4 ms·

Personally I've come to believe none of it matters and that encryption is a total waste of time, at least for the kind of stuff I would want to publish using Ge

by Lammy 5y ago

Personally I've come to believe none of it matters and that encryption is a total waste of time, at least for the kind of stuff I would want to publish using Gemini (long-form text) where there's nothing interactive or user-specific in any request. Just the act of making a network connection gives away who you are, where you are, when you are online, and what you're reading: https://kieranhealy.org/blog/archives/2013/06/09/using-metadata-to-find-paul-revere/ https://kieranhealy.org/blog/archives/2013/06/09/using-metad...

sodality2 5y ago
Restricting Gemini to just long-form text (one way consumption) is really reducing the possibilities Gemini can have, IMO. Though the whole minimalist attitude would probably preclude most of them.
- alexwennerberg 5y ago
  > reducing the possibilities Gemini can have Gemini is all about reducing possibilities. If you want more possibilities, use the web IMO
  - sodality2 5y ago
    Fair. I certainly think that type of simplistic Gemini has a place in the world. But I think ">If you want more possibilities, use the web IMO" goes against the minimalist ethos of Gemini as well; I don't want something as bloated as the web, but perhaps I do want a comment section of my posts? I think that's not too bloated to be thrown in with the rest of the web. But it might very well be too bloated to throw into Gemini, which is reasonable. Footnote: An email alongside the post + the author editing the post with meaningful and thoughtful contributions could perhaps be a substitute.
    - alexwennerberg 5y ago
      With Gemini, the philosophy of intentional austerity means that everyone is going to be a bit unhappy, and want some feature added to it. Its "incompleteness" is a necessary consequence of its design philosophy -- it calls on us to accept it "as-is" rather than try and extend the spec. A mailing list for comments, as you describe, would be more "gemini philosophy". This is what the author does: => https://lists.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/public-inbox https://lists.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/public-inbox Mailing lists are a bit out of vogue, but there's no reason not to bring them back into vogue, at least for people sympathetic to Gemini's ideals.
      - savolai 5y ago
        I find it laudable you're openly admitting making users unhappy. Of course, what's "added" and what's "simple" is a political value choice in an of itself. Using a mailing list for comments sounds like "returning to the golden days when we didn't need to take non-techies people seriously but could tell them what to use their cognitive capacity for" i.e. to learn arcane UI that never even tried to really take into account all the learnings of Human-computer interaction about how learning and cognition works. It really doesn't sound like there's been an actual critical discussion taking into account the needs of a substantial array of potential users. Instead the design seems like a reactive wish to return to olden days. Which is okay of course, just how it's presentes seems skewed in a very particular way.
        BrightGlow 5y ago
        I really don't think it's okay. I've noticed this type of "tech reactionarism" a lot recently in open source as a form of wishful thinking. This author in particular seems to write about it quite a lot. But it's misleading and not being fair to the users, who deserve to know that what they're doing is a waste of time. Unless someone wants to pull out the old teletype and modem connected to a phone line then we can't go back to the olden days. And honestly, nobody wants to do that in 2021.
        alexwennerberg 5y ago
        > what they're doing is a waste of time. I fundamentally disagree here. There are ways that people waste their time on the web that are far more pernicious than "learning how to write gemtext markup" The web is in a seriously messed up state, and in many ways, things are getting worse. I think it's far more dangerous to shrug our shoulders and just let things continue as they are than to work on projects that attempt to present an alternative.
  - goodpoint 5y ago
    No, we are talking about reducing security here.
- R0b0t1 5y ago
  Alternate streams for rich content.
- zzo38computer 5y ago
  I think that this restriction is good, though. For other uses, there are other file formats (Gemini protocol supports the use of other file formats too, e.g. you can use audio/ogg or audio/opus for audio, image/png or image/xpixmap for pictures, etc; a client might not support them and a user might not want them, so really you should use text if that is suitable (I am one who would rather have an explanation in text rather than a video), although you can still have links to other files too if needed) and other protocol (e.g. NNTP for slow communication (including if you want to allow comments for your articles), IRC for fast communication, Telnet/SSH for interactive applications, and other protocol should be made up for database access then you can use a SQLite extension to access them) (the text/gemini format can include links to other protocols too).
zzo38computer 5y ago
What I think is that a "insecure-gemini:" scheme should be added, which is the same except without TLS and 6x response is not allowed (if a client certificate is required, it must redirect to the protocol with TLS).
- Lammy 5y ago
  "pollux://"

by Lammy 5y ago

sodality2 5y ago

Restricting Gemini to just long-form text (one way consumption) is really reducing the possibilities Gemini can have, IMO. Though the whole minimalist attitude would probably preclude most of them.

