One thing I'd love to hear ideas for: can we allow running arbitrary JS in a way that doesn't allow fingerprinting?
Deferring JS until actual rendering might be a better approach.
-
-
yep, but then the perf guarantees are far weaker. hmm this is an interesting one.
-
The real issue is AMP circumvents this issue by centralizing allowed JS through approved (but nonstandard) WCs.
-
You can't make AMP work with just platform features, and Google isn't willing to trust "just anyone" with the power of JS, so here we are
-
The answer really cannot be "we trust Google to vet all JS that works in this context".
-
right. nor is the answer "eventually all sites are amp" i think the amp team is acting in good faith. i wish there was more transparency.
-
I've said so repeatedly. But the amount of concentrated power makes it easy for bad outcomes to slip through the cracks.
-
AMP defers to search policy as out of scope for OSS project repeatedly.
-
I don't think they're acting in bad faith, but there's too much complexity around various levers of power for ppl to get it right.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.