Kevin Boone: The Gemini Protocol in 2026: growing, but still not setting the Internet aflame
kevinboone.me
The Gemini protocol has been around for over five years, but the world-wide web remains broken. This articles reviews what’s changed for the better over the last five years – and what hasn’t.

With surveillance capitalism reaching it’s peak in 2026/2027, is getting out the Web the only way for the privacy inclined user?

Will Gemini (or cousins) go the way of Linux? Or is it foverer condemned to go the way of Hurd

  • SocialistVibes01@lemmy.mlOP
    3·
    9 hours ago

    Let me mince this to you in a more palatable bit but with Marxist praxis: working together under the same old status quo is exactly what put all of us in the cage. There won’t be a magical popular new protocol being birthed from the void: it’s precisely the myriad of options that will allow the best one to be battle tested (in politics, we call this the two-line struggle although there are more than two lines in dispute) and gain traction. Idealism is expecting that the same old strategy of putting up with what exists right now for the lack of a sure win strategy will defeat the greed corporations controlling the current Web, the current social complacency, the gerrymandering, the two parties system, the capitalism.

    • ZWQbpkzl [none/use name]@hexbear.netEnglish
      1·
      3 hours ago

      You’re being delusional if you think the Gemini protocol is any sort of socialist praxis. Even the author of the article acknowledges that its a bit of an ivory tower and embraces its elitism.

      Gemini’s designers planned for it to be of interest to academics and enthusiasts, and completely incapable of commercial exploitation. We – academics and enthusiasts – made the web.

      I welcome a place where academics and continue their discussions with some isolation from capitalism but Gemini will never be a protocol of the proletariat and therefore will have limited adoption.

    • Melobol@lemmy.ml
      3·
      12 hours ago

      I never said use the same status quo. Gather in bigger groups. You are being conquered by being divided.
      My problem is the miniscule groups. Just look at the other comments. No one said: “yes, this is the future!”.
      Ivory tower.

      • SocialistVibes01@lemmy.mlOP
        2·
        12 hours ago

        That’s not really how it works. Greater groups allow some atrocities like the DSA calling themselves socialist and deviate to the status quo. Unity in theory and action is a necessity before greater numbers.

        • Melobol@lemmy.ml
          3·
          12 hours ago

          Do you even realize what you are doing?

          Insulting the conversation partner just because you can.
          Avoiding and not even acknowledging talking points.
          Preaching propaganda, name dropping.
          You are not showing anything that’s positive and actually open to discussion. Very demagogue.

          And you made it sure I never going to pay attention to this project again.

          • SocialistVibes01@lemmy.mlOP
            2·
            9 hours ago

            Are you liberal leaning or not? Is this a insult to you? If so, I’m clapping to that and you’re not really a liberal.

            You’re the one putting me in an Ivory Tower when my question is whether that tool is the right one to be adopted and be made known to others and I made myself clear that I believe the weaponized WWW is a tool for the status quo.

            You can’t game the system, that’s a liberal belief proven wrong through the History since the Social Democrats in Germany.

            Heck, I just said the old BBS and IRC made a better interconnecting model for people based on the genuine desire of sharing something, a very Socialist thing to do. There is, a positive thing to me, is it to you?

            But we can’t connect on your terms because I believe you are in the wrong and a correction would be beneficial to you.

            But the neoliberal consensus of conformity makes the sleeping people think that a confrontation of ideas is a bad thing and the middle ground is the desirable choice.

            Guess what? The middle ground to accommodate ideas that are beneficial to the ruling class isn’t a middle ground at all. The power unbalance is too great to ignore.

            And your take on what’s more comfortable works for them. Because they control the dopamine and serotonin intake cycles though the screens on the WWW. And you’re just reproducing that opinion because in any epoch the ruling ideas are the ideias of the ruling class. While I’m all for a paradigm shift.

            As for your last claim of demagogy, that and populism are just words historically meant to prevent exposition of an idea siding with the working class’ need of being more involved in politics. Sometimes “tankie” is the one used. Alas, it’s par for the course.

            Ah, yes: on the last line, I’m not even advocating for Gemini per si. You do you.