Slashdot Mirror


Google Launches AMP For Email To Bring Web-like Actionable Content To Gmail (venturebeat.com)

Google today announced an extension of the AMP (accelerated mobile pages) program to include another popular communications medium. From a report: The internet giant unveiled the Gmail developer preview of AMP for email, a web-like experience designed to make emails more engaging and interactive. One of the key benefits of AMP for email will be that content within an email can be updated, and recipients will be able to browse email content much like they would a web page. So an email from Pinterest, for example, could contain actionable content, allowing users to Pin content to their own Pinterest account without leaving Gmail. Or they could complete a form to arrange a meeting, fill in a questionnaire, and do just about anything -- all from within the email itself. It's clear that marketers will be a major target audience here.

98 comments

  1. Maybe it's the decades of viruses by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    sent via email talking, but no, God no. Do not want.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re: Maybe it's the decades of viruses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      But just think of the advertising and analytics opportunities it gives to Google!

    2. Re: Maybe it's the decades of viruses by Cryacin · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm more thinking of all of the security policies the banks have about email being a "secure" medium...

      Dear Mr. Smith,
      Please log into your internet banking here, as a fraudulent transaction has been detected by our software:
      Username:
      Password:
      Submit

      From Russia with love.

      --
      Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
    3. Re:Maybe it's the decades of viruses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What can possibly go wrong?

  2. NO oooo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Another major bandwidth hog and malware assault vector.

    1. Re:NO oooo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Optimist.

  3. AMP is irrelevant by loufoque · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just stop trying to create technologies that do the same thing as what established standards already do, but in a sillier way.

  4. No. Stop. Don't. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Email should be a flat, inert, self-contained message. Links if you need them, but otherwise *stop*

    1. Re:No. Stop. Don't. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The beatings will continue until morale improves.

    2. Re:No. Stop. Don't. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yep, if this is not disable-able, i will be moving to my own email provider.

    3. Re:No. Stop. Don't. by blackpaw · · Score: 1

      Yep, that would probably be the final step to get me off gmail.

    4. Re:No. Stop. Don't. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How much would it help to move away from the web into a mail program?

      Are Google messing with the content there too?

  5. Security? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like a big experiment with security

    1. Re:Security? by DogDude · · Score: 0

      Using Gmail is "a big experiment with security" (or the lack thereof).

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    2. Re:Security? by afidel · · Score: 1

      Gmail is actually WAY more secure than having your average user run a desktop client, but this is idea will lead to security compromised, guaranteed.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    3. Re:Security? by DogDude · · Score: 0

      Google saves, complies, and sells the contents of every email. I don't know how email could be *less* secure.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    4. Re:Security? by ctilsie242 · · Score: 2

      Outlook and Thunderbird don't show pictures by default. The added content just ensures that some spammer knows that a user actually saw their email at the very least. This would be very useful in targeted attacks, where one wants to find what someone's IP is, perhaps to DDoS them.

      Of all the things to screw around with, E-mail isn't one of them. We already went through at least two "active content" cycles, one being VB scripts (I Love You worms), and HTML with its Web bugs, beacons, tracking stuff, etc. All AMP is going to add is more network and storage bandwidth taken for ads/malvertising. It won't improve anything for daily use.

    5. Re:Security? by unrtst · · Score: 4, Informative

      Google saves, complies, and sells the contents of every email. I don't know how email could be *less* secure.

      You and your parents post are discussing entirely different subjects, even though they both use similar words.

      I believe afidel was referring to the risk to the security of your local computer being greater if using a desktop client versus gmail. That may be debatable, but there are some good supporting facts for that.

      You are referring to information security, or the risk of your personal email data being exposed to others.

      While you do have a point (google can read all unencrypted emails and provides stats and such to advertisers), I'd still wager that your data is more secure on gmail servers than many other services. There's a wide range of email setups, but they typically fall in the range of:
      a) admin your own server and leave mail on server
      b) use some 3rd party email provider (your ISP, a paid for service, etc), and download mail to read locally with local email client
      c) use some webmail provider, like gmail ... and there are mixes in between each of those (ex. you can use gmail and download all mail to local client).

