The #Gemini protocol seen by this #HTTP client person daniel.haxx.se/blog/2023/05/28… -
tldr: I think they have some improvements left to do.
This entry was edited (1 year ago)
⇧
The #Gemini protocol seen by this #HTTP client person daniel.haxx.se/blog/2023/05/28… -
tldr: I think they have some improvements left to do.
nytpu
in reply to daniel:// stenberg:// • • •> Its quite similar to going back to GOPHER.
It should be noted that Gemini was literally intended as “Gopher but with TLS and more palatable markup” rather than anything related to modern HTTP.
However your other points not related to the markup/visual style are perfectly accurate IMHO
nytpu
in reply to nytpu • • •daniel:// stenberg://
in reply to nytpu • • •daniel:// stenberg://
Unknown parent • • •@tomasino @nytpu in fact, using plain old CA is the *least* complex and most established system and way more secure than TOFU...
Thanks for the comment. I fully understand that my views and opinions may not align very well with many of the people in and fans of the Gemini project.
dressupgeekout 🦓
in reply to daniel:// stenberg:// • • •I love Gemini to bits, and I host my own server and everything, but the fact TLS is a REQUIREMENT from Day 1 has kinda bugged me to be honest.
If I were to write my own Gemini client (which is supposed to be 'easy') then I'd have to have all the crypto bits in place before I can ensure my code is on the right track to verify I can even make a proper connection at all. I guess I owe it to myself to be better acquainted with TLS in practice, but, meh, I wish I didn't NEED to.
Also, Gemini feels like a PERFECT FIT for retro computers to disseminate and consume information over the internet... except the TLS bits make it out of reach! I would love to be able to surf across Gemini on my old Atari ST, but with only 1 MB of RAM and a 8MHz CPU I'm not sure how feasible that is without some kind of proxy -- which you correctly state in your article has problems in itself.
Martin Bagge / brother
in reply to daniel:// stenberg:// • • •daniel:// stenberg://
in reply to daniel:// stenberg:// • • •The Gemini protocol seen by this HTTP client person | Hacker News
news.ycombinator.comartyr3
in reply to daniel:// stenberg:// • • •100% of web boomers agree...
Gemini is useless.
Just like they said Linux was in 1995.
"It doesnt follow the correct standards. It doesnt cow tow to the approproate bureacratic organizations."
Youre totally right. You should ignore it, and GTFO.
daniel:// stenberg://
in reply to artyr3 • • •artyr3
in reply to daniel:// stenberg:// • • •MCMic
in reply to daniel:// stenberg:// • • •But you take an example where you have data and you do not know its encoding, then it's useless data, no? If you have to guess encoding it means a non-utf8 uri would not have helped, the guessing would have happenned on server side?
daniel:// stenberg://
in reply to MCMic • • •MCMic
in reply to daniel:// stenberg:// • • •daniel:// stenberg://
in reply to MCMic • • •HD Moore
in reply to daniel:// stenberg:// • • •daniel:// stenberg://
in reply to HD Moore • • •@hdm someone proposes we should support Gemini in curl. I take the time to read and understand the protocol (to understand that task better). As a consequence, I find flaws and errors in the spec and write them down in a blog post.
I read specs and write network code all day, every day.
HD Moore
in reply to daniel:// stenberg:// • • •LisPi
in reply to daniel:// stenberg:// • • •