[tech] [spec] On extending gemini

What we have here, is a little cancel culture fun goin' on ;)

Let's play paint the asshats into a corner, shall we? You decide which
folks get loaded on the train to oblivion okay?

What I'm really upset about here, is the fact that the last bambi I
murdered for food got incinerated coz I couldn't get it down off the
mountaiin when my part of the mountain was engulfed by the fires. I
barely made it out myself, and were it not for a grower who knew I was
probably still on the mountain and completely unaware of the evacuation
orders, I would have been cooked myself.

So I come back, to what, this? Hey I took couple of glances at the list
and how the Gemini space has grown, along with the explosive adoption of
this experimental protocol and though to myself, "Man, it's still in the
spirit of the old NSFnet AUP - that's awesome.

Now I learn that someone is disrespecting me. This will not stand.

For the better part of two decades, my friends and colleagues on the
Gopher list have chided me for my refusal to accept proxies which permit
people to use HTTP protocol to access my gopherholes. Yet in that time,
I have NEVER come accross an administrator who outright refused to
accept my personal **choice** to disallow such proxies to invade my
network space.

It may be not in alignment with what others have wanted, in order to
repopularize the Gopher protocol, but I am, and always have been, a firm
believer that if you want to surf any protocol space, then you should
use the tools specifically designed for those purposes. I lamented the
removal of Gopher protocol from the **browsers*, and subesquently,
cogitated over why one would even bother having an http:// in the
address bar if that's ultimately going to be the only supported method
of browsing, all of this while Geocities went lights out and Angelfire
stopped showing up in SERPs... and people became the dopamine enslaved
property of private enterprise that butcherd and packaged and wrapped us
in celophane with a price tag as they placed us into inventory.

So here comes this new thang using TCP 1965 and I'm like, "Okay, kewl!
That's how we extend Gopher to a new beginning without damaging it or
crippling the backward compatibility of it, and we can leave port 70
alone, without losing what is so great about the protocol!"

>From the lessons learned in hindsight with respect to functionality and
utility, Gemini introduced a novel methodology that is, or at least was
until a couple of days ago, adventerous, experimental, with that
sensible utility and above all, not afraid to examine ideas and kick
them around a bit.

I was so excited when the first time Gemini space delivered to me an
almost discernable ANSI graphics file. I know most of you weren't even
born when that was a thing, long before most everyone here was privy to
ARPANET access. But it was a big deal for me.

And now, instead of simply discussing the virtues that include the pros
and cons, with demonstrated test cases, some latecomers are showing up,
drawing lines in the sand with their divisive sticks, and making threats
against the people who have put in the hard work and actually built
Gemini in the first place? How dare you?

To see the creators and original pioneers, so to speak, of the Gemini
protocol threatened and bullied like this? Especially the gentlemen
whose servers most everyone in Gemini space actually run themselves?

I dunno what Faceplant taught y'all, but if it was kneejerk reactions
are something you think is a noble thing then maybe you learned well,
and maybe you should just keep on Faceplanting and cutting off a few
more pounds of flesh for Google, and those who would refuse to respect
the wishes of server admins that don't want their services bastardized
by proxies delivering their content to people in HTTP space.

Now, threatening people like the authors of Amfora, and Jetforce, and
GLV-1.12556 (the first ever Gemini server)? Man that's not just bad
form, it's borderline ad homonym - a bannable offense in most treatises
of netiquette. The people I've just mentioned are the people who made
possible your very enjoyment of this novel service answering on TCP
1965, and you have the audacity to dangle deplatforming at them? Do you
wish to incite a Hatfield and McCoy like volley?

I don't think so. Chill, have a crumpet, watch an old episode of Lost in
Space, or listen to a a good death metal band live in concert, or a
string quartet performing Bach - whatever floats your boat and takes you
to that happy place of yours. If you don't, everyone will end up with
urine on their pant legs and that's stinky, to say the least.

Now, I've personally just discovered Lagrange, and I must say I'm
enamored of it. It fricken' rocks and at this time is my goto GUI client
for Gemini (and  Gopher). My fav is however,  still Elpher, and no, I'm
still a Vim guy, but that's okay. I've seen people rave about how kewl
other clients are, some I like, some I feel are lacking with respect to
my needs, and ALL of that is okay. I even prefer using some really
rickety old and unmaintained CLI based clients.

So let's talk not talk about ultimatums, but instead, about choices.
About user choices and about server admin choices and the rules they
adopt as their acceptable use policies. If a server admin says, "You
can't put up content on my servers with favicons - then fricken' don't
do that!

but don't be an asshat and say you'll ban the IPs of people using
clients that support a feature you can otherwise prohibit your
respective userbase as part of your terms of service, or threaten to
lobby for the deplatforming of well meaning, enthusiastic developers -
that's childish, that's juvenile, that's moronic.

That's as stupid as the crippleware that Tusky became when it violated
the philosophy of FOSS and user empowerment by hardcoding philosophy
into the client. You take away the empowerment of the user and you're no
better than Dorsey or Ellison or Zuckerberg or ABC... Don't be evil my
ass, that's exactly what ABC has become.

If a user says, I don't want favicons coz I'll get tracked (ridiculous
reasoning, but as valid as any other preference), then either use a
client that doesn't support that or find the dev of your fav client and
ask them if they'll integrate such configurability into their client
that allows you to hold the pickles and lettuce. Special orders really
don't upset them, and if you do it in the form of a patch or pull
request, even better!

You need to realize that you're speaking to creators - people who like
to build things, and more often than not, it actually makes their day
when they know someone likes their product enough to ask for a feature
to be added. That's actually flattery man!, Flatter them. Thank them.
Let them know, as a consumer of their products that you have things you
think would be beneficial.

That's how you affect change.

Or you can threaten. And cancel yourself.

The truth about tracking, is that you can't do anything about stopping a
provider from attempting to do so. You're in their syslogs, their
firewall logs, and they can fingerprint you from other remote resources.
No one, that I'm aware of here, is interested in tracking anyone in
Gemini space. That will not always be the case, and already there are
those who are in earnest betrayal of the trust of this community, and as
is typical, those people are the individuals that are clamoring the
loudest for control, slinging threats, and engaging in ad homonym.

I'm seeing all kinds of new ideas and proposals and questions put into
experimentation for feasibility and that's part of what Project Gemini
is about (for example:
gemini://gemini.circumlunar.space/~ew/2020/20201217-towards-a-proper-flightlog-4.gmi
), some fly, some don't. Some are adopted even though the use cases are
narrow while others are popular and detested by many - for those latter
cases, we have three choices, that of user configurability, that of
server administrative policy, and official canonization into the spec.
That third item of remediation is, of course, the weakest of all
remedies when a popular functionality is the topic. Anyone can fork an
existing project and launch a death star. Don't kid yourselves, and it
will happen. It already has actually, there's a Richard Cranium out
there in Gemini space disrespecting robots.txt - and that's a very real,
clear, and imminent threat to privacy.


I hope that helps :)

-- 
Bradley D. Thornton
Manager Network Services
http://NorthTech.US
TEL: +1.310.421.8268

---

Previous in thread (5 of 32): 🗣️ mieum (mieum (a) namu.blue)

Next in thread (7 of 32): 🗣️ Miguel de Luis Espinosa (enteka (a) fastmail.com)

View entire thread.