> TLS doesn't prevent blocking by ISPs They can block it or they can let it through unmodified. They can't keyword-filter it and add advertisements to it. > i

> TLS doesn't prevent blocking by ISPs They can block it or they can let it through unmodified. They can't keyword-filter it and add advertisements to it. > it is limited in term of spying prevention (metadata are still available) Granted. However, "Your customer connected to this IP address" is much less marketable than "Your customer is reading information about stew recipes" and much less actionable than "Your customer is reading information about encryption and is therefore a traitor" and so on. > it does prevent tampering by ISPs, but I think that part would be more effectively achieved with digital signatures (ex: PGP blocks) that not only prevents tampering by ISPs, but also by someone who controls the server or by forgers. Digital signatures only guarantee that the data is from who it says it's from (which Gemini doesn't enforce because it specifies TOFU) and that hasn't been modified. They don't protect against spying, for advertising or any other reason. They also still rely on a cryptographic library, which undermines your point about how Gemini shouldn't be burdened with the complexity of TLS or SSL. > As for information you share that will become sensitive, yes sure, but if you think that, don't publish anything at all on public networks. Here, I'm not talking about what I post but what I access and read. It seems like you want to give everyone the ability to snoop on who uses the library and for what, and I have a hard time not attributing nasty motives to something like that.