[uamgeoalsk]

That's not up to you to say. If it solves the issues I have with the modern web, it is an actual solution for me. And if changing my browser or installing extensions does nothing to solve the issues I have with the modern web, then that's not even on the table.

A solution that works for a niche... works for that niche. It's not like your solution of switching your browser or installing extensions universally solves anything. I absolutely despise the user experience of Firefox (which you suggested elsewhere) and ads aren't even close to the top of the list of my issues with the modern web.

Once again, what annoys you may or may not annoy me and what annoys me may or may not annoy you.

[rglullis]

We are definitely talking about different things.

I'm talking about systemic issues in the modern web. Surveillance Capitalism. The control of mass communication platforms in the hands of a few corporations. The "attention economy" which makes creators more interested in collecting eyeballs than being rewarded by the quality of their work. Cultural homogenization driven by "the algorithm".

This is a lot bigger than "annoyances", and we are not going to solve any of this by acting like it all can be ignored and that all we need is to seek refuge in some ascetic application.

[uamgeoalsk]

Quoting you:

> Problem: you are looking for a way to get rid of the annoying issues of the modern www. What is the solution that solves this with the least amount of work?

Talk about shifting the goalposts! If the idea is to dismantle surveillance capitalism and the attention economy, sure, Gemini won't get us there. But neither will Firefox or browser extensions.

You're talking a major political, societal and cultural revolution here, and for that I don't think "least amount of work" is something to be aiming for.

[rglullis]

We vastly underestimate what could be done with a powerful browser. Ad blockers are just the tip of the iceberg.

A powerful browser could work, e.g, as the basis for any type of local-first application and we would solve 98% of the issues of social media networks by letting the browser in control of the functionality. [0] We have web browsers that can let you browse through Tor and we would get rid of data tracking. We can have a "good guy's version" of HolaVPN where people could still cooperate in the data proxying, but without the data selling part. Brave gets a lot of shit because of their crypto stuff, but if more people were seriously looking at their platform as a privacy-preserving opt-in monetization platform, we would be a far better place that we are nowadays.

We can not do any of that with an user agent that can do nothing but fetch and present text documents. We need an actual application platform.

[0]: https://raphael.lullis.net/a-plan-for-social-media-less-fedi...

[uamgeoalsk]

The issues you're talking about (surveillance capitalism, the attention economy) aren’t just browser problems. They're systemic societal and economic forces that go far beyond what a browser can fix. People accept surveillance and attention-hacking in every part of their lives: phones, smart TVs, credit cards, physical store visits. Thinking a better browser setup will meaningfully push back against that feels..... extremely optimistic at best. And that's me being quite charitable in my choice of words.

Also, I think it’s worth noting that you seem to be arguing against points no one here is actually making. Most people in this thread — myself included — aren’t claiming Gemini is a replacement for the entire web, or that it can dismantle surveillance capitalism. We’re just discussing a tool that works well for certain use cases.

As bayindirh pointed out in another reply to you:

> Again for the third and last time: I and other people replying to you didn't say Gemini is a replacement to HTTP. It's a neat little protocol which does some things well and used for some use cases, which happens to my main use cases for the thingy called web. > I have no qualms with your choices with views, but to try to portray your confirmation bias as what I and others say is stuffing words to others' mouth and is an insult to people's intelligence.

A conversation only works when people respond to what’s actually being said — not to imagined arguments. I’d really appreciate it if you could take a step back and engage with the points people are making, rather than framing everyone as advocating for something they’re not.