Live data from Hacker News

Six Years of Gemini

geminiprotocol.net

151–160 of 169 posts

Re: Six Years of Gemini

#151
post #94
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. You could have tinyweb/oldweb sites identify themselves with a meta tag, and have a browser that only browses those. A opt-in, web-within-a-web. And turns off js, cookies, and images. You don’t need another transport protocol.

How do you stop users who aren't using the custom browser from accessing these 'tinyweb' HTTP sites? How do you prevent content scrapers and search indexers from accessing them? How do you suppress direct incorporation of 'mainstream' web content into 'tinyweb' content? If your goal is precisely to create an parallel ecosystem that's "airgapped" from the mainstream web, and you're already going to have to develop cus…

Why would you need to? The big web existing doesn’t hinder or harm the existence of the tinyweb.

Re: Six Years of Gemini

#152
post #72
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t hate it, but I question the use. You can use HTTP to do what it does, but better. The modern web is opt-in. I build and use sites that aren’t SPAs and shitted up with 3p resources and images and code. HTTP is great, and deserves our time and attention. I get that they seem upset with the modern web, and I am too - but it isn’t HTTP’s fault. It’s the sites you visit. If you want to build new and smaller commun…

> I don’t hate it, but I question the use. You can use HTTP to do what it does, but better. I'm not sure I understand that. HTTP is the fundamental protocol of the web. If your goal is to create an ecosystem that is deliberately set apart from the web, how would using the same underlying tech stack help rather than hinder you in doing that? > HTTP is great, and deserves our time and attention. I get that they seem up…

My argument is not to use the same stack - just the same transport. No need to reinvent the wheel. HTTP and HTML do not necessitate that you use javascript or images or even forms.

Re: Six Years of Gemini

#153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's also arguably the reason that the Fediverse can not manage to grow to more than 1 million MAU. Shall the number go up indefinitely? I don't believe so. Something can be attractive to a group of people and the number may float somewhere as people come and go. If the main aim is to make "the line go up", then the users become the product, and this is what I'm against in the first place. > The solution to this is…

> Shall the number go up indefinitely? False dichotomy. > Also, if we should give people all the power they need, then we arrive to the abolishing all law and regulation in all areas of the life (...) Non-sequitur. > The tool is the result of exponentially increasing complexity of doing something simple. The tool is for someone that needs to solve a problem at a different scale than what you and I need. You don't hav…

> The tool is for someone that needs to solve a problem at a different scale than what you and I need. You don't have to use it. No one is forcing you to adopt it. Their problems do not apply to you and no one is stripping you of the ability to solve your problem the way you see fit.

False analogy. First, I know what scaling means, and I yell at the tool because it makes something more complicated than it should for any scale. For me, that tool is a bastion of bloat and unnecessary complexity, because I know how I can solve that exact problem with simpler processes at the scale that the tool targets.

> It is being developed and is guided only by the things that it does not do.

Non sequitur. Scope creep is a problem and having a good scope is half of building a good foundation. Exclusion is a more powerful tool for a good scope.

> "Gemini users consider themselves so powerless against the traps of Surveillance Capitalism, they think that the only way they can resist the siren song is by tying themselves to the boat mast. They see themselves as alcoholics who know they will relapse if they go out to the bar with their old friends, so they are building a place where drinks are not available."

False dichotomy.

> But this is not the argument I hear. All I hear is a bunch of people talking about how awesome it is to sail the seas while tied to the boat mast.

Confirmation bias. I told that it can provide an alternative universe for people to use low-distraction services. Another person told that it's just for fun for them. Nobody, I mean, nobody incl. me in this conversation told that it's a total replacement for HTTP/S or current web, but an alternative one for people who want alternatives.

People use BBSes, IRC, Matrix, RSS, etc. etc. Some of them work over HTTP, some are not. Some people prefer GUI tools for these, others use TUIs. All of these things augment or provide alternative universes or perspectives to what you want to keep dominant, "Modern Web".

If other people's choices and desires doesn't make sense to you, that's fine! However, painting them in the light you want, and telling that you're trying to understand is not.

It's pretty evident at that point is you only want to confirm and spread your view about something you don't get to like.

You don't have to use Gemini. No one is forcing you to adopt it. Their problems do not apply to you and no one is stripping you of the ability to solve your problem the way you see fit.