      Which of those provides the most security to the average users data, and to the average users PC? I think the big names in webmail fill that role, from fastmail to outlook.com to gmail. And if you admin your own server, you'd better be damned good at it, and good luck with your spam filter (though obscurity does helps here).

    6. Re:Security? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Outlook and Thunderbird don't show remote pictures by default.

      FTFY.

    7. Re: Security? by johnsnails · · Score: 1

      I was talking about a proxy for images to a few people so spammers could not know if images were downloaded by active email addresses. Few months later google did it. Same thing happened when I was discussing my phone auto looking up business numbers etc when they call that are not saved on your phone (think mechanic etc).

    8. Re:Security? by AHuxley · · Score: 2

      Secure for the ads. Thats all that gets security.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    9. Re:Security? by swillden · · Score: 1

      Google saves, complies, and sells the contents of every email. I don't know how email could be *less* secure.

      Google does nothing of the sort. Google doesn't give your email content to anyone; Google's mail servers scan your email and use the content to decide what ads to show you in the Gmail interface. That's it.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  6. Target Market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's clear that marketers will be a major target audience here.

    What about the scammers? Won't anyone think of the scammers?

    1. Re:Target Market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about the scammers? Won't anyone think of the scammers?

      Clearly Google are...

    2. Re:Target Market by viperidaenz · · Score: 2

      marketers is a synonym for scammers.

    3. Re:Target Market by easyTree · · Score: 2

      Scammers are higher in the social order.

  7. New motto for google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just because we can.

  8. Wow, how awful. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I will make sure my email client strips this shit out along with all the images people seem to think belong in email WTF, FAIL!

    1. Re:Wow, how awful. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good luck with that, when Google will convert the email of experience and engagement into a single -link. Even the less evil corporations with smaller pockets send their emails as obfuscated html/javascript mess.

  9. Not interested. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    a web-like experience designed to make emails more engaging and interactive

    And the world said as one: fuck that.

    1. Re:Not interested. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the world said as one: fuck that.

      No. The world NEVER says "fuck that".

      Remember when banner ads first appeared on the web?

      Remember when tracking bugs first appeared in web pages?

      Remember when javascript started to block your "save" button and back button, and pop huge things over the top of what you were trying to see?

      Remember when message clients started to send all your conversations to ad companies?

      The world NEVER says "fuck that". A few geeks do. The public at large says, "We don't care." Every. Time.

      Eventually, the geeks get pushed out, because tech becomes unworkable unless you give in.

      Do not feel so secure. We've been down this road a hundred times. It never ends well.

  10. Where's the button for plain text only format? by Flexagon · · Score: 2

    This option is still available for some newsletters, and I use it.

  11. F__K NO!!! by Major_Disorder · · Score: 5, Funny

    Words can not explain how much I do not want this.
    I know it is only Tuesday, but I am calling this as worst tech idea of the week.

    --
    First law of people: People are generally stupid.
    1. Re:F__K NO!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      over-react much?

    2. Re:F__K NO!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hell, It's only February and I'm looking at this as the worst idea of the year

    3. Re:F__K NO!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hardly. AMP for Email is once-in-a-decade cerebral diarrhea. He's being nice.

    4. Re:F__K NO!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      then don't use gmail you tit.

    5. Re:F__K NO!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is certainly a strong contender for Worst Idea of the Year.
      Apart from the sheer obnoxiousness of what will undoubtedly be sent this way, it is a giant security breach about to happen.

      This is certainly an idea that should never, ever, be tried.

    6. Re:F__K NO!!! by Rakarra · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ideas need to be combated aggressively. How it works in the tech world is that if you just sit back passively and say "eh, not for me," then the powers that be will make it default, and more and more companies will use it exclusively. There will be a short period where you really can opt out, but as it gains more traction, you will be more cut off and marginalized like folks who, say, refuse to use sites that require Javascript. The vast majority will always choose something more functional, regardless of security concerns. As long as they don't care, don't expect that just sitting back and doing nothing will keep you safe from this -- especially since the advertisers, the trackers, and general do-badders REALLY want it, and they have a lot of resources to push for it.

    7. Re: F__K NO!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what everyone said about MS Windows in the late 80s. It led to 15 years if hell for 90% of users.

    8. Re:F__K NO!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Luckily, you won't have to rely on just words now!

  12. HTML email by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Didn't we go through this before with HTML, remote content, scripts and the like in email? That worked out so well, after all.

