I ran across an article about apm (accelerated mobile web) some hours before seeing that topic posted here on WW.

As I read through it I felt a sense of relief, in the sense that this was actually a change I had been seeking.
One where the heavy load of web pages and web advertising was reduced, and rewarded by Google.

To the contrary, the APM thread on WW has only generated about 10 responses. Essentially no excitement about faster, quicker pages at all.

Every once and a while I work on my website "live," and notice that on some pages I do struggle with heavy, slow loading ads interfering with my browser's performance.

I realize I could improve things by just using Adsense text ads. But anticipating a drop in earnings makes that a difficult choice to make.

On the eve of the widespread use of ad blockers, it's a shame that there isn't some Google algorithm advantage (a big boost for load speed, some sort of high text-to-ad space boost, text-to-ad-type ratio [i.e. non-active image ads] boost, or a boost for no intersitials) that might reward publishers for paring down offensive ad practices, yet allow them to be rewarded for doing so (by way of increased traffic, which even with a percentage of people using ad blockers might still result in increase income).

Right now there's essentially no financial incentive to "do the right thing" to any great extent. The dichotomy between the mobile experience (low band width) and desktop (high band width) places a publisher in a difficult position knowing what mix of the two to offer. Having two standards (APM vs. desktop web) could help with that issue.