> Today we know AMP was also a anticompetitive plot to kill off header bidding.
I completely disagree, and I think this will become clear as information continues to come out.
I completely disagree, and I think this will become clear as information continues to come out.
I don't expect anything that comes right out and says something like "we must implement AMP to as a strategy to remove competition from header bidding". Instead it will mostly be just the standard talking points about user experience and load times.
I could be wrong though: plenty of things have been revealed in things like text messages where people don't think of them as being part of an official record.
In this case, it appears that multiple large orgs are involved: G and M. One provides the environment and the other appears to have dropped their drawers and crapped in it but in the end a telephone should always be able to make emergency calls regardless of what is installed or configured on it.
In the end this sort of thing might look like lack of responsibility due to arrogance due to lack of competition. I'm sure other interpretations are available.
Normally the above should be considered an example of whataboutery but I think your response deserves little else. If you have something to contribute then please do but not that sort of thing.
(1) https://www.theregister.com/2021/12/09/android_911_teams/
[Edit: weird formatting snag, content unchanged]
So if you weren't asked to, you're just astroturfing voluntarily. That's not better, it's worse: If one gives up one's integrity, one should at least get paid for it. Otherwise, one isn't acting just scummily, but scummily and stupidly.