Thanks, this is an important question.
In the server world I agree you would just provide a bridge, much like IPFS have done with Cloudflare, and this is a little simpler, but not that much really.
The downside is that you are now using servers again, with all their vulnerabilities and difficulties. I’d rather not go far into this in this topic (happy to do so elsewhere), but one of they key points about SAFE Network is that it eliminates servers as we know them, and this is one of the reasons it offers data security, privacy and above all greater ease of adoption and use: no server to buy / install / maintain, no pod service provider to trust / get taken over / switch business models, no bottlenecks vulnerable to overload / hacking / surveillance / DDoS etc.
From the user’s point of view not having a server involved is more secure, easier to adopt and to pay for (no subscription - you pay to store when you upload, no domain renewals, no need to ever switch service providers or migrate data).
Also URIs are permanent unless the owner chooses to redirect them, but even then the old versions remain accessible so as a culture we get a permanent web.
If you keep the traditional server in the loop, you lose those benefits. I don’t doubt people will also support that approach (servers as a gateway) but I see it as more of a problem than a solution because users may think they have the benefits of SAFE, when in fact very important features have been lost.
If you want to go deeper maybe we can spin off a new topic or chat elsewhere, and link to that here?