Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Project Gemini

geminiprotocol.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 194 posts

Re: Project Gemini

#151

Post by immibis »

comex wrote: post #125
immibis wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bet it would be a few percent less and the world would be a fraction of a percent better if the first result was the rainforest. I wonder how much they pay Google for the top spot.

Amazon does not need to pay Google for this. There is no world where Google puts an organic result about the rainforest in the top spot, because it's not what most users are looking for. At most there might be a world where Google puts someone else's ad above the organic results.

Well, we also know Google isn't trying to help the user leave Google's site as quickly as possible, because they get more ad money when the user clicks on a few pages or does a few searches before finding what they want.

Re: Project Gemini

#152

Post by safety1st »

userbinator wrote: post #140

Maybe this is just me showing my age, but I don't understand why reinvent everything when you could just go back to something like HTML 2.0 or even 3.2 with some minor changes. I probably hate what happened with the "modern web" as much as the Gemini developers, but going full NIH is unlikely to be a good solution when there's an existing "unmodern web" to develop for, and as a bonus, can be experienced even with a m…

Gemini is a reaction to all the negative changes that happened to the web. Their premise is that the design of the web was fundamentally flawed because it was extensible. You see this in both the protocol and the community where the dominant idea is basically, make it super hard to ever extend or change Gemini. HTML is clearly a failure from this perspective, because HTML changed.

Personally I don't have much use for this attitude, the main problem I have with the web is when faced with the choice of empowering the publisher vs empowering the user, we kept on choosing to empower the publisher. The standards and browsers were owned by the web publishers, no one represented the user, and now instead of having a "user agent" installed on your machine to browse the web, you have a piece of spyware, better referred to as "Google's agent."

I don't really need to trade Google's Agent for Drew DeVault's Agent, give me software that does whatever I want it to do, fuck the publishers. But what do I matter, I'm not building any of this stuff.

Re: Project Gemini

#153

Post by Shugyousha »

I like the idea of Gemini and was inspired to write a script to turn my blog posts written in markdown to gemtext. Sadly I still haven't finished that script ...

My main issue with the protocol is that it is requiring creating a new TLS connection for every request. That is indeed a simple approach but I argue that the extra round trip times added due to this are not worth the trade-off for the simplicity gained in this case

Coming up with a simple way to reuse a connection would reduce the round trips needed drastically. If we put our heads together, I feel like we could come up with a way to do that, that doesn't overly complicate the protocol ...

Re: Project Gemini

#154

Post by 6P58r3MXJSLi »

userbinator wrote: post #140

Maybe this is just me showing my age, but I don't understand why reinvent everything when you could just go back to something like HTML 2.0 or even 3.2 with some minor changes. I probably hate what happened with the "modern web" as much as the Gemini developers, but going full NIH is unlikely to be a good solution when there's an existing "unmodern web" to develop for, and as a bonus, can be experienced even with a m…

HTML 2.0 and NOSCRIPT are very hard to enforce both server and client side.

Re: Project Gemini

#155

Post by cantalopes »

I have read and liked the philosophy, no inline images, no tracking, nondistraction, no extensioms, security, etc.

so i went and downloaded the first android gemini browser from the links called "buran".

Then i surfee around links people posted in here.

Came upon a site gemini://hellomouse.net

First thing i see: an inline image that is against very principles of gemini and shouldn't be allowed

What am i doing wrong?

Re: Project Gemini

#156

Post by stOneskull »

debo_ wrote: post #71

My main blog is now an "anonymous" gemlog. I use the kineto http proxy to provide a website version as well. I wrote a little deploy script that scrapes my posts and creates an atom XML feed (static doc) that kineto serves for those few people who want to stay up-to-date. Once a quarter, I batch up the recent posts and bcc a bunch of folks I like to keep in touch with. Some of them respond. This is what I do in place…

i installed Kristall to try this all out. Seems nice. Should I stick to it or is there a better client you'd recommend?

Re: Project Gemini

#157

Post by andrepd »

Jtsummers wrote: post #106
andrepd wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you for real? Or is this some irony I'm not getting

Presumably these are the 100 words they read: > Gemini is a new internet technology supporting an electronic library of interconnected text documents. That's not a new idea, but it's not old fashioned either. It's timeless, and deserves tools which treat it as a first class concept, not a vestigial corner case. Gemini isn't about innovation or disruption, it's about providing some respite for those who feel the inter…

Sorry I read the first 10 words of your comment but didn't understand the point.

Re: Project Gemini

#158

Post by andrepd »

netsharc wrote: post #120
IshKebab wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does a really bad job of explaining what it is. They could have said "modern gopher" and that would have conveyed way more information (for people who know what gopher is, which is probably 90% of the people ever reading it).

The time they save by not having the bells and whistles of JavaScript and "HTML5" they waste by being very blah blah blah around the point...

Tik-tok type thing to say.

Re: Project Gemini

#159

Post by andrepd »

afc wrote: post #124
mmaunder wrote: post #92

Read the 100 word intro and still don't know what this is. Left.

Agree, that was exactly my reaction. What a terrible introduction, wasting many words on such platitudes as telling me that the idea isn't new but it isn't old fashioned either, or that they want to provide "some respite for those who feel the internet has been disrupted enough already."

Jesus, god forbid someone share their motivation for a project for longer than it takes for a tiktok to play...

The link to the FAQ and spec is right there. If you have the attention span of a fruit fly (many such cases) I personally suggest trying to fix it, not feeling proud about it.

If this were an utterly pedestrian """deep dive""" about some AI thing it could have rambled as much as it liked that there wouldn't be this comment near the top, I assure you.

Re: Project Gemini

#160

Post by rndmio »

tpoacher wrote: post #142
userbinator wrote: post #140

Maybe this is just me showing my age, but I don't understand why reinvent everything when you could just go back to something like HTML 2.0 or even 3.2 with some minor changes. I probably hate what happened with the "modern web" as much as the Gemini developers, but going full NIH is unlikely to be a good solution when there's an existing "unmodern web" to develop for, and as a bonus, can be experienced even with a m…

Interesting outro. Interoperability is presumably one very big reason for this protocol. As for why, all I can say is, download Lagrange, go to gemini://bleyble.com/cgi-bin/random, and see for yourself. It's one thing hearing about it and a completely different experience browsing the geminispace.

That was a terrible experience. For a start that site has an expired certificate, as do many of the pages it suggested, and of the pages that worked it was mostly people that dipped a toe in a few years ago and never came back or other broken function.
Post reply on HN