4 ms·

I really don't like the popular concept in the Gemini project of conflating that developer-centric software is somehow _less evil_ than tech megacorps. Software

I really don't like the popular concept in the Gemini project of conflating that developer-centric software is somehow _less evil_ than tech megacorps. Software can be user-hostile and be written by individuals, coops, collectives, or corporations. Software can be user-friendly and be written by individuals, coops, collectives, or corporations. Being anti-megacorp doesn't make your software friendly to use or more effective, nor does being pro-megacorp. Gemini is developer-centric and user-hostile while also being written by non-megacorp developers. That's all. Let's stop trying to use "anti-megacorp" to promote software that is developer-centric and user-hostile, when it is simply just developer-centric and user-hostile. The proof is in the pudding. Most posts on Gemini are all about how awesome Gemini is and ascetic meditations on digital minimalism. Essentially, it's the bouncer at the "plain text cool kids club". I think many of us have an interest in creating non-megacorp-friendly software but the "plain text cool kids club" isn't it. EDIT: This post has swung wildly in score so there's obviously some interesting thoughts happening here :D

fwip 5y ago
I think maybe your post is conflating "evil" and "user-hostile."
- Karrot_Kream 5y ago
  No and that's the point. Gemini is developer-centric and user-hostile. It isn't evil. These are distinct concepts. We can't use good and evil as a way to exonerate bad software.
  - wahern 5y ago
    The original promise of the Internet and, especially, the WWW was to elide the distinction between publisher and consumer--i.e. developer and user. The incredible increase in the complexity of the modern internet has almost completely restored that fundamental distinction, if not made it deeper and wider, giving rise to publishers (e.g. Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc) and other media companies (e.g. Google) with powers we haven't seen for over a century, if ever.
    - Jtsummers 5y ago
      > The original promise of the Internet and, especially, the WWW was to elide the distinction between publisher and consumer--i.e. developer and user. Where does this idea come from?
      - wahern 5y ago
        From the 1990s and, to a lesser degree, early 2000s internet culture--both the zeitgest and scholarship. I'd post links but ever since Google began heavily favoring publication date over keyword and semantic matching I've found it difficult and often impossible (not for lack of trying) to find the various websites, manifestos, blogs, and magazine articles that I read and re-read back then. One of my favorite manifestos was about the issue of [the non-existence of] spectrum scarcity, which also hashed out the threat posed by the reimposition of a strong publisher/consumer dichotomy. Alas, I haven't been able to find it again in the past several years. These days whenever I come across a good article (my metric is an article I return to at least once, either to re-read or cite) I archive the link. Google is now useless for finding anything but the most recent content, and headed in that same direction when it comes to finding substantive content. Another object lesson in the perils of centralization and technological reliance.
      - weikju 5y ago
        https://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/WorldWideWeb.html https://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/WorldWideWeb.html > The first web browser - or browser-editor rather > ... https://worldwideweb.cern.ch/worldwideweb/ https://worldwideweb.cern.ch/worldwideweb/ > Editing > To edit any document, whether it's one you created, or a page on the world wide web: > Click on the text you want edit. > Edit it.
    - Karrot_Kream 5y ago
      > The original promise of the Internet and, especially, the WWW was to elide the distinction between publisher and consumer--i.e. developer and user. I disagree. I do _not_ equate a "publisher" with a "developer". I'd much rather see a world where publishers are _not_ developers. It's not like all the books I read are written by developers.
  - dredmorbius 5y ago
    Coming back after thinking over your comment and this thread for a while. The Web really just does not have a user-oriented document format presently. HTML5 via WATWG / Google / Facebook is advertiser friendly. The result is horrible both for anyone looking to independently implement a fully-compliant, capable Web browser AND any user actually accessing Today's-Web-As-Designed. Gemini addresses the dev-unfriendliness ... bu still tosses out far too much functionality IMO in the name of simplicity. The basic semantics of HTML5 are actually reasonably sound, but without some external enforcement over styles and complexity, it's simply going to be abused. Having used tablets and e-readers principally for the past six years or so, I much prefer the presentation of, yes, PDF (generally, it's still possible to stuff those up entirely) to virtually anything rendered in HTML by a browser. At a desktop system, console-mode simple markup remains reasonably readily consumed, and is quite useful for reference and incorporation into other works (writing / literature study). I'm not entirely sure where the answer lies, but I don't think Gemini is the promised land. Possibly a bondage-and-disciplin markup format, enforced by ... what exactly I don't know, though a defined set of document formats, and perhaps an independent search platform's ranking systems, might be one approach. (Yes, addressing the issues of copyright, compensation, and authors integrity might also help, though at this point, stripping the Web of all advertising seems a good start.)
    - Karrot_Kream 5y ago
      I largely agree with this. A constrained markup format I look to for inspiration is EPUB [1], which uses XHTML and a constrained directory layout, but recent versions have fallen in thrall of HTML5 and has the potential for its attendant complexity. I think a scoped version of EPUB has a lot of promise and is readily supported on many, many devices. Another format inspired similarly is the now-defunc WML [2], which uses an even more constrained XML document to describe layout specifically for constrained devices. Regardless, I largely feel that constrained markup formats are where the effort to make the web both user and developer friendly again should lie. There is also another defunct format, the AMB [3] which is a very different approach, but its goals and assumptions are a little too far out from the expectations of modern users IMO. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPUB https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPUB [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_Markup_Language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_Markup_Language [3]: http://amb.osdn.io/ http://amb.osdn.io/
cxr 5y ago
> The proof is in the pudding Indeed. For all of the cheerleaders that Gemini has, check how deep their convictions run. Here's an exercise: collect a smattering of names of those who champion Gemini the loudest, and then take a survey of their personal sites on the HTTP web. Do those pages look more like those found on cr.yp.to, or do they look more like the MySpacified web that they purport to be fed up with?
- kixiQu 5y ago
  If you're looking for hypocrisy, the project FAQ (https://gemini.circumlunar.space/docs/faq.gmi https://gemini.circumlunar.space/docs/faq.gmi) says it's supposed to be for people who are: > Opposed to the web's ubiquitous tracking of users > Tired of nagging pop-ups, obnoxious adverts, autoplaying videos and other misfeatures of the modern web Mere design you find distasteful wouldn't really signify here. If you're talking about someone who's tracking and got autoplaying video on their site, I'm interested to hear who that'd be! (For the record, I am not a champion of Gemini, and I like how MySpacey my personal site looks; I just don't think this is a fair take)
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - cxr 5y ago
    I did not offer any feedback about subjective matters of tasteful web design. I did not accuse anyone of including adtech (of the tracking type or not) and autoplaying videos. I don't need to, and it's irrelevant besides. I offered only a very simple litmus test for measuring a commitment to values. I'll go further now, though, and say that I find your response to be not just unfair, and not just deceptive, but deceptive in a really insidious way. In addition to crafting a suggestive response that tacitly asks the reader to attribute two flawed arguments to me (re "design you find distasteful", and you're being "interested to hear" "who's tracking and got autoplaying video on their site"—two really obnoxious strawmen), you've used selective quoting of the linked FAQ to present a narrow target and paint a picture of a fundamental conflict between my remarks and the essence of Gemini. Extremely bold to do that while in the next breath having the confidence to offer an opinion about what is or is not a "fair take". Gemini's proponents purport to be interested in a set of values. Proponents defend Gemini's design in terms of those values; the values form design constraints that inform all aspects of the project (including, for example, its markup format). Given that it is possible for Gemini residents to demonstrate a commitment to those values even with vanilla HTML and HTTP—because one is forcing anyone to make use of any of the Web technologies that Gemini omits—then we should expect them to do exactly that. The litmus test is to ask whether they do that, or whether they expect the downstream recipients of their own work to be comfortable compromising on those very same values when it comes to consuming media over the Web. This is the _entirety_ the argument I laid out before.
nathias 5y ago
You are conflating ethics with convenience, user-friendliness has nothing to do with good/evil.

