AMP is just a subset of HTML/JS/CSS, but there is also an AMP CDN and the implication that you agree to allow your content to be cached by third parties.
I think this means that the agreement concerning the AMP CDN says you don't use bad ads, thus discouraging ad blocking.
By using the AMP format, content producers are making the content in AMP files
available to be crawled, indexed & displayed (subject to the robots exclusion
protocol) and cached by third parties.
In addition, AMP files can be cached in the cloud in order to reduce the time
content takes to get a user’s mobile device. By using the AMP format, content
producers are making the content in AMP files available to be cached by third
parties. Under this type of framework, publishers continue to control their content,
but platforms can easily cache or mirror the content for optimal delivery speed to
users. Google has stated that it will provide a cache that can be used by anyone at
no cost, and all AMPs will be cached by Google’s cache. Other companies may build
their own cache as well.
I imagine that means Google will be caching AMP pages in full, so if your search turns up an AMP page, it will be served from Google's CDN. Presumably, it will be more difficult to determine what is an ad if it's all cached, but maybe ads are an exception to cache -- you can't target a static ad very well.
Ads from third-parties are supposed to be placed in special amp-ad elements. Those would be trivial to block. Ads that are served as standard images would probably be limited to blogs that deal directly with advertisers (e.g what slatestarcodex does) which is about as inoffensive as it gets.
Some testing: Apparently the text flows fine in Chrome. The AMP team would like you to believe their open standard that should be good for everyone everywhere has a website that only renders correctly in their own browser.
I think this means that the agreement concerning the AMP CDN says you don't use bad ads, thus discouraging ad blocking.