←back to thread

Project Gemini

(geminiprotocol.net)
327 points andsoitis | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.198s | source
Show context
userbinator ◴[] No.45961391[source]
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 modern browser.

Never underestimate interoperability.

replies(6): >>45961518 #>>45961852 #>>45962392 #>>45962596 #>>45964678 #>>45970721 #
tpoacher ◴[] No.45961518[source]
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.

replies(3): >>45961869 #>>45961888 #>>45962975 #
int_19h ◴[] No.45961869[source]
The different experience is largely thanks to different content, not different protocol. The protocol just serves a gatekeeping role to keep the community small enough.
replies(1): >>45976400 #
tpoacher ◴[] No.45976400[source]
That's true to some extent, but it's also true that the side-effect of the protocol is that it results in a very different community.

It's a bit like saying that the camping experience has nothing to do with not having access to electricity. Well, true but also not true.

replies(1): >>45985804 #
1. int_19h ◴[] No.45985804[source]
I think that the specifics of the protocol don't actually matter all that much. What matters is that it's sufficiently unappealing to filter out most potential users; you genuinely have to feel strongly about the state of the web etc to spend a lot of time on Gemini.

In that sense, I suspect that OP is right and they could have achieved the same on top of, say, HTML 2 (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1866).