[airstrike]

IMHO the problem with Gemini is that "a subset of the web's functionality" is a very broad definition and it's hard to find consensus on whether that subset corresponds to 1% or 99% or something in the middle

I think the ideal project starts closer to the 99% but allows for graceful degradation down to 1% with little beyond a TUI, some colors and hyperlinks. That requires creating the right infrastructure for servers to offer a "stack" of content built something like (text + (hyperlinks + (images + (css + (video + (animations + (...)))). Clients can then be developed to handle whatever portion of that stack they want to.

This at least has the advantage of lowering switching costs for users who want to explore this "new web" while also allowing nerds like me to experience the web "the right way" with no distractions

However, the elephant in the room is that is is hard to imagine content creators would be in any way incentivized to think about their content in terms of that stack. Reddit just wants to force everyone to use their app, text-and-hyperlinks be damned. There's a reason RSS feeds have died.

[ilyt]

> IMHO the problem with Gemini is that "a subset of the web's functionality" is a very broad definition and it's hard to find consensus on whether that subset corresponds to 1% or 99% or something in the middle

The problem is that it consist of below 1%. Markdown (let's say some fancy variants with tables) + hyperlinks + multimedia gives you a lot. Cut multimedia and now not even "look what I made" blog makes sense on it. Cut on basic formatting features. and you can't even make it nice to read

[airstrike]

(Also from another recent HN discussion on Gemini I was left with the impression that the project's direction was defined in a pretty heavy-handed way, and I think its chilling effect has likely further diminished the chances Gemini has to succeed)