alexwennerberg 5y ago
> reducing the possibilities Gemini can have Gemini is all about reducing possibilities. If you want more possibilities, use the web IMO
- sodality2 5y ago
  Fair. I certainly think that type of simplistic Gemini has a place in the world. But I think ">If you want more possibilities, use the web IMO" goes against the minimalist ethos of Gemini as well; I don't want something as bloated as the web, but perhaps I do want a comment section of my posts? I think that's not too bloated to be thrown in with the rest of the web. But it might very well be too bloated to throw into Gemini, which is reasonable. Footnote: An email alongside the post + the author editing the post with meaningful and thoughtful contributions could perhaps be a substitute.
  - alexwennerberg 5y ago
    With Gemini, the philosophy of intentional austerity means that everyone is going to be a bit unhappy, and want some feature added to it. Its "incompleteness" is a necessary consequence of its design philosophy -- it calls on us to accept it "as-is" rather than try and extend the spec. A mailing list for comments, as you describe, would be more "gemini philosophy". This is what the author does: => https://lists.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/public-inbox https://lists.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/public-inbox Mailing lists are a bit out of vogue, but there's no reason not to bring them back into vogue, at least for people sympathetic to Gemini's ideals.
    - savolai 5y ago
      I find it laudable you're openly admitting making users unhappy. Of course, what's "added" and what's "simple" is a political value choice in an of itself. Using a mailing list for comments sounds like "returning to the golden days when we didn't need to take non-techies people seriously but could tell them what to use their cognitive capacity for" i.e. to learn arcane UI that never even tried to really take into account all the learnings of Human-computer interaction about how learning and cognition works. It really doesn't sound like there's been an actual critical discussion taking into account the needs of a substantial array of potential users. Instead the design seems like a reactive wish to return to olden days. Which is okay of course, just how it's presentes seems skewed in a very particular way.
      - BrightGlow 5y ago
        I really don't think it's okay. I've noticed this type of "tech reactionarism" a lot recently in open source as a form of wishful thinking. This author in particular seems to write about it quite a lot. But it's misleading and not being fair to the users, who deserve to know that what they're doing is a waste of time. Unless someone wants to pull out the old teletype and modem connected to a phone line then we can't go back to the olden days. And honestly, nobody wants to do that in 2021.
        alexwennerberg 5y ago
        > what they're doing is a waste of time. I fundamentally disagree here. There are ways that people waste their time on the web that are far more pernicious than "learning how to write gemtext markup" The web is in a seriously messed up state, and in many ways, things are getting worse. I think it's far more dangerous to shrug our shoulders and just let things continue as they are than to work on projects that attempt to present an alternative.
- goodpoint 5y ago
  No, we are talking about reducing security here.
R0b0t1 5y ago
Alternate streams for rich content.
zzo38computer 5y ago
I think that this restriction is good, though. For other uses, there are other file formats (Gemini protocol supports the use of other file formats too, e.g. you can use audio/ogg or audio/opus for audio, image/png or image/xpixmap for pictures, etc; a client might not support them and a user might not want them, so really you should use text if that is suitable (I am one who would rather have an explanation in text rather than a video), although you can still have links to other files too if needed) and other protocol (e.g. NNTP for slow communication (including if you want to allow comments for your articles), IRC for fast communication, Telnet/SSH for interactive applications, and other protocol should be made up for database access then you can use a SQLite extension to access them) (the text/gemini format can include links to other protocols too).

zzo38computer 5y ago

What I think is that a "insecure-gemini:" scheme should be added, which is the same except without TLS and 6x response is not allowed (if a client certificate is required, it must redirect to the protocol with TLS).

Lammy 5y ago
"pollux://"