5 ms·

Nah - Gemini FORCES people to use a very strict small surface area. Building on top of existing tech you would need to trust people to do it right, and that ain

Nah - Gemini FORCES people to use a very strict small surface area. Building on top of existing tech you would need to trust people to do it right, and that ain't something you trust.

throwawayboise 5y ago
Yep there would always be the temptation to say "well I need just one cookie" or "well I need just this bit of javascript" Gemini doesn't give you those options.
- dopidopHN 5y ago
  It’s also make the protocol considerably easier. I read it in two small settings. It’s surprisingly digest and make you want to start implementing a server or a client for it.
- viraptor 5y ago
  I think it's only a matter of time before Gemini does that. The moment it's actually used by people who aren't interested in the underlying tech, someone will fork the browser and include either video support or scripting of some kind. Or they'll say, maybe it should display PDFs too - and that will bring the JS engine in as well.
  - DarylZero 5y ago
    Gemini can play videos just fine already.
DarylZero 5y ago
Exactly. It's similar to how, here in HN comments, you cannot embed a giant 300MB javascript advertisement monstrosity. Or even just an image. If people could do that, then the space would be destroyed by malicious actors. What if we eliminate HN and do the communication P2P? Where author hosts own content. How can I as author still guarantee you as reader that I won't do that? One answer is to publish over Gemini.
- piaste 5y ago
  I wonder if instead of Minimal HTTP, it would have been more effective to create a Minimal ActivityPub instead.
  - iszomer 5y ago
    I think if you want to further limit yourself than Gemini yet maintain some of the semblance of the existing modern web, you can go the Beaker Browser [1] route. [1] https://beakerbrowser.com/ https://beakerbrowser.com/
wnolens 5y ago
Right. I had never heard about Gemini before this thread. So after skimming, I read the Gemini FAQ, then went back and re-read the article. The author completely missed the point and began a technical discussion. Kind of similar to that dev you work with that gets psyched about a solution, and doesn't stop to ask "do we need to solve this problem?"
rPlayer6554 5y ago
I think this is an interesting argument, but my question is why can't it just work in the browser I have with an extension? No matter what people say, modern websites with JS and HTML and such aren't going away. I can't just stick my head in the sand and only use this special browser since I use too many things that make my life better in meaningful ways that use the traditional protocols. Many of them wouldn't be possible using Gemini (I assume, I haven't dug in much). That means if I want to use Gemini I would have to add a whole other browser to my computer and switch between the two while browsing which is super annoying. At that point I just won't bother. What is the end game here? Do they want all websites to switch to Gemini? Do they expect people to use two browsers? Are they saying that anything that can't be built on Gemini should be a Native App?
- akkartik 5y ago
  I use Firefox. When I click on a gemini:// link it opens it in Lagrange. Seems pretty seamless. If you're not going to install Lagrange, I'm doubtful that you're going to install an extension either. This isn't about you personally, it's a statistical judgment about the market segment you're signalling yourself to belong to. People reluctant to install native software are also unlikely to install extensions. Having a separate app provides some additional protection compared to an extension that can look over your shoulder at everything you browse. Lagrange runs in a separate process entirely, and it can only snoop on the Gemini websites I visit. Re endgame, see 1.6 at https://gemini.circumlunar.space/docs/faq.gmi https://gemini.circumlunar.space/docs/faq.gmi Me, I go to Gemini (and Mastodon, and the tildeverse, and plan.cat, and twtxt, and, and..) precisely because it has no hope in hell of adoption. If someone's posting there they're intrinsically motivated[1]. That's the stuff I want to look at. When I'm in small pools like these I'm less legible[2] to marketers. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motivation#Intrinsic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motivation#Intrinsic [2] https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2010/07/26/a-big-little-idea-called-legibility https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2010/07/26/a-big-little-idea-call...
- immibis 5y ago
  It can, but someone has to write that extension first.

Nah - Gemini FORCES people to use a very strict small surface area. Building on top of existing tech you would need to trust people to do it right, and that ain't something you trust.

throwawayboise 5y ago

Yep there would always be the temptation to say "well I need just one cookie" or "well I need just this bit of javascript" Gemini doesn't give you those options.

dopidopHN 5y ago
It’s also make the protocol considerably easier. I read it in two small settings. It’s surprisingly digest and make you want to start implementing a server or a client for it.
viraptor 5y ago
I think it's only a matter of time before Gemini does that. The moment it's actually used by people who aren't interested in the underlying tech, someone will fork the browser and include either video support or scripting of some kind. Or they'll say, maybe it should display PDFs too - and that will bring the JS engine in as well.
- DarylZero 5y ago
  Gemini can play videos just fine already.

DarylZero 5y ago

Exactly. It's similar to how, here in HN comments, you cannot embed a giant 300MB javascript advertisement monstrosity. Or even just an image. If people could do that, then the space would be destroyed by malicious actors. What if we eliminate HN and do the communication P2P? Where author hosts own content. How can I as author still guarantee you as reader that I won't do that? One answer is to publish over Gemini.

piaste 5y ago
I wonder if instead of Minimal HTTP, it would have been more effective to create a Minimal ActivityPub instead.
- iszomer 5y ago
  I think if you want to further limit yourself than Gemini yet maintain some of the semblance of the existing modern web, you can go the Beaker Browser [1] route. [1] https://beakerbrowser.com/ https://beakerbrowser.com/

wnolens 5y ago

Right. I had never heard about Gemini before this thread. So after skimming, I read the Gemini FAQ, then went back and re-read the article. The author completely missed the point and began a technical discussion. Kind of similar to that dev you work with that gets psyched about a solution, and doesn't stop to ask "do we need to solve this problem?"

rPlayer6554 5y ago

I think this is an interesting argument, but my question is why can't it just work in the browser I have with an extension? No matter what people say, modern websites with JS and HTML and such aren't going away. I can't just stick my head in the sand and only use this special browser since I use too many things that make my life better in meaningful ways that use the traditional protocols. Many of them wouldn't be possible using Gemini (I assume, I haven't dug in much). That means if I want to use Gemini I would have to add a whole other browser to my computer and switch between the two while browsing which is super annoying. At that point I just won't bother. What is the end game here? Do they want all websites to switch to Gemini? Do they expect people to use two browsers? Are they saying that anything that can't be built on Gemini should be a Native App?

akkartik 5y ago
I use Firefox. When I click on a gemini:// link it opens it in Lagrange. Seems pretty seamless. If you're not going to install Lagrange, I'm doubtful that you're going to install an extension either. This isn't about you personally, it's a statistical judgment about the market segment you're signalling yourself to belong to. People reluctant to install native software are also unlikely to install extensions. Having a separate app provides some additional protection compared to an extension that can look over your shoulder at everything you browse. Lagrange runs in a separate process entirely, and it can only snoop on the Gemini websites I visit. Re endgame, see 1.6 at https://gemini.circumlunar.space/docs/faq.gmi https://gemini.circumlunar.space/docs/faq.gmi Me, I go to Gemini (and Mastodon, and the tildeverse, and plan.cat, and twtxt, and, and..) precisely because it has no hope in hell of adoption. If someone's posting there they're intrinsically motivated[1]. That's the stuff I want to look at. When I'm in small pools like these I'm less legible[2] to marketers. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motivation#Intrinsic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motivation#Intrinsic [2] https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2010/07/26/a-big-little-idea-called-legibility https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2010/07/26/a-big-little-idea-call...
immibis 5y ago
It can, but someone has to write that extension first.