3 ms·

I really like this balkinization of the web that is happening. I think the web has become too centralized. Having different programs, protocols and standards

I really like this balkinization of the web that is happening. I think the web has become too centralized. Having different programs, protocols and standards will lead to a rethinking of everything. Computers have become Chrome machines in the last 15 years. I want variety, humanity, and disjoint choices. I've loved Gemini so far, and see a lot of value in the limitations placed on it. I think adding the ability to access KyuWeb from the normal web is actually the wrong move. I think we need to make these things completely distinct and let the winner come out naturally. Also, I think leveraging existing technologies is a mistake. HTTP is a massive undertaking to implement. The idea of being able to write your own browser is a huge step forward as it prevents situations where everyone depends on one implementation like WebKit. Unfortunately for Gemini, everyone still depends on canonical encryption implementations - openssl. I wish someone could create a sort of "reference implementation" in psuedo-code of TLS that is easy to understand and hard to mess up. I can't find any mention of encryption - will this be more like Gopher in that it lacks encryption? Or is it optional?

Cyberdog 5y ago
> I think adding the ability to access KyuWeb from the normal web is actually the wrong move. I think we need to make these things completely distinct and let the winner come out naturally. I think that forcing people to download and use a different software program will be a roadblock to letting people try KyuWeb. For better or worse (well, for worse, mostly), a web browser is the tool people use to do internet-related things. Every person that clicks a link and sees a KyuWeb document right in their browser is one person more using KyuWeb than there otherwise would have been. That said, I expect a mature KyuWeb browser to provide a better experience than a normal web browser if for no other reason than it should be much faster. > Also, I think leveraging existing technologies is a mistake. HTTP is a massive undertaking to implement. The idea of being able to write your own browser is a huge step forward as it prevents situations where everyone depends on one implementation like WebKit. I agree when it comes to the web, but for KyuWeb, strict standardization is a feature, not a bug. That said, the relative simplicity of implementing a usable Markdown parser and renderer versus a modern HTML + CSS + JS parser and renderer should result in relative explosion of client implementations (a relative explosion). > I can't find any mention of encryption - will this be more like Gopher in that it lacks encryption? Or is it optional? Does HTTP/1.1 support encryption? Is encryption optional in HTTP/1.1? There are your answers.

Cyberdog 5y ago

> I think adding the ability to access KyuWeb from the normal web is actually the wrong move. I think we need to make these things completely distinct and let the winner come out naturally. I think that forcing people to download and use a different software program will be a roadblock to letting people try KyuWeb. For better or worse (well, for worse, mostly), a web browser is the tool people use to do internet-related things. Every person that clicks a link and sees a KyuWeb document right in their browser is one person more using KyuWeb than there otherwise would have been. That said, I expect a mature KyuWeb browser to provide a better experience than a normal web browser if for no other reason than it should be much faster. > Also, I think leveraging existing technologies is a mistake. HTTP is a massive undertaking to implement. The idea of being able to write your own browser is a huge step forward as it prevents situations where everyone depends on one implementation like WebKit. I agree when it comes to the web, but for KyuWeb, strict standardization is a feature, not a bug. That said, the relative simplicity of implementing a usable Markdown parser and renderer versus a modern HTML + CSS + JS parser and renderer should result in relative explosion of client implementations (a relative explosion). > I can't find any mention of encryption - will this be more like Gopher in that it lacks encryption? Or is it optional? Does HTTP/1.1 support encryption? Is encryption optional in HTTP/1.1? There are your answers.