4 ms·

Speaking specifically as a Gemini enthusiast: We don't want "the web, but less of it". Do you not realize that "less of it" is still a whole hell of a lot of w

Speaking specifically as a Gemini enthusiast: We don't want "the web, but less of it". Do you not realize that "less of it" is still a whole hell of a lot of web? Take a look at Netsurf: 13 years of development and half a million lines of C and it's probably the most advanced rendering engine after the big three. And yet, one of my websites, sourcehut.org, renders like this: https://l.sr.ht/_2pv.png https://l.sr.ht/_2pv.png On WebEngine, it should look like this: https://l.sr.ht/bSdI.png https://l.sr.ht/bSdI.png And this is one of the most conservative websites on the modern internet. The problem with using the web, but less of it, is that the web is still incredibly complicated and even conservative websites require a massive engineering undertaking to render properly, and it just takes one link to a more liberal page to ruin the experience entirely. Gemini is a separate, self-contained network, based on a much simpler philosophy. I wrote my Gemini client in two afternoons, and it's already pleasant to use with all Gemini pages. We don't want the web, but less. We want something else entirely.

est31 6y ago
> The problem with using the web, but less of it, is that the web is still incredibly complicated and even conservative websites require a massive engineering undertaking to render properly The main problem is that "less of it" isn't well defined, so any website, while still appearing to require little of the web, requires its own subset. If there is a clear demarcation about which features are supported and which aren't, then websites can be built targeting this smaller subset, and everyone would be happy. There is no need to reinvent the wheel and start totally from scratch. Reading the Gemini specification, it seems like a NIH of HTTP. What's wrong about a HTTP 1.0 server?
- ddevault 6y ago
  If you start with the web but less, you're never going to shake the web. You're still fundamentally buying into the same ecosystem. I don't want to be a subset of a broader ecosystem which I hate. I want a new ecosystem.
oscargrouch 6y ago
Is there anything on Gemini that prevents centralization? Because lets suppose this will happen, everyone now goes for the sweet land of Gemini. At the beginning it will be just like the web in the nineties, full of indies web sites, a dozen open source clients, that implements the protocol, yay! Profit right? Here now enter the 2000's of Gemini.. startups begin to grow stronger most of them mediating and selling the content of others that they get for free. The individual gemini sites begin to fade, the startups create Gemini clients with a lot of new features starting to turn impossible for new implementations. (Now its the time we start to ask ourselves, where did we see that movie?) So whats the point of a new protocol or standard, if it doesnt solve the real issues we are facing nowadays, and the only solution it provides its to manipulate people emotions that we should get back to that romantic era of the internet, the 'belle epoque'. "Its hard to solve the modern issues? get your time machine pal, lets get to the nineties and start everything again without solving the core issues, and if by chance we happen to thrive, just let those big problems to be solved by your grandson" There is only one thing we should be doing right now: Decentralize the internet, making "blue seas" for new things to thrive making the moves of FAANGS to centralize and control data, information and computation futile by getting people out of a game they control. A solution like Gemini would reset the game, yes, but only to have the same problems later, giving the creators were not trying to solve them in the first place. Gemini is trying to solve a problem by using denial, and as we know, it doesnt actually solve the problems. It just make them disappear temporarily to hit us again in a near future. You can make a Gemini client in two weeks? thats great, this is probably what you would take to make browsers in the nineties..
- ddevault 6y ago
  >startups create Gemini clients with a lot of new features starting to turn impossible for new implementations I don't think this is going to happen. We're pushing very hard for a culture which embraces the limitations of the protocol. Anyone who even thinks about extensions has the fury of the mailing list wrought upon them as soon as they propose them. And Gemini is so simple that it's difficult to monetize. There's not much corporate incentive here. I think that corporations will continue to use the web, because the web was basically hand-designed for corporate needs - even going so far as to do so at the expense of the users. >You can make a Gemini client in two weeks? Two afternoons. And a stated goal of the specification is not to add substantial changes. We can decentralize the internet and serve Gemini over our new, decentralized space. We can work on more than just one of THE MOST IMPORTANT PROBLEMS™ at a time, you know.

est31 6y ago

> The problem with using the web, but less of it, is that the web is still incredibly complicated and even conservative websites require a massive engineering undertaking to render properly The main problem is that "less of it" isn't well defined, so any website, while still appearing to require little of the web, requires its own subset. If there is a clear demarcation about which features are supported and which aren't, then websites can be built targeting this smaller subset, and everyone would be happy. There is no need to reinvent the wheel and start totally from scratch. Reading the Gemini specification, it seems like a NIH of HTTP. What's wrong about a HTTP 1.0 server?

ddevault 6y ago
If you start with the web but less, you're never going to shake the web. You're still fundamentally buying into the same ecosystem. I don't want to be a subset of a broader ecosystem which I hate. I want a new ecosystem.

oscargrouch 6y ago

Is there anything on Gemini that prevents centralization? Because lets suppose this will happen, everyone now goes for the sweet land of Gemini. At the beginning it will be just like the web in the nineties, full of indies web sites, a dozen open source clients, that implements the protocol, yay! Profit right? Here now enter the 2000's of Gemini.. startups begin to grow stronger most of them mediating and selling the content of others that they get for free. The individual gemini sites begin to fade, the startups create Gemini clients with a lot of new features starting to turn impossible for new implementations. (Now its the time we start to ask ourselves, where did we see that movie?) So whats the point of a new protocol or standard, if it doesnt solve the real issues we are facing nowadays, and the only solution it provides its to manipulate people emotions that we should get back to that romantic era of the internet, the 'belle epoque'. "Its hard to solve the modern issues? get your time machine pal, lets get to the nineties and start everything again without solving the core issues, and if by chance we happen to thrive, just let those big problems to be solved by your grandson" There is only one thing we should be doing right now: Decentralize the internet, making "blue seas" for new things to thrive making the moves of FAANGS to centralize and control data, information and computation futile by getting people out of a game they control. A solution like Gemini would reset the game, yes, but only to have the same problems later, giving the creators were not trying to solve them in the first place. Gemini is trying to solve a problem by using denial, and as we know, it doesnt actually solve the problems. It just make them disappear temporarily to hit us again in a near future. You can make a Gemini client in two weeks? thats great, this is probably what you would take to make browsers in the nineties..

ddevault 6y ago
>startups create Gemini clients with a lot of new features starting to turn impossible for new implementations I don't think this is going to happen. We're pushing very hard for a culture which embraces the limitations of the protocol. Anyone who even thinks about extensions has the fury of the mailing list wrought upon them as soon as they propose them. And Gemini is so simple that it's difficult to monetize. There's not much corporate incentive here. I think that corporations will continue to use the web, because the web was basically hand-designed for corporate needs - even going so far as to do so at the expense of the users. >You can make a Gemini client in two weeks? Two afternoons. And a stated goal of the specification is not to add substantial changes. We can decentralize the internet and serve Gemini over our new, decentralized space. We can work on more than just one of THE MOST IMPORTANT PROBLEMS™ at a time, you know.