMP doesn't allow it.
It puts people who were previously not in a position where they could push back against decisions which effect load speed in a position where they can push back.
The tech team could have just as easily have said, "sorry, that would put us over our X ms page speed limit."
The fact Google spent 100X the resources of a simple algorithm update by creating AMP, tells us there were other motives behind this.
They actually did this a few years ago: https://developers.google.com/search/blog/2018/01/using-page...
Lobbying.
The AMP mess is not the death knell of the open internet, perhaps the sick idea of a rotting company
Wooow slow down buddy. Nothing like that is hapening. I can still hook up my computer to the internet and start serving websites right away. Google can't do anything about that. Neither can Facebook, or any GAFAM.
However Google did change your behavior is entirely on you. You can live without them just fine. Until that is changed I can't see any need for regulation.