  13. No! Stop! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does that mean we get more security holes, more ways for spammers to track us and more dependency on always-on internet? Oh goody.

  14. Early April Fools joke? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I sure hope this is a joke. What a crappy idea.

    1. Re: Early April Fools joke? by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 1

      It has to be. It's a whole new level of stupid, never before seen.

      --
      "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
  15. Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    So that means that when I open my e-mail I'll get the following:

    1. A giant full-screen video ad
        a. Or a giant full screen asking me to please turn off my ad blocker
    2. Fifty tracking cookies
    3. JavaScript to set custom scroll bars
    4. Four bit-coin mining ads
    5. And finally, a drive by offering to fix all of my computer problems by encrypting my hard drive.

    Fuck you, Google.

    1. Re:Great by ctilsie242 · · Score: 1

      6: While that all is going on, an EME-protected cryptocurrency miner running in the background.

  16. Hopefully there will be a toggle by junk · · Score: 1

    Like quick replies, there are people that will love this and there are the rest of us. It didn't take long for that toggle to appear. Hopefully the collective outcry will make this optional pretty quickly. I don't want my email to be "interaction."

    1. Re:Hopefully there will be a toggle by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      I don't want my email to be "interaction."

      And, email already has that. It's called "Reply".

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  17. Great! by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    Except I never asked for this. And I don't see it having any affect on my life.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  18. Thankfully by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 2

    I only POP my mail from Gmail -- and read all my mail in text-only mode, except for those occasional ones that only use HTML (frelling sigh). I only actually log into Gmail to empty the trash, and permanently everything, as POP only seems to move downloaded mail there (again, sigh). For me, email contains static information and 99.9% of my email gets read and deleted, I don't need or want to have to go back to review possibly updated dynamic content -- give me a link for any of that and I'll review it in my browser.

    The article mentions possible desirable uses for this (below) but in general I give this a *BIG* No Thank You.

    “Many people rely on email for information about flights, events, news, purchases, and beyond,” noted Gmail product manager Aakash Sahney. “With AMP for Email, it’s easy for information in email messages to be dynamic, up-to-date, and actionable.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:Thankfully by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any reason why you don't use IMAP instead of POP?

    2. Re:Thankfully by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you leave your mail at the post office?

    3. Re: Thankfully by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use IMAP to download all my mail and store it locally. Works much better than POP.

    4. Re: Thankfully by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No surprise people aren't aware offline even exists. Swear I'm not that old yet people around me are idiots, completely oblivious to tech. And I WORK in IT.

      The problem with GMail is Google intentionally castrates it so you have to jump through hoops to do simple things like delete email. The only way to do it from IMAP is drag everything into spam, _then_ delete it otherwise Google reverts the delete. Not to mention none of your tags or filtering can be configured -- all of which IMAP is quite capable of doing.

      Fuck Google. We do not need ASP for email which ironically enough already is possible. We use the same idea in SAP to embed editable documents in email. Lotus Notes is/was/has been capable of this too and for a long time. Difference is these systems are for the most part internal. There's absolutely no expectation of vendors to support it.

  19. the solution is simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    dont use gmail. then you wont have to see amp emails.

    use literally any other email service.

  20. Bonus! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... browse email content much like they would a web page ...

    So Facebook/Reddit/Slashdot feeds inside your email: What a bonus! </sarcasm>

  21. What can go wrong? by Carcass666 · · Score: 1

    Some would say that this violates the "do one thing, do it well" prescription for building quality applications.

    That is, until remembering that Google is not a technology company, they are an advertising company. Their revenue base is literally dependent upon how frequently they assault your eyeballs. Everything Google does is to make money off of forcing you to look at stuff.

    1. Re:What can go wrong? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      ActiveX for the internet. The ads come alive and stay deep in your OS, any OS.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  22. Great ....if! by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

    Hopefully Google will vet the advertisements so that nothing gets through that is not hurtful of otherwise does not conform to Google's social re-ordering mission.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  23. No! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bad Google! No cookie!

  24. I'm going to backscatter that shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't use autoreplies for anything, but this shit will be thrown right back into the sender's face, even at the risk of creating backscatter. FUCK YOU GOOGLE!!!

