Google wants to phase out Javascript and CSS with AMP HTML.

[polonus]

What parties are into this project, well the big ad-launchers like Google, Twitter, Pinterest, LinkedIn en Adobe Analytics.
The reason given is to get quicker website loadtime, but the real reason behind might be damage-control from ad-blockers.
Ads in the new post-javascript and CSS days should be launched via (hidden) iFrames is the proposal.
Best ads are to type an adword and get one, so you type "red table cloth" and will see an advert for "red table cloth",
all other ads are an annoyance to those that do not want to be bothered with them.
For us here in this forum the main reason for continued adblocking is "malicious ads that can infest".
So with a future of malFrame ads we certainly want to continue blocking.
So forewarned is forearmed in this case.
At least we know now who wants to feed us those unwanted annoying ads under all circumstances...
like our spoonful of cod liver oil at night (do you remember?).

[DavidR]

I always wonder what the reasoning is behind these decisions.

Then I wonder what will replace them to cover the functionality that they provide.

In NoScript it has a whole section - Embeddings - that a forbid iFrame. I just wonder how effective that would be.

Then there is RequestPolicy as these hidden iFrames would have to import the content from a 3rd party site.

[polonus]

Hi DavidR,

And that is just the trade-off, according to AMP tech lead Malte Ubl, part of this decision can be attributed to the performance issues caused by the usage of multiple JavaScript libraries, tools, embeds, and so forth ^. Ads and analytics are being subjected to similar treatment. AMP disallows ads from being directly embedded into a website, requiring instead that they are placed into sandboxed iframes with no access to the primary documents. On the other hand, it’s possible to embed analytics that utilise so-called “tracking pixels”  * in AMP documents. Anything that requires the use of JavaScript, however, remains unsupported.
So will it mean either restrictive AMP embedded website with ads or no website shown without the ads.

* This can be blocked by PixelBlock chrome extension.
^ is that the real reason behind it or just a pre-text?
Halting your browser-loading most are, right, for the larger part the very SPOF code Google is using in their  ad-tracking. So first they create a problem to later come up with that AMP solution.

Embedded ads are going to function a bit like junkware and the hidden iFrame ad-delivering also reminds me of the malcreants' variety. One thing is certain the "war on adblocking certainly is on".

And, DavdR, script and request blocking is only used by a small fraction of the users that are victims of the ads-tsunami. How effective this will be against embedded auto-ads in main website's.

At least I installed PixelBlock now.

polonus