Gemini is a little gem
The problem isn't Gemini, the problem is Gemini marketing.<p>Gemini enthusiasts (or, at least the ones I've seen posts from, most notably ddevault) market Gemini as a replacement (edit: in whole or part, it doesn't matter, the argument is the same) for "the web".<p>Then, when you point out that Gemini has basically none of the features of "the web" (and is incapable of supporting the vast majority of its content, and even the vast majority of its <i>good</i> content), they then say that "oh, you don't <i>need</i> those features, inline images are an anti-pattern!" Or something.<p>The problem isn't that Gemini has no features, the problem is that it's being marketed as a replacement (edit: in whole or in non-trivial part, it doesn't matter) for the web, which is it <i>clearly</i> unsuited for.<p>Gemini is bad at conveying almost any content except text, which also means that it's unsuitable for scientific papers, education, browser games, social media (even for less "social" social media, like Reddit and HN, where you could be exchanging purely technical information), web services, web applications (disclaimer: I think that web applications are generally slow and dumb, but I'd much rather use HN from my browser than download a dedicated .deb just for it), wikis and encyclopedias, Stack Overflow, search engines, and various other web things that your life would be significantly less great without.<p>So, by all means, use Gemini. Just don't say that it's a "replacement" for the web (edit: not even part of it - Gemini does so little that the comparison is entirely invalid), or "better" than the web (or associated technology). It is its own thing with its own community that is entirely complementary to the web, and nothing more.<p>If <i>you</i> want to go back to the internet dark ages without Wikipedia, Google, Stack Overflow, Compiler Explorer, and Shadertoy, have fun - just don't drag me down with you.