Re: Six Years of Gemini

#154
post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is no friction. It's trivial to write a program that can scrape a Gemini network. It's not trivial at all. First, you have to want to do it, then you have to commit time and effort to doing it, then you have to maintain the solution you deploy specifically for Gemini in parallel to your web scraping architecture. > If there is no one pulling data from Gemini servers yet, is not because it's difficult do it, b…

> First, you have to want to do it, then you have to commit time and effort to doing it Implementing a Gemini to HTTP gateway seems like a perfect type of weekend project for someone that wants to play with a new programming language. With that, any barrier that you think you have is gone. Crawlers will get to you no matter what. > So using a separate, custom tech stack is what keeps the threshold of effort in front…

I don't know what to tell you at this point other than 'eppur si muove' -- you're giving me a bunch of theoretical reasons as to why you think it shouldn't work, and yet Gemini has been around for years now: it is maintaining itself as a distinct niche; it is not full of spam, ads, or slop; its content isn't readily accessible from the web or turning up in major web search engines despite the fact that there already are multiple web gateways around; and it generally does fulfill the intentions of the people using it.

You're treating this like a hypothetical discussion, but we're talking about something that already exists and functions.

And I don't think the "hobby" distinction you're making is particularly relevant, because the whole point of it is again to function as a community of amateurs -- and it's doing that quite effectively.

Re: Six Years of Gemini

#155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Shall the number go up indefinitely? False dichotomy. > Also, if we should give people all the power they need, then we arrive to the abolishing all law and regulation in all areas of the life (...) Non-sequitur. > The tool is the result of exponentially increasing complexity of doing something simple. The tool is for someone that needs to solve a problem at a different scale than what you and I need. You don't hav…

> The tool is for someone that needs to solve a problem at a different scale than what you and I need. You don't have to use it. No one is forcing you to adopt it. Their problems do not apply to you and no one is stripping you of the ability to solve your problem the way you see fit. False analogy. First, I know what scaling means, and I yell at the tool because it makes something more complicated than it should for…

> I mean, nobody incl. me in this conversation told that it's a total replacement for HTTP/S or current web, but an alternative one for people who want alternatives.

Look at the start of the thread. My question was "you are looking for a way to get rid of the annoying issues of the modern www. What is the solution that solves this with the least amount of work?"

You (among others) came on to argue that not only doing all this investment on Gemini is a solution to this problem, but that it would be easier than using a better web browser.

> If other people's choices and desires doesn't make sense to you

Let me repeat: I was asking about what was the best way to solve a problem. And you wanted to sustain the argument that is less work to solve the problems of modern web by rebuilding in a way that is functionally crippled instead of simply adopting better web browsers. Which already exist.

I have no interest in judging your choices or what you value desires. If you want to get invested in this, I have nothing to say about it. But to try to turn this into a rational and effective course of action is an insult to people's intelligence.

Re: Six Years of Gemini

#156
post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> First, you have to want to do it, then you have to commit time and effort to doing it Implementing a Gemini to HTTP gateway seems like a perfect type of weekend project for someone that wants to play with a new programming language. With that, any barrier that you think you have is gone. Crawlers will get to you no matter what. > So using a separate, custom tech stack is what keeps the threshold of effort in front…

I don't know what to tell you at this point other than 'eppur si muove' -- you're giving me a bunch of theoretical reasons as to why you think it shouldn't work, and yet Gemini has been around for years now: it is maintaining itself as a distinct niche; it is not full of spam, ads, or slop; its content isn't readily accessible from the web or turning up in major web search engines despite the fact that there already…

> because the whole point of it is again to function as a community of amateurs

Looks like I will have to point to the top of the thread again.

If your solution only works for a niche and it can only exist because it is so small that it is only interesting for a handful of people, then it is not an actual solution to the modern web!

Re: Six Years of Gemini

#157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That “alcoholic” metaphor? Seriously, what the hell. You don’t have to like Gemini, but reducing the people who use it to self-loathing addicts is ridiculous. I use Gemini because I enjoy it. That’s it. It’s fun. It’s weird. It scratches an itch that the modern web doesn’t. Maybe that’s not your thing — fine. But why does someone’s personal enjoyment of a simpler protocol have to be pathologized? Not everything needs…

> people can engage with technology for all kinds of reasons — curiosity, aesthetics, nostalgia, minimalism, fun Fine! The same thing could be said about retrocomputing enthusiasts. If that's only a hobby, go on and be merry. But don't go around acting like this hobby is an actual, practical solution to the problems of the modern web. This whole thread started because I asked "you are looking for a way to get rid of…

You're framing this whole conversation as if there's a single, universally agreed-upon set of "problems with the modern web." You're also treating it as though the only valid solutions are the ones that address your version of those problems in the most efficient way possible.

But your original suggestion (installing a handful of browser extensions) doesn’t do much for someone whose interests go beyond tracking scripts, ads, or page weight. For someone who values different aesthetics, a slower pace of change, or the creative possibilities of working within tight constraints, then Gemini might feel like a very practical solution. It may not solve your problems, but it might solve theirs.

