#corlaezI just catched up with the conversations about gemini. @xuid, I haved digged into gopher or that retrocomputing website
#corlaezI think that Gemini is very explicitly not trying to replace the web, just be something else.
#corlaezAnd the constrains of gemtext, while limiting, I find they allow me to focus in the content and lifts some of the weight from publishing something up. Just a tiny bit of formating
#corlaezlike the lightest ++ one could do to plain text
#corlaez@xuid, I *haven't* digged into gopher or that retrocomputing website
#corlaezAnd I think regarding the lack of extension and constraints... It just wants to be simple and stay simple
#corlaezextensible would open the door to complexity
#corlaezThe limitations on gemtext are also based on permacomputing and privacy I believe
#corlaezbecause even if you make the tinyest, simplest HTML page, chances are the browser has all sorts of gadgets running: js engine, APIs, fingerprinting, stores, etc
#corlaezAnd the protocol allows service providers to siphon a lot of data about you
#corlaezI know the indie web is ideally about owning your website, and you can control how simple your responses are
sp1ff joined the channel
#corlaezbut in practical terms, there is always service providers, even indie ones like known and others
#corlaezand the thought is that by removing certain capabilities from the protocol and sealing it up you have better guarantees about privacy and such
#corlaezsimple protocols and clients means implementations can proliferate and are easier to inspect as well, or write your own.
#corlaezwhile browsers are impossible lovecraftian messes.
#corlaezThe one thing about gemini which I just go rogue about is requiring TLS always. I think it is kind of a blunder. For hosting a service over the internet, big YES. but otherwise I can see practical applications of the TLS-less version of gemini being useful
#corlaezin fact I use some myself, as long as they are not exposed to the internet I believe it is fine.
#corlaeza critique to gemini (the biggest change since that is that the protocol and gemtext are now separate specs and I think they have made them a little more specific and less ambiguous)
#corlaezI don't think the closing the connection critique is fair, the protocol is oriented to the gemtext or file transfer use and gemtext explicitly won't initiate a request when rendering the page (unlike html)
#corlaezPerhaps, I am dumb and don't know how expensive the connection opening really is, but if you transfer files and pages that take you enough seconds to read or observe
#corlaezperhaps that makes reconnection infrecuent enough to be justifiable. (so long form blog better than one liner tweets)
#[tantek]^ corlaez sounds like you've thought about this enough to write all that up into a blog post on your own site!
#aaronpkotherwise it will be lost to the winds of the chat
#carrvo[d]In my effort to cleanup and redeploy, I have, for reasons I can elabourate, the pattern `https://example.com/public/user/myuser/profile/index` and I am wondering if there is a nicer term to see than "public" (the rest will remain as is)? Any clever suggestions?
#carrvo[d]I can add later a shorter path that resolves (in the background) to what I am configuring now. But, yes, I noticed how long it has gotten by reasons I can elabourate if you wish.
#osteophageThanks! I think I have two karma records now, though, since I have a different display name to my username. Or does Loqi know how to match the two?