I initially found this project kind of fun, almost like an art project. But realistically, it’s easier to just use the web. Nothing about the web implies heaviness. If you want a minimalist website with no photos, you are absolutely free to make one, and you’re also free to use e.g. Lynx/w3m/elinks browsers to browse the modern web or the subset that renders well on it. Way, way more websites will look awesome on these in text mode than the content available on Gemini.
Yes, except that heaviness is allowed, and lightness is opt-in.
> you’re also free to use e.g. Lynx/w3m/elinks browsers to browse the modern web or the subset that renders well on it.
Yes, except you have no way of known if and when something you want to search for will work on these. Whereas anything on Gemini will work on Gemini.
Ultimately to some extent it's an anti-bloat guarantee. Yes not all of the normal web has bloat, but that's not the point. To use a Genetic Programming analogy, it's the difference between not even considering program trees beyond a certain small size, vs having elaborate strategies for countering the inevitable program of bloat once you start dealing with programs of sufficient interest and complexity. But if you want to end up with programs that only consist of less than 10 instructions that you can reason with easily, then perhaps a "small world of small programs" is exactly what you want. And the natural content that fits this "small programs / small world" guarantee is personal thoughts and atomic websites. Which makes for an interesting webspace.
I’ve recently started hosting a Gemini capsule for myself, and I’m having a lot of fun with it. Browsing Geminispace has been very refreshing.
Kinda bummed that other threads here are focusing on how Gemini does not replace certain things we can do on the web like it’s a failure. I’d say it’s fine and good that the two have different capabilities!
In my experience, Gemini does not aspire to replace the web, but just to add a different internet experience for those who want the option.
I shut down my server the other day after people on HN were sharing horror stories about runaway bandwidth bills. I could not find a good (easy) way to ensure that my gemini server shuts down if hit by DDOS. I want to set it up again, but need to find some place to host it that has a guaranteed maximum bandwidth cost.
Just run it on Hetzner. You get 20TB egress monthly per server, which should cover a lot of DDOS activity.
You could also probably create a script to run on another machine that uses the Hetzner (or other cloud provider) API to monitor usage and shut off your server if it exceeds usage limits.
It was running on Hetzner, but I did not like the idea of having to rely on some script to try to avoid a disaster as opposed to just be able to set a limit (that they do not support?).
* Even if the risk is obviously very low, the value of running my gemlog isn't great. Not really worth any non-zero risk of significant costs.
It is rather easy to have one running alongside the other and the gemtext syntax is such it is quite easy to make automatic converters. Did you encounter issues maintaining both?
I mean I truly believe anyone can do small websites using HTML standards so for the actual content producer Gemini doesn't have much appeal. On the other hand using Gemini provide the users/visitors a guarantee they will not end up following a link and ending up in a bloated, privacy and ad nightmare. So I think it is sane to offer that even if you believe in small regular web.
When I was younger, I thought Gemini was very cool mostly because it was an alternative protocol to the mainstream. It made me feel very inner-circle in the development world, for some reason.
As I've grown, I've come to learn I'm a very visual learner. I've learned that "clear is kind", and for many, image and text are both important, but many images have a way of conveying what is difficult to express in words without being overly verbose.
I agree, illustrations are an essential part, especially when teaching something.
Some clients have a setting to inline images, or/and a shortcut to do so on the current page. Most clients can display images when the user follows a link to one. So images are quite useless as decorations (as most will probably not see them) but if an article contains useful images most users will be able to see those.
I found it funny that they propagate the no image thing and the screenshots of android clients showcased some sites that did ascii art and other ways to "fake images".
The Gemini protocol does not mandate lack of images. It is simply left up to the implementation to decide how (or whether) to display those.
One of the most popular Gemini browsers, Lagrange, shows images inline once downloaded. But you need to click their link to ensure you want to see the content first.
E.g., view this in lagrange to see what I mean: gemini://8by3.net/~xkcd/
Gemini has images, just by default the gemini protocol is designed to not download and inline them, though many gemini browsers allow auto inlining of images. There is no specific line format for them, they are just another link line pointing to an image.
