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

51–60 of 227 posts

Re: Gemini is Solutionism

#51

Post by ryukafalz »

I don't often use Gemini, but here's the thing that I think this misses and that Gemini does well:

If I click a link in a Gemini browser, I know for sure that it will not start loading and running a ton of resource-intensive scripts. I know that it will not start autoplaying audio or video. I know that it will display fine in plain text, every single time - so it works in my terminal, in Emacs, on my phone, etc. And I know it will be fast.

Yes, I can use NoScript, uBlock Origin with comprehensive lists, etc. and start to approach that level of simplicity... but every other link I click will likely be broken in weird and wonderful ways. In Gemini, they all work (provided the page still exists, of course). I think there's some value in that.

Re: Gemini is Solutionism

#53

Post by daveevad »

yardstick wrote: post #36
latch wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OP is correct. HTTP/1.1 requires the Host header (1). The client must send it, and the server must reject requests without it. Some implementations simply don't follow the standard. For example, you can test this on twitter.com, which appears to be correctly following the specification. (1) https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7230#section-5.4

OP is only correct if using HTTP/1.1 and not 1.0 or 0.9. I’ve done plenty of telnets using 1.0 without the need for the host header. Just depends on if the server is a dedicated server or running a bunch of hosts (and the default host isn’t the one you want).

  Connected to motherfuckingwebsite.com.

  Escape character is '^]'.

  GET / HTTP/1.0

  HTTP/1.0 200 OK

Re: Gemini is Solutionism

#54

Post by viraptor »

throwawayboise wrote: post #5
sergiotapia wrote: post #2

Nah - Gemini FORCES people to use a very strict small surface area. Building on top of existing tech you would need to trust people to do it right, and that ain't something you trust.

Yep there would always be the temptation to say "well I need just one cookie" or "well I need just this bit of javascript" Gemini doesn't give you those options.

I think it's only a matter of time before Gemini does that. The moment it's actually used by people who aren't interested in the underlying tech, someone will fork the browser and include either video support or scripting of some kind. Or they'll say, maybe it should display PDFs too - and that will bring the JS engine in as well.

Re: Gemini is Solutionism

#56

Post by wnolens »

sergiotapia wrote: post #2

Nah - Gemini FORCES people to use a very strict small surface area. Building on top of existing tech you would need to trust people to do it right, and that ain't something you trust.

Right.

I had never heard about Gemini before this thread. So after skimming, I read the Gemini FAQ, then went back and re-read the article.

The author completely missed the point and began a technical discussion.

Kind of similar to that dev you work with that gets psyched about a solution, and doesn't stop to ask "do we need to solve this problem?"

Re: Gemini is Solutionism

#57

Post by RodgerTheGreat »

It seems to me like the author is experiencing how the web itself feels if you try to step off the browser upgrade treadmill or use an older computer. A website refuses HTTP and you don't have recent TLS certs? Tough luck, pal. This page dynamically loads content with JS? Buzz off, guy using Links. Can't pay your online bills or join a video chat because you aren't using Chrome? Get with the times, grandma, and surrender to the new flesh!

There will come a point- and for some things we're already past it- where there is exactly one viable web browser, and it is controlled by a company that sells ads. This is why Gemini exists.

Re: Gemini is Solutionism

#58

Post by duxup »

square_usual wrote: post #50

I agree with the author, but from a different direction. The Gemini community has this ethos that stripping away all the styling etc. makes the internet about "content" again. Setting aside for the moment that the definition that content = text is unnecessarily reductive (and insulting to other forms of content - is a beautiful animation not content? is an interactive map of a country showing how covid is affecting i…

The great thing about the web when I came along with was all the character, good, bad or otherwise that personal sites, even some corporate sites that people build had.

GeoCities came along and things could be ugly, but it felt genuine.

Even just background choices or ugly gifs…

I miss the personal wonkiness and folks not afraid to make ugly sites.

The race to ultra minimalism feels as cold as a Facebook profile, maybe more.

Re: Gemini is Solutionism

#59

Post by lvass »

The author isn't considering how lack of features can be useful. Just like the lack of gotos in a language allows you to make many assumptions about a program, Gemini lacks just about every mechanism for fingerprinting and tracking that's become an inherent risk of accessing web pages, hugely reducing surface area for attacks.

Even lack of styling with every page looking about the same can be considered a feature, everything looks familiar and we aren't inconvenienced by bad design decisions.

Re: Gemini is Solutionism

#60

Post by rPlayer6554 »

sergiotapia wrote: post #2

Nah - Gemini FORCES people to use a very strict small surface area. Building on top of existing tech you would need to trust people to do it right, and that ain't something you trust.

I think this is an interesting argument, but my question is why can't it just work in the browser I have with an extension? No matter what people say, modern websites with JS and HTML and such aren't going away. I can't just stick my head in the sand and only use this special browser since I use too many things that make my life better in meaningful ways that use the traditional protocols. Many of them wouldn't be possible using Gemini (I assume, I haven't dug in much).

That means if I want to use Gemini I would have to add a whole other browser to my computer and switch between the two while browsing which is super annoying. At that point I just won't bother.

What is the end game here? Do they want all websites to switch to Gemini? Do they expect people to use two browsers? Are they saying that anything that can't be built on Gemini should be a Native App?

Post reply on HN