4 ms·

Why in the world do you think DNS is the issue? If you're worried about that, look at Namecoin. This is a solved problem. The issue is that the government, giv

by wyager 10y ago

Why in the world do you think DNS is the issue? If you're worried about that, look at Namecoin. This is a solved problem. The issue is that the government, given sufficient regulatory power, will start doing things like banning porn or "extreme" political views. This is not hypothetical; it has already happened in the UK.

falcolas 10y ago
Let me paraphrase your own comment in response. The issue is that the corporations, given no regulation, will start doing things like banning porn or "extreme" political views. This is not hypothetical; it has already happened on Facebook. Censorship is not purely the domain of the government. At least there are checks and balances on a government's power (as ineffectual and slow as they may be); save for the morals of a company's leadership team, there are no checks or balances on a corporations actions without regulation. > look at Namecoin. This is a solved problem. Most excellent. How do I give my mother a namecoin domain and have her visit their webpages? If it involves "download X from namecoin.org", you're already in trouble, since that's already relying on DNS. If we get past that, and the namecoin wallet needs to bootstrap itself - does it also use DNS? If it involves changing system configurations, period, it also won't work, since I've taught my mother to never to do that (she lacks the technical knowledge to add nuance to the restriction).
- wyager 10y ago
  ISPs could have already tried to ban porn, but they haven't. Facebook isn't an ISP. Just because a single company has content restrictions doesn't mean every company in the world will do the same. Namecoin doesn't need DNS to bootstrap. Why would you need to download something? Do you need to download a DNS client for your grandmother? If such a system becomes adopted, OSs include it in the background, like DNS. If you can't be bothered to read the namecoin paper, look at the great success of products like Google DNS. Nothing fancy, but an excellent privately run DNS.
  - falcolas 10y ago
    > ISPs could have already tried to ban porn, but they haven't. Yes, they have. For one example when AOL was both an ISP and service provider, you bet your butt they blocked porn and objectionable speech. > Facebook isn't an ISP. I'm not sure I agree with this - the Free Basics program sure quacks like an ISP duck. > Just because a single company has content restrictions doesn't mean every company in the world will do the same. With no legal restrictions, what stops them? > OSs include it in the background, like DNS. I'm of the opinion that this describes a future that will never exist. Microsoft, Apple, and Linux distros have no compelling reason to include namecoin support by default, and likely never will. Especially since there is limited to no support for failover or localization of name->IP lookups. Even the lack of support for legal disputes over trademarked domains (for example, does amazon.bit actually go to the same location as Amazon.com) would scare off any for-profit company. > Namecoin doesn't need DNS to bootstrap. I missed that namecoin uses a number of fixed IPs as seeds for bootstrapping into the blockchain, so DNS control matters less there (well, once you have the software, that is). Of course, IPs are also distributed by a centralized authority, and routing information for IPs can be ignored by ISPs, so it's a mistake to assume the IPs will never change.
    - wyager 10y ago
      >With no legal restrictions, what stops them? You tell me. Most ISPs never had content restrictions, even though they could have. >and likely never will. You're probably right, but the point is they could if the need was there.

by wyager 10y ago

falcolas 10y ago

Let me paraphrase your own comment in response. The issue is that the corporations, given no regulation, will start doing things like banning porn or "extreme" political views. This is not hypothetical; it has already happened on Facebook. Censorship is not purely the domain of the government. At least there are checks and balances on a government's power (as ineffectual and slow as they may be); save for the morals of a company's leadership team, there are no checks or balances on a corporations actions without regulation. > look at Namecoin. This is a solved problem