Only in the same way the nano editor should rename itself to Stable Diffusion because of Google naming their image generator nano-banana.
Gemini predated Google's Gemini by many years and was a sufficiently known project. Google hijacking known project names is a thing which keeps happening for some reason.
The difference is you can actually access it today without fear of being thrown back in 2025 by doing such a simple thing as following a link on the same protocol.
Similar to the indie web/slow web movements, it's genuinely a shame that these qualities are essentially anathema to the business model of so much of modern social media.
Plus glad to see it call "Gemini" instead of "Gemini Protocol", too bad google stole the name after Gemini was a thing. And unlike gopher, Gemini renders fine on Cell Phones.
As I mentioned before in these threads, I find Gemini far easier to maintain then anything associated with html. It is very simple. I had moved my WEB space to Gemini on sdf* a while ago and my old WEB space points to my Gemini Site.
FWIW, google forced Gemini to change its URLs, it is now:
I initially found this project kind of fun, almost like an art project. But realistically, it’s easier to just use the web. Nothing about the web implies heaviness. If you want a minimalist website with no photos, you are absolutely free to make one, and you’re also free to use e.g. Lynx/w3m/elinks browsers to browse the modern web or the subset that renders well on it. Way, way more websites will look awesome on these in text mode than the content available on Gemini.
> Nothing about the web implies heaviness
Yes, except that heaviness is allowed, and lightness is opt-in.
> you’re also free to use e.g. Lynx/w3m/elinks browsers to browse the modern web or the subset that renders well on it.
Yes, except you have no way of known if and when something you want to search for will work on these. Whereas anything on Gemini will work on Gemini.
Ultimately to some extent it's an anti-bloat guarantee. Yes not all of the normal web has bloat, but that's not the point. To use a Genetic Programming analogy, it's the difference between not even considering program trees beyond a certain small size, vs having elaborate strategies for countering the inevitable program of bloat once you start dealing with programs of sufficient interest and complexity. But if you want to end up with programs that only consist of less than 10 instructions that you can reason with easily, then perhaps a "small world of small programs" is exactly what you want. And the natural content that fits this "small programs / small world" guarantee is personal thoughts and atomic websites. Which makes for an interesting webspace.
I’ve recently started hosting a Gemini capsule for myself, and I’m having a lot of fun with it. Browsing Geminispace has been very refreshing.
Kinda bummed that other threads here are focusing on how Gemini does not replace certain things we can do on the web like it’s a failure. I’d say it’s fine and good that the two have different capabilities!
In my experience, Gemini does not aspire to replace the web, but just to add a different internet experience for those who want the option.
(As you can tell, I still browse the web.)
A month or so ago, I migrated all of my Gemini posts to my blog and shut down my Gemini server.
For me there wasn't really a point to the effort. I'm glad the protocol exists and that people are enjoying it, but I'll stick to HTML.
I shut down my server the other day after people on HN were sharing horror stories about runaway bandwidth bills. I could not find a good (easy) way to ensure that my gemini server shuts down if hit by DDOS. I want to set it up again, but need to find some place to host it that has a guaranteed maximum bandwidth cost.
Just run it on Hetzner. You get 20TB egress monthly per server, which should cover a lot of DDOS activity.
You could also probably create a script to run on another machine that uses the Hetzner (or other cloud provider) API to monitor usage and shut off your server if it exceeds usage limits.
It was running on Hetzner, but I did not like the idea of having to rely on some script to try to avoid a disaster as opposed to just be able to set a limit (that they do not support?).
* Even if the risk is obviously very low, the value of running my gemlog isn't great. Not really worth any non-zero risk of significant costs.
sourcehut offers gemini hosting via your sr.ht repos from what I understand.
haven't tried it myself yet, though I've been meaning to...
It is rather easy to have one running alongside the other and the gemtext syntax is such it is quite easy to make automatic converters. Did you encounter issues maintaining both?
I mean I truly believe anyone can do small websites using HTML standards so for the actual content producer Gemini doesn't have much appeal. On the other hand using Gemini provide the users/visitors a guarantee they will not end up following a link and ending up in a bloated, privacy and ad nightmare. So I think it is sane to offer that even if you believe in small regular web.