  25. GOOGLE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Keep your grubby dirty fingers off my mailbox. I warn you. I don't care about "experience" -- just fuck off.

    1. Re:GOOGLE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you use gmail, it is _their_ mailbox, not yours.

    2. Re:GOOGLE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you use gmail, it is _their_ mailbox, not yours.

      Exactly. But for some reason, almost nobody seems to understand that.

    3. Re:GOOGLE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OP here. No, I'm not using gmail, never was. I'm not using Google search either.

      But I sometimes do exchange mails with poor souls "on" gmail, and this is enough to give me the jeebies!

  26. If you're still using GMail... by DogDude · · Score: 0

    ... then you obviously don't care about privacy or security of your personal information. Bring it on GMail!

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
  27. all I'll need to know is how to block/disable it by mikeabbott420 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    a feature whose primary uses will be to make spam more annoying and phishing more surreptitious

    --
    This program was made possible by a grant from the Ultra-Humanite, and viewers like you.
  28. HTML by thegreatbob · · Score: 2

    Simple HTML-based e-mail is obnoxious enough, why would people actually want this?

    --
    There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
  29. I don't want my mail "engaging and interactive." by nctritech · · Score: 5, Insightful

    At what point does email just replicate the functions of a web browser and thus is no longer "email?" STOP TRYING TO MAKE MY EMAIL INTO A WEB PAGE. It's like the salesman who won't just drop off his brochure and instead talks to you for ten minutes; it's"engaging and interactive" but in a way that causes URGE TO KILL RISING.

  30. Dumb as a panata by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    So now I have to keep all email, just in case someone decides to add a tid bit to it? What happens when I delete an email and then some moron decides there was more to say, or to correct some spelling error or what ever? Will I get a new email with the mark ups or is it dead to me since I deleted the original? This seems like an attempt to do something "new" just for the sake of saying you did something at all.

  31. I still use mutt by zoward · · Score: 2

    Will there be enough text left in the body of the email for a text-based client to even work anymore? Not that I'm worried about it - I suspect the same people who will use AMP to send email are the ones I wouldn't want to read anyway.

    --
    "Can't you see that everyone is buying station wagons?"
    1. Re:I still use mutt by ShoulderOfOrion · · Score: 2

      Yup. I love mutt's html-dump mode; it shows me all the links (including the 1x1 bitmaps) and lets me pick and choose which ones I want to copy and paste to a real browser. 99% of the time the answer is 'none of them'. I suspect AMP-dump mode will function similarly.

      The big problem with HTML email (or AMP) for us mutt-users is the wasted bandwidth when they actually include all those mime-attachments inline, clogging our mbox's with octet-junk.

  32. Hell, no! by scdeimos · · Score: 1

    Google is eager to stress that this isn’t a purely Google-focused product — the company wants other email client providers to embrace it.

    Fuck off, Google. Just fuck off!

  33. AMP by executioner · · Score: 1

    Active
    Malware
    Present


    thanks for at least naming it correctly.

    --
    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
  34. fuck no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    we don't even want AMP for web pages; we sure as hell don't want it for email

  35. Email tracking/cookies by future+assassin · · Score: 1

    I'm sure some idiots is salivating at this. The max an email should contain is an attachment. All else should be plain text.

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
  36. And... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is not a drill !

  37. Still using Gmail basic HTML view by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The difference in speed between regular Gmail, and their more 1990s like "HTML view" is like the difference between night and day.

      Regular Gmail is slow, sluggish, and hard to use. HTML Gmail is like a rocket, and though it isn't as "pretty", is very usable and does not have all of the fancy "Web 3.0" garbage to get in the way.

      Companies need to think about stripping all of the unnecessary blat and garbage away, not making more of it. I want my e-mail to just be that: email, with the ability to send files. I don't need a bunch of bloaty, animated clown garbage to break things.

  38. No. Just... No. Good God, No. by RonVNX · · Score: 1

    Tell me again how Google are the good guys. It just gets both funnier and sadder every time someone tries.

