4 ms·

A fair point but my point is that http is a very simple easy to use specification, and for content html can be a very simple easy to use document format, gemini

by somat 4y ago

A fair point but my point is that http is a very simple easy to use specification, and for content html can be a very simple easy to use document format, gemini is fine, I think it is great that people are having fun on the internet, you will however have a hard time convincing me that http/html is too complicated. Note that html can be too complicated, but it does not have to be, not everything needs to be some sort of monstrous framework heavy single page javascript encumbered anomaly.

Buffout 4y ago
[dead]
fsiefken 4y ago
yes, the argument goes that because html can be too complicated gemini was designed to actively prevent and limit these complications. Of course html can be used in a simple gemini- or gopherlike way as well. But some purists want nothing to do with the complexities, distractions from and corruption of pure textual information.
CharlesW 4y ago
> Note that html can be too complicated, but it does not have to be, not everything needs to be some sort of monstrous framework heavy single page javascript encumbered anomaly. The philosophy of Gemini seems to be that it's not enough that people can create Gemini's austere's experience with the web, but that everyone must be forced to conform. I guess "punk" has lost all of it's meaning.
- teucris 4y ago
  > but that everyone must be forced to conform One thing I like about smolweb stuff, including Gemini, is that they really aren’t being gatekeepers. Sure, they have strong opinions (and they encode them in protocols) but it comes off like a DM trying to make a good campaign.
- seanw444 4y ago
  You're free to express yourself within the technological limitations. Sometimes that's more freeing than having an overload of functionality. It also makes it more of an open platform because anybody can re-implement it if they want. That's plenty "punk" to me. Alternatively, use the flying spaghetti codebase monster duopoly, also known as Chromium and Firefox.
  - krapp 4y ago
    >You're free to express yourself within the technological limitations. Sometimes that's more freeing than having an overload of functionality. It also makes it more of an open platform because anybody can re-implement it if they want. That's plenty "punk" to me. Being satisfied with expressing oneself within technological limitations has never been "punk." Punk is pushing a system to its bleeding edge, breaking it, undermining it, using it in ways it was never intended for and not giving a damn about keeping things tidy. The web in all its hypercomplex madness and ugliness is far more punk than Gemini is even capable of being. Gemini doesn't even allow site authors control over the design or layout of their content - that's entirely implemented by the browser. Punk is rebellion against authority and systems of control, while Gemini is rebellion against freedom and the imposition of control for the sake of ascetic minimalism. Punk is anarchy, while Gemini is orthodoxy. It gets points for being anticapitalist, though.
    - marssaxman 4y ago
      > Gemini doesn't even allow site authors control over the design or layout of their content Of course not. End users should have control of their experience. Why should someone else get to control what my software does on my machine? Why should some designer somewhere be the authority? I'm going to pick the fonts and colors and styles I want. Seems like a pretty punk-rebellious attitude to me.
      - krapp 4y ago
        >Why should someone else get to control what my software does on my machine? For the same reason someone else gets to control the layout of a magazine you buy. The browser is yours, but the page you're accessing is not. It is the creative expression of someone else, why should they not have the right to express themselves freely? Why are you insisting on absolute creative freedom and editorial control over other people's property? I mean, ignore javascript entirely. Why should someone publishing to Gemini not be able to set the background and font on their site? Gemini doesn't even allow even the tiny bit of individualism offered by the old web. >Seems like a pretty punk-rebellious attitude to me. You're view is literally rebelling against other people's freedom because what they do might not suit your tastes, and you don't feel others should have the right to violate your sense of aesthetics. Wanting to control everything isn't punk, it's textbook authoritarianism. But I doubt we're going to see eye to eye on this.
- arcanesciences 4y ago
  Really, now? Since when is anyone being "forced to conform"? It's an alternative protocol stack that people can use if they want. I don't see anyone saying "you have to use Gemini, or else" - but I do see people attacking it for being its own thing, rather than part of the web.

by somat 4y ago

Buffout 4y ago

[dead]

fsiefken 4y ago

yes, the argument goes that because html can be too complicated gemini was designed to actively prevent and limit these complications. Of course html can be used in a simple gemini- or gopherlike way as well. But some purists want nothing to do with the complexities, distractions from and corruption of pure textual information.

CharlesW 4y ago

> Note that html can be too complicated, but it does not have to be, not everything needs to be some sort of monstrous framework heavy single page javascript encumbered anomaly. The philosophy of Gemini seems to be that it's not enough that people can create Gemini's austere's experience with the web, but that everyone must be forced to conform. I guess "punk" has lost all of it's meaning.

teucris 4y ago
> but that everyone must be forced to conform One thing I like about smolweb stuff, including Gemini, is that they really aren’t being gatekeepers. Sure, they have strong opinions (and they encode them in protocols) but it comes off like a DM trying to make a good campaign.
seanw444 4y ago
You're free to express yourself within the technological limitations. Sometimes that's more freeing than having an overload of functionality. It also makes it more of an open platform because anybody can re-implement it if they want. That's plenty "punk" to me. Alternatively, use the flying spaghetti codebase monster duopoly, also known as Chromium and Firefox.
- krapp 4y ago
  >You're free to express yourself within the technological limitations. Sometimes that's more freeing than having an overload of functionality. It also makes it more of an open platform because anybody can re-implement it if they want. That's plenty "punk" to me. Being satisfied with expressing oneself within technological limitations has never been "punk." Punk is pushing a system to its bleeding edge, breaking it, undermining it, using it in ways it was never intended for and not giving a damn about keeping things tidy. The web in all its hypercomplex madness and ugliness is far more punk than Gemini is even capable of being. Gemini doesn't even allow site authors control over the design or layout of their content - that's entirely implemented by the browser. Punk is rebellion against authority and systems of control, while Gemini is rebellion against freedom and the imposition of control for the sake of ascetic minimalism. Punk is anarchy, while Gemini is orthodoxy. It gets points for being anticapitalist, though.
  - marssaxman 4y ago
    > Gemini doesn't even allow site authors control over the design or layout of their content Of course not. End users should have control of their experience. Why should someone else get to control what my software does on my machine? Why should some designer somewhere be the authority? I'm going to pick the fonts and colors and styles I want. Seems like a pretty punk-rebellious attitude to me.
    - krapp 4y ago
      >Why should someone else get to control what my software does on my machine? For the same reason someone else gets to control the layout of a magazine you buy. The browser is yours, but the page you're accessing is not. It is the creative expression of someone else, why should they not have the right to express themselves freely? Why are you insisting on absolute creative freedom and editorial control over other people's property? I mean, ignore javascript entirely. Why should someone publishing to Gemini not be able to set the background and font on their site? Gemini doesn't even allow even the tiny bit of individualism offered by the old web. >Seems like a pretty punk-rebellious attitude to me. You're view is literally rebelling against other people's freedom because what they do might not suit your tastes, and you don't feel others should have the right to violate your sense of aesthetics. Wanting to control everything isn't punk, it's textbook authoritarianism. But I doubt we're going to see eye to eye on this.
arcanesciences 4y ago
Really, now? Since when is anyone being "forced to conform"? It's an alternative protocol stack that people can use if they want. I don't see anyone saying "you have to use Gemini, or else" - but I do see people attacking it for being its own thing, rather than part of the web.