I no longer use a VPS and just have my static site hosted on a free provider.
The lack of images made Gemini unworkable for me. I know it's by design, but illustrations are an important part of my writing.
It's more sensible to build the sort of websites I want to see, and to use Reader Mode for other people's websites.
When I was younger, I thought Gemini was very cool mostly because it was an alternative protocol to the mainstream. It made me feel very inner-circle in the development world, for some reason.
As I've grown, I've come to learn I'm a very visual learner. I've learned that "clear is kind", and for many, image and text are both important, but many images have a way of conveying what is difficult to express in words without being overly verbose.
I agree, illustrations are an essential part, especially when teaching something.
In what context did you hear "clear is kind"? That expression is new to me
Some clients have a setting to inline images, or/and a shortcut to do so on the current page. Most clients can display images when the user follows a link to one. So images are quite useless as decorations (as most will probably not see them) but if an article contains useful images most users will be able to see those.
I found it funny that they propagate the no image thing and the screenshots of android clients showcased some sites that did ascii art and other ways to "fake images".
Yeah - images are an integral part of the www.
The Gemini protocol does not mandate lack of images. It is simply left up to the implementation to decide how (or whether) to display those.
One of the most popular Gemini browsers, Lagrange, shows images inline once downloaded. But you need to click their link to ensure you want to see the content first.
E.g., view this in lagrange to see what I mean: gemini://8by3.net/~xkcd/
I like a significant amount of sites I can find through https://marginalia-search.com/explore
I don't think most of the ones I like would be possible to implement in gemini because it doesn't have images.
Gemini has images, just by default the gemini protocol is designed to not download and inline them, though many gemini browsers allow auto inlining of images. There is no specific line format for them, they are just another link line pointing to an image.
This Gemini protocol discussed back in 2021, and had 3 points, but no comments on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29005442
Also, they should rename it to bard:// (just kidding)
Only in the same way the nano editor should rename itself to Stable Diffusion because of Google naming their image generator nano-banana.
Gemini predated Google's Gemini by many years and was a sufficiently known project. Google hijacking known project names is a thing which keeps happening for some reason.
"A look at the Gemini protocol: a brutally simple alternative to the web"
was published 5 years ago with 347 comments
Never heard of it, but what's the difference with the web in 1994?
The difference is you can actually access it today without fear of being thrown back in 2025 by doing such a simple thing as following a link on the same protocol.
I believe that's the entire point.
TLS. Beyond that, as little as possible is basically the goal.
Gemini is a part of the “small internet” movement: https://www.linuxpromagazine.com/index.php/Issues/2021/245/T...
But but but... how would this would allow me to run arbitrary client-side code in order to snoop on users, mine shitcoins or enforce DRM?!
> Simpler
> Human Scale
> Distraction Free
> Privacy Protecting
Similar to the indie web/slow web movements, it's genuinely a shame that these qualities are essentially anathema to the business model of so much of modern social media.
[dead]
[flagged]
You’re so glad that, rather than discuss it, you redirect the conversation back to Google’s Gemini?
Plus glad to see it call "Gemini" instead of "Gemini Protocol", too bad google stole the name after Gemini was a thing. And unlike gopher, Gemini renders fine on Cell Phones.
As I mentioned before in these threads, I find Gemini far easier to maintain then anything associated with html. It is very simple. I had moved my WEB space to Gemini on sdf* a while ago and my old WEB space points to my Gemini Site.
FWIW, google forced Gemini to change its URLs, it is now:
https://geminiprotocol.net/docs/gemtext-specification.gmi
and the FAQ, the article has the old URL
https://geminiprotocol.net/docs/faq.gmi
* sdf:
https://wiki.sdf.org/doku.php?id=gemini_site_setup_and_hosti...
List of clients are here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gemini_(protocol)
> too bad google stole the name after Gemini was a thing
Gemini was one of the 48 constellations described by the 2nd century AD astronomer Ptolemy
From the Wiki page the formatting capabilities to me look too limiting. How about tables? Are nested (numbered/bulleted) lists a thing?