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

Gemini is Solutionism

xn--gckvb8fzb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 227 posts

Re: Gemini is Solutionism

#211

Post by ajioasfnokal »

cxr wrote: post #159
akkartik wrote: post #23

I'm not yet sure how I feel about Gemini (I like inline links), but this post makes me think it's starting to gain some traction. It's past the "first they ignore it" and "then they laugh at it" phases and now into the "then they fight it" phase. Given that the mainstream stack we all are dependent on has foundational problems as OP acknowledges, language like "solutionism at its worst" feels counter-productive. Sure…

> language like "solutionism at its worst" feels counter-productive[...] why not let a thousand flowers bloom? Because resources are not infinite. Gemini sucks the air out of the room. > Sometimes an adage is trotted out that goes roughly like this: Welp, it's not perfect, but it's better than nothing!¶ And sometimes that's true. It's at least widely understood to be true, I think.¶ What I don't see mentioned, ever,…

Gemini devs could have contributed to something else? Sure. They didn't, though.

Historians avoid counterfactual arguments because they lead nowhere. Perhaps the timeline without Gemini is worse. Perhaps it's better. Not possible to say. Best to just live in the moment.

What projects would you prefer them to work on?

Re: Gemini is Solutionism

#212

Post by knowledge-clay »

hammyhavoc wrote: post #199
knowledge-clay wrote: post #18

> It feels like the people working on/running Gemini infrastructure don’t want to actually solve the issues with the modern day web and instead just wanted to be different, Many of Gemini's adherents can be described broadly as left-anarchists or left-libertarians. Their assessment of the problem is that the web has been captured by large, centralized corporations. Their alternative is human-scale technology and huma…

Source? Or is this anecdotal?

Not entirely sure what specific claim you’re looking for a source for

Re: Gemini is Solutionism

#213

Post by hammyhavoc »

knowledge-clay wrote: post #212
hammyhavoc wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Source? Or is this anecdotal?

Not entirely sure what specific claim you’re looking for a source for

"Many of Gemini's adherents can be described broadly as left-anarchists or left-libertarians."

Many? How many? Which capsule? Who? How were they identified? What were the numbers for centrists and people who swung the opposite way politically? How was it defined?

Re: Gemini is Solutionism

#214

Post by CyberRabbi »

DarylZero wrote: post #210
CyberRabbi wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's a massively more complex implementation for no benefit. It’s barely complex. It’s a standard dispatch on the accept header, all major web servers handle this out of the box. Also it has the significant benefit of working with existing browsers. On what basis were you making that statement? > Also it's definitely not enough to set a HTTP header. Need to use a different schema so that the restraints on content…

I meant that an implementation of HTTP is massively more complex than an implementation of Gemini. > You can accomplish the same URL transparency by using a file extension convention. E.g. “ https://foo.com/my log.gemini” The extension shouldn't be `.gemini` it should be `.this-is-not-malware-i-super-pinky-promise` Just kidding. The problem is you can't enforce a mere "convention" against malicious actors.

> I meant that an implementation of HTTP is massively more complex than an implementation of Gemini.

The subset of http necessary to support Gemini-style requests is really not complex at all. I’ve written basic http servers in hours if not minutes.

> The extension shouldn't be `.gemini` it should be `.this-is-not-malware-i-super-pinky-promise`

If you are someone who uses what I’m calling “http-Gemini” because they are worried about malware then use the stripped down “http Gemini” browser. For the rest of the world who is already comfortable with potential malware in their links, there is no change. The control stays in the user’s hands.

Re: Gemini is Solutionism

#215

Post by DarylZero »

CyberRabbi wrote: post #214
DarylZero wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I meant that an implementation of HTTP is massively more complex than an implementation of Gemini. > You can accomplish the same URL transparency by using a file extension convention. E.g. “ https://foo.com/my log.gemini” The extension shouldn't be `.gemini` it should be `.this-is-not-malware-i-super-pinky-promise` Just kidding. The problem is you can't enforce a mere "convention" against malicious actors.

