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.
You must log in or register to comment.
You can edit Wikipedia when something is wrong. That’s kinda like the whole point of the site
Not to badmouth Wikipedia. But things like this are still mildly infuriating.
You seem pretty knowledgeable on the subject, go ahead and edit it! Seriously. I mean that with zero snark.
Someone without your skillset is going to read that section and not know any better. Just delete it and explain why. I’ve made hundreds of edits over the years and I’ve never even made an account.
My encouragement here is real. We rely on each other’s expertise. People like me who know nothing of the Gemini protocol need people like you to keep this page accurate.
Now for a tiny bit of playful snark: I am mildly infuriated that you noticed this yesterday and still haven’t changed it. Do it! Be the change you wish to see!
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…
Daniel Stenberg isn’t a random person, he is the lead developer of
curlwhich 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.
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.
“… used to transfer resource heavy HTML pages.” Uhm, Gemini does not use HTML – that’s the freaking point.
I can’t be arsed to try to edit the Wiki page but this is just entirely wrong.
