3 ms·

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 beginn

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.
- oscargrouch 6y ago
  > 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. People are creating "killer apps" because the web evolved to its current state. Theres a lot of bloat of course, preventing new browsers to emerge and this is a real issue. But the serious effort would be to scrap most of this bloat and create a leaner web standard that would be easier to implement and yet offer advantages for people developing in it. Seriously i dont know WHY Tim Berners Lee think the solution is something like Solid, but not to create a leaner version of his own creation. Which developer will be ok to trade what he/she have today for http0.9+markdown? None, because is too little. Maybe the Linux manuals will find they are more popular there.. The creators will not want to add the solutions to problems that will appear, but this will just make it a small niche. Im trying hard to launch a solution to decentralization that at the same time looks good for the developer and the user, and its really hard, because the status quo is very sophisticated. Its David vs. Goliath and there's no way to get there except by facing Goliath. If the guys behind this at least optimize it to be "a protocol for terminal/console browsers" i'm pretty sure that they would find a niche to live and start, but not as something that when looking over the shoulders of the current web presents no advantages to developers or users. They say they are not competing with the web, and that's ok, but they should at least do it in a way were the thing they created manage to exist. Otherwise it just looks like noise. Sorry if i take this too serious, but its because we are all facing real danger now, the world we are heading to doesnt look pretty if we keep in this direction. And more noise right now, just takes peoples attention from where we are really needing anyone help, and i think its a disservice, at least right now. Because we get more divided, and we are already just David, it will be even harder by being half-of-David. Its cool if people dont care, or are in another phase in life, but at least how about to play in another playground, why waste peoples time in a arena and a time we need all the effort we can get?
- akerl_ 6y ago
  > Anyone who even thinks about extensions has the fury of the mailing list wrought upon them as soon as they propose them. If a central entity decided they could capture a new market by shipping “Gemini++: The One With DRM So You Can Watch Netflix”, I’m not sure why the “fury of the mailing list” would be a concern for them. Given that users pick their clients, the folks pushing for fewer features would end up splitting the userbase between “people who agreed with them” and “people who didn’t”. For an example of how this goes if a medium gets popular, the best example may in fact be HTTP/HTML/etc.

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.

oscargrouch 6y ago
> 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. People are creating "killer apps" because the web evolved to its current state. Theres a lot of bloat of course, preventing new browsers to emerge and this is a real issue. But the serious effort would be to scrap most of this bloat and create a leaner web standard that would be easier to implement and yet offer advantages for people developing in it. Seriously i dont know WHY Tim Berners Lee think the solution is something like Solid, but not to create a leaner version of his own creation. Which developer will be ok to trade what he/she have today for http0.9+markdown? None, because is too little. Maybe the Linux manuals will find they are more popular there.. The creators will not want to add the solutions to problems that will appear, but this will just make it a small niche. Im trying hard to launch a solution to decentralization that at the same time looks good for the developer and the user, and its really hard, because the status quo is very sophisticated. Its David vs. Goliath and there's no way to get there except by facing Goliath. If the guys behind this at least optimize it to be "a protocol for terminal/console browsers" i'm pretty sure that they would find a niche to live and start, but not as something that when looking over the shoulders of the current web presents no advantages to developers or users. They say they are not competing with the web, and that's ok, but they should at least do it in a way were the thing they created manage to exist. Otherwise it just looks like noise. Sorry if i take this too serious, but its because we are all facing real danger now, the world we are heading to doesnt look pretty if we keep in this direction. And more noise right now, just takes peoples attention from where we are really needing anyone help, and i think its a disservice, at least right now. Because we get more divided, and we are already just David, it will be even harder by being half-of-David. Its cool if people dont care, or are in another phase in life, but at least how about to play in another playground, why waste peoples time in a arena and a time we need all the effort we can get?
akerl_ 6y ago
> Anyone who even thinks about extensions has the fury of the mailing list wrought upon them as soon as they propose them. If a central entity decided they could capture a new market by shipping “Gemini++: The One With DRM So You Can Watch Netflix”, I’m not sure why the “fury of the mailing list” would be a concern for them. Given that users pick their clients, the folks pushing for fewer features would end up splitting the userbase between “people who agreed with them” and “people who didn’t”. For an example of how this goes if a medium gets popular, the best example may in fact be HTTP/HTML/etc.