> I meant that an implementation of HTTP is massively more complex than an implementation of Gemini. The subset of http necessary to support Gemini-style requests is really not complex at all. I’ve written basic http servers in hours if not minutes. > The extension shouldn't be `.gemini` it should be `.this-is-not-malware-i-super-pinky-promise` If you are someone who uses what I’m calling “http-Gemini” because they a…

OK, but you didn't say anything about defining a subset of HTTP.

Re: Gemini is Solutionism

#216

Post by cxr »

ajioasfnokal wrote: post #211
cxr wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> language like "solutionism at its worst" feels counter-productive[...] why not let a thousand flowers bloom? Because resources are not infinite. Gemini sucks the air out of the room. > Sometimes an adage is trotted out that goes roughly like this: Welp, it's not perfect, but it's better than nothing!¶ And sometimes that's true. It's at least widely understood to be true, I think.¶ What I don't see mentioned, ever,…

Gemini devs could have contributed to something else? Sure. They didn't, though. Historians avoid counterfactual arguments because they lead nowhere. Perhaps the timeline without Gemini is worse. Perhaps it's better. Not possible to say. Best to just live in the moment. What projects would you prefer them to work on?

> Gemini devs could have contributed to something else?

Not the argument I'm making. I'm observing that others' energy that gets captured (or more accurately, spent; i.e., fails to be captured for use elsewhere) as a consequence of Gemini's gravity is wasted. It's necessary to make a distinction between Gemini's originators and people sucked into its orbit.

Re: Gemini is Solutionism

#217

Post by ajioasfnokal »

cxr wrote: post #216
ajioasfnokal wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gemini devs could have contributed to something else? Sure. They didn't, though. Historians avoid counterfactual arguments because they lead nowhere. Perhaps the timeline without Gemini is worse. Perhaps it's better. Not possible to say. Best to just live in the moment. What projects would you prefer them to work on?

> Gemini devs could have contributed to something else? Not the argument I'm making. I'm observing that others' energy that gets captured (or more accurately, spent; i.e., fails to be captured for use elsewhere) as a consequence of Gemini's gravity is wasted. It's necessary to make a distinction between Gemini's originators and people sucked into its orbit.

Still a pointless counterfactual.

Re: Gemini is Solutionism

#218

Post by [deleted] »

sreevisakh wrote: post #196
grumbel wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm guaranteed to not be flooded with ads That seems more like an artifact of it not being popular than a feature of the protocol. If companies wanted to, they could just run native advertisement on Gemini just like they do elsewhere, just disguise the ad as regular news article and call it a day. Nothing stops them from putting banners on top of every page either or how about showing you an ad text before you are…

> That seems more like an artifact of it not being popular than a feature of the protocol. If companies wanted to, they could just run native advertisement on Gemini just like they do elsewhere, just disguise the ad as regular news article and call it a day. Nothing stops them from putting banners on top of every page either or how about showing you an ad text before you are allowed to visit the actual content? You c…

[deleted]

Re: Gemini is Solutionism

#219

Post by knowledge-clay »

hammyhavoc wrote: post #213
knowledge-clay wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not entirely sure what specific claim you’re looking for a source for

"Many of Gemini's adherents can be described broadly as left-anarchists or left-libertarians." Many? How many? Which capsule? Who? How were they identified? What were the numbers for centrists and people who swung the opposite way politically? How was it defined?

I don't want to speak for any individual, but it's pretty clear if you just go through the blogs/social media feeds of any of the major figures in the community. I didn't say it's the only perspective, but it's obviously prevalent

Re: Gemini is Solutionism

#220

Post by cxr »

ajioasfnokal wrote: post #217
cxr wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Gemini devs could have contributed to something else? Not the argument I'm making. I'm observing that others' energy that gets captured (or more accurately, spent; i.e., fails to be captured for use elsewhere) as a consequence of Gemini's gravity is wasted. It's necessary to make a distinction between Gemini's originators and people sucked into its orbit.

Still a pointless counterfactual.

There is very definitely a point.
Post reply on HN