  39. "Engaging and Interactive" by Greyfox · · Score: 2

    Annoying. They mean annoying. Like my gmail inbox isn't already clogged with an endless litany of companies I talked to once, terrible tech recruiters working out of India and notifications from people I'm not interested in hearing from. At this rate I may as well just ditch email and go back to old-fashioned snail mail. At least then it costs the sender something to talk to me.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:"Engaging and Interactive" by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

      "Engaging" now means they will nag, cajole, lie, beg, induce, hypnotize, and use any other psyops trick they can dredge up to get you to use the stupid thing so they can profile you.

      --
      This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
  40. Asian Massage Parlor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i was kind of confused at first. I guess I need to read something other than pron.

  41. \o/ by easyTree · · Score: 1

    So an email from Pinterest, for example, could contain actionable content, for example a button 'Remove all traces of Papathy from your view of the web. Warning, this will mean that 48% of images returned by Google Image Search will no longer by hijacked by the Papathy service.'

  42. Re:all I'll need to know is how to block/disable i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But clearly, as with all things Google, spam and phishing are Totally Great!!! Just ask Official Google Asshole Shawn Willden!!!

       

  43. Since they are likely going to push this on us... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since they are likely going to push this on us...

    Let me be the first to ask:

    How do I turn that sh*t off?

  44. This will screw up discovery and FOIA big time by knorthern+knight · · Score: 2

    OK, let's say you have a court order for discovery, or you're in a government agency that receives a FOIA (Freedom Of Information Act) request for old emails. You may have the original "container" email but the content could easily have changed. How will courts handle this?

    --

    I'm not repeating myself
    I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
    1. Re: This will screw up discovery and FOIA big time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is exactly what I came to say. Glad at least one other person is thinking along these lines. The immutability of email is useful, even as a CYA thing, let's not fuck that up. Just imagine you emailing your boss "let's not do this, for these legit reasons" and him firing you and changing the content of the container to read "let's tank the company, btw here's some kiddie porn I love," citing that as why you were fired.

    2. Re:This will screw up discovery and FOIA big time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Easy. All mail, images, and everything else you do must be kept online for eternity.

      I wish I was kidding. That is the kind of thought process involved with this crap. No, this is yet another attempt to deprecate "old" technology in favour of Google Sponsored "solutions". They've certainly bought the right people off to make it happen too.

      Finally closed my GMail accounts for good. The ability to access my own email when and where I want without having to confirm with "google security" that yes, where I'm logging in from is indeed me, is truly liberating.

  45. Google Wave? by natex84 · · Score: 1

    It sounds like they are reviving part of the failed Google Wave project...

  46. Google is doing a great job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of destroying everything to do with computers and the internet.
    Losers.

  47. Google and it's hated child AMP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder why google does not give up pushing AMP. I don't want AMP. It's privacy invading, useless and complicated.

  48. I like it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think this is a good idea. Many people use e-mail clients for managing their tasks. It would be if the tasks could be completed without leaving the e-mail client. Say, you manage an ad words campaign. A system sends you a report with campaign statistics. You can change the bids or disable some keywords directly in the e-mail. Then you just move the e-mail to the DONE folder.

  49. Re:No. Just... No. Good God, No. by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

    Tell me again how Google are the good guys.

    They have disrupted industries and improved overall Internet services in doing so. I remember when webmail services had a limit of 15MB, when office suites were not really affordable, when search was filled with obnoxious advertising, when online storage services were massively expensive.

    They have provided significantly better services, for free. The competition have in turn had to remain competitive and in turn, made the web significantly cheaper, accessible and usable for the vast majority out there.

    It just gets both funnier and sadder every time someone tries.

    Google have done plenty wrong too, but your question was specifically how they are "the good guys".

    --
    Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  50. Re:No. Just... No. Good God, No. by RonVNX · · Score: 1

    And I guess I'm still waiting for the answer.

  51. Re:No. Just... No. Good God, No. by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

    You already have one. They've changed much of the online industry for the better in many instances.

    --
    Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  52. Don't want what AMP is Selling. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Noooooo. Please stay out of my mail. I do not want anything you are trying to sell in AMP.

  53. Re:No. Just... No. Good God, No. by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

    Two out of your four are "storage got cheaper" which was happening long before Google came around and kept happening. Google might have sped things up a bit by being aggressive, but that's all.

    Searching being full of advertising... well, it still is, but thanks to Google 90% of it is hidden beneath the surface. Like an iceberg.

    They did Google Docs right.