slow in performance (short-lived bursty TCP connections) if it was ever used to transfer resource heavy HTML pages.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gemini_(protocol)#Reception

Well duh. A bicycle is also overloaded and cumbersome, if it was ever used as a car.

I mean, use your brain a little, will ya?

Edit: to clarify, the whole point of the gemini web is to avoid heavy and complex site layouts. Automatic embedding and stuff just doesn’t happen there. Also doesn’t use HTML. So, short-lived and bursty connections, are a ideal fit.

  • hendrik@palaver.p3x.deEnglish
    41·
    15 hours ago

    Lmao. Just add a big RELEVANCE? I mean why do they cite 3 random people’s opinion on random aspects of the entire concept? It’s supposed to be an encyclopedia, not a blog post…

    • NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
      6·
      5 hours ago

      Daniel Stenberg isn’t a random person, he is the lead developer of curl which is the backbone of quite literally every networked device on the planet and outside of it. The curl project supports a very large number of protocols. His opinion does mean something here.

      That said, this does need to be clarified in the Wikipedia page, and it’s still possible that his criticism isn’t actually relevant in the end. I’m still reading about this.

      • hendrik@palaver.p3x.deEnglish
        3·
        4 hours ago

        Sure. I should have phrased it a bit differently. My point was more or less, why is the curl developer’s review of the performance in a hypothetical scenario a decisive factor here… That feels like super random information. Same with the other two people. I’m fairly sure this is true and all… There’s just no context given, nor is there a connection being made between the statements and the rest of the content of the article.