fwip 5y ago

I think maybe your post is conflating "evil" and "user-hostile."

Karrot_Kream 5y ago
No and that's the point. Gemini is developer-centric and user-hostile. It isn't evil. These are distinct concepts. We can't use good and evil as a way to exonerate bad software.
- wahern 5y ago
  The original promise of the Internet and, especially, the WWW was to elide the distinction between publisher and consumer--i.e. developer and user. The incredible increase in the complexity of the modern internet has almost completely restored that fundamental distinction, if not made it deeper and wider, giving rise to publishers (e.g. Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc) and other media companies (e.g. Google) with powers we haven't seen for over a century, if ever.
  - Jtsummers 5y ago
    > The original promise of the Internet and, especially, the WWW was to elide the distinction between publisher and consumer--i.e. developer and user. Where does this idea come from?
    - wahern 5y ago
      From the 1990s and, to a lesser degree, early 2000s internet culture--both the zeitgest and scholarship. I'd post links but ever since Google began heavily favoring publication date over keyword and semantic matching I've found it difficult and often impossible (not for lack of trying) to find the various websites, manifestos, blogs, and magazine articles that I read and re-read back then. One of my favorite manifestos was about the issue of [the non-existence of] spectrum scarcity, which also hashed out the threat posed by the reimposition of a strong publisher/consumer dichotomy. Alas, I haven't been able to find it again in the past several years. These days whenever I come across a good article (my metric is an article I return to at least once, either to re-read or cite) I archive the link. Google is now useless for finding anything but the most recent content, and headed in that same direction when it comes to finding substantive content. Another object lesson in the perils of centralization and technological reliance.
    - weikju 5y ago
      https://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/WorldWideWeb.html https://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/WorldWideWeb.html > The first web browser - or browser-editor rather > ... https://worldwideweb.cern.ch/worldwideweb/ https://worldwideweb.cern.ch/worldwideweb/ > Editing > To edit any document, whether it's one you created, or a page on the world wide web: > Click on the text you want edit. > Edit it.
  - Karrot_Kream 5y ago
    > The original promise of the Internet and, especially, the WWW was to elide the distinction between publisher and consumer--i.e. developer and user. I disagree. I do _not_ equate a "publisher" with a "developer". I'd much rather see a world where publishers are _not_ developers. It's not like all the books I read are written by developers.
- dredmorbius 5y ago
  Coming back after thinking over your comment and this thread for a while. The Web really just does not have a user-oriented document format presently. HTML5 via WATWG / Google / Facebook is advertiser friendly. The result is horrible both for anyone looking to independently implement a fully-compliant, capable Web browser AND any user actually accessing Today's-Web-As-Designed. Gemini addresses the dev-unfriendliness ... bu still tosses out far too much functionality IMO in the name of simplicity. The basic semantics of HTML5 are actually reasonably sound, but without some external enforcement over styles and complexity, it's simply going to be abused. Having used tablets and e-readers principally for the past six years or so, I much prefer the presentation of, yes, PDF (generally, it's still possible to stuff those up entirely) to virtually anything rendered in HTML by a browser. At a desktop system, console-mode simple markup remains reasonably readily consumed, and is quite useful for reference and incorporation into other works (writing / literature study). I'm not entirely sure where the answer lies, but I don't think Gemini is the promised land. Possibly a bondage-and-disciplin markup format, enforced by ... what exactly I don't know, though a defined set of document formats, and perhaps an independent search platform's ranking systems, might be one approach. (Yes, addressing the issues of copyright, compensation, and authors integrity might also help, though at this point, stripping the Web of all advertising seems a good start.)
  - Karrot_Kream 5y ago
    I largely agree with this. A constrained markup format I look to for inspiration is EPUB [1], which uses XHTML and a constrained directory layout, but recent versions have fallen in thrall of HTML5 and has the potential for its attendant complexity. I think a scoped version of EPUB has a lot of promise and is readily supported on many, many devices. Another format inspired similarly is the now-defunc WML [2], which uses an even more constrained XML document to describe layout specifically for constrained devices. Regardless, I largely feel that constrained markup formats are where the effort to make the web both user and developer friendly again should lie. There is also another defunct format, the AMB [3] which is a very different approach, but its goals and assumptions are a little too far out from the expectations of modern users IMO. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPUB https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPUB [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_Markup_Language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_Markup_Language [3]: http://amb.osdn.io/ http://amb.osdn.io/

cxr 5y ago

> The proof is in the pudding Indeed. For all of the cheerleaders that Gemini has, check how deep their convictions run. Here's an exercise: collect a smattering of names of those who champion Gemini the loudest, and then take a survey of their personal sites on the HTTP web. Do those pages look more like those found on cr.yp.to, or do they look more like the MySpacified web that they purport to be fed up with?

kixiQu 5y ago
If you're looking for hypocrisy, the project FAQ (https://gemini.circumlunar.space/docs/faq.gmi https://gemini.circumlunar.space/docs/faq.gmi) says it's supposed to be for people who are: > Opposed to the web's ubiquitous tracking of users > Tired of nagging pop-ups, obnoxious adverts, autoplaying videos and other misfeatures of the modern web Mere design you find distasteful wouldn't really signify here. If you're talking about someone who's tracking and got autoplaying video on their site, I'm interested to hear who that'd be! (For the record, I am not a champion of Gemini, and I like how MySpacey my personal site looks; I just don't think this is a fair take)
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- cxr 5y ago
  I did not offer any feedback about subjective matters of tasteful web design. I did not accuse anyone of including adtech (of the tracking type or not) and autoplaying videos. I don't need to, and it's irrelevant besides. I offered only a very simple litmus test for measuring a commitment to values. I'll go further now, though, and say that I find your response to be not just unfair, and not just deceptive, but deceptive in a really insidious way. In addition to crafting a suggestive response that tacitly asks the reader to attribute two flawed arguments to me (re "design you find distasteful", and you're being "interested to hear" "who's tracking and got autoplaying video on their site"—two really obnoxious strawmen), you've used selective quoting of the linked FAQ to present a narrow target and paint a picture of a fundamental conflict between my remarks and the essence of Gemini. Extremely bold to do that while in the next breath having the confidence to offer an opinion about what is or is not a "fair take". Gemini's proponents purport to be interested in a set of values. Proponents defend Gemini's design in terms of those values; the values form design constraints that inform all aspects of the project (including, for example, its markup format). Given that it is possible for Gemini residents to demonstrate a commitment to those values even with vanilla HTML and HTTP—because one is forcing anyone to make use of any of the Web technologies that Gemini omits—then we should expect them to do exactly that. The litmus test is to ask whether they do that, or whether they expect the downstream recipients of their own work to be comfortable compromising on those very same values when it comes to consuming media over the Web. This is the _entirety_ the argument I laid out before.

nathias 5y ago

You are conflating ethics with convenience, user-friendliness has nothing to do with good/evil.