AMP isn't a solution for anything. Google should NOT be 'fixing' the web for anyone.

I don't disagree with you, but there are so many bad websites that something should be done. AMP is a really bad solution to a real problem. Walled garden pages as Facebook for companies and similars are equally bad in my opinion. Some time ago I had the idea that, maybe, the website layout could be controlled by the user, and only data are controlled by the website's owner. The web would become boring, I know, but the alternative is just as bad: broken websites.

> Some time ago I had the idea that, maybe, the website layout could be controlled by the user, and only data are controlled by the website's owner. The web would become boring, I know,

(disclaimer: my web developer days were a lifetime ago)

wasn't this basically the idea with CSS (and user CSS), "semantic" HTML and JS as progressive enhancement? those were pretty exciting ideas (IMHO), and with modern CSS there's no reason they shouldn't look good either... what ever happened with that?

> I don't disagree with you, but there are so many bad websites that something should be done.

Yeah, we should not be visiting those sites. Give our attention and currencies to the sites who care about their users.

I guess one good thing about AMP is now I know what sites to do my best not to use.

As a third world Google user, I appreciate that they save me a lot of frustration and money with AMP.

I suppose it'd be great if pampered first-worlders get to disable it for themselves.

My point is that the developers of the sites that are so slow should be figuring out why and not leaning on the crutch that is AMP.

The problem AMP is trying to fix is very real. Its just a shitty powergrabbing fix