As I mentioned earlier, I still use the web. Gemini is not a replacement for me. But using it changes the way I experience the web. Gemini’s minimalism helps me notice and appreciate different aspects of modern web technologies. Likewise, the complexity and richness of the web always makes coming back to Gemini feel like a breath of fresh air. These perspectives can coexist without being contradictory. Not every tool needs to solve every problem. Sometimes I want to spend hours cooking something elaborate. Other times I just want to eat a banana.

Enjoyment is also a valid reason to use a tool. You can take something seriously and still appreciate it for what it is, not only for what it reacts against.

Re: Six Years of Gemini

#158
post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know what to tell you at this point other than 'eppur si muove' -- you're giving me a bunch of theoretical reasons as to why you think it shouldn't work, and yet Gemini has been around for years now: it is maintaining itself as a distinct niche; it is not full of spam, ads, or slop; its content isn't readily accessible from the web or turning up in major web search engines despite the fact that there already…

> because the whole point of it is again to function as a community of amateurs Looks like I will have to point to the top of the thread again. If your solution only works for a niche and it can only exist because it is so small that it is only interesting for a handful of people, then it is not an actual solution to the modern web!

That's not up to you to say. If it solves the issues I have with the modern web, it is an actual solution for me. And if changing my browser or installing extensions does nothing to solve the issues I have with the modern web, then that's not even on the table.

A solution that works for a niche... works for that niche. It's not like your solution of switching your browser or installing extensions universally solves anything. I absolutely despise the user experience of Firefox (which you suggested elsewhere) and ads aren't even close to the top of the list of my issues with the modern web.

Once again, what annoys you may or may not annoy me and what annoys me may or may not annoy you.

Re: Six Years of Gemini

#159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> people can engage with technology for all kinds of reasons — curiosity, aesthetics, nostalgia, minimalism, fun Fine! The same thing could be said about retrocomputing enthusiasts. If that's only a hobby, go on and be merry. But don't go around acting like this hobby is an actual, practical solution to the problems of the modern web. This whole thread started because I asked "you are looking for a way to get rid of…

You're framing this whole conversation as if there's a single, universally agreed-upon set of "problems with the modern web." You're also treating it as though the only valid solutions are the ones that address your version of those problems in the most efficient way possible. But your original suggestion (installing a handful of browser extensions) doesn’t do much for someone whose interests go beyond tracking scrip…

> You're framing this whole conversation as if there's a single, universally agreed-upon set of "problems with the modern web."

No, I'm framing this as "go ask 1000 different people to make a list of the top 10 issues they have with the web, and we will be able to solve 99.995% of them without ditching the web browser and start using a Gemini client to access documents instead".

All the problems you are describing are tractable with a web browser. Disable javascript, disable external stylesheets, run all the websites you want to read through wallabag and then just browse with a preset userstyle. Use lynx for all I care. That's all there is to it. Any of these approaches will get you the same type of experience you'd be getting from a Gemini client - with the difference that we won't need to know or care about it.

You might keep looking for justification for experimenting with other things. You might find joy in using them. It's all good, but completely orthogonal to the point. At the end of the day I'm just saying we do not need to switch to a different transport protocol in order to experience a saner web, and y'all are acting like just I'm calling your kid ugly.

Re: Six Years of Gemini

#160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're framing this whole conversation as if there's a single, universally agreed-upon set of "problems with the modern web." You're also treating it as though the only valid solutions are the ones that address your version of those problems in the most efficient way possible. But your original suggestion (installing a handful of browser extensions) doesn’t do much for someone whose interests go beyond tracking scrip…

> You're framing this whole conversation as if there's a single, universally agreed-upon set of "problems with the modern web." No, I'm framing this as "go ask 1000 different people to make a list of the top 10 issues they have with the web, and we will be able to solve 99.995% of them without ditching the web browser and start using a Gemini client to access documents instead". All the problems you are describing ar…

You're still trying to invalidate my experience because it doesn’t align with your criteria for what's “necessary.” But I'm not trying to solve your problems. I'm solving mine, in a way that works for me. Your browser ideas wouldn't solve anything for me.

You seem to keep asking for some airtight, utilitarian justification, but not everything people build or use needs to pass through that filter. Some things exist because they offer a different perspective, and that difference can be meaningful even if it doesn't optimize for mainstream efficiency or convenience.

No one's asking you to switch protocols. Most Gemini users don't "switch" protocols, they still use the web alongside Gemini. No one's asking you to even keep replying to any of this. Just leave the thread and forget that Gemini ever existed for all I care. But insisting that the only valid solutions are the ones you’ve pre-approved is a great way to miss the value in approaches that don’t look like yours. And that's exactly what you keep doing.

Seriously, you're the one who's been out of line here: dismissive, condescending, and acting like curiosity itself needs to justify its existence to you. It doesn’t. If you don't like Gemini, all you have to do is look away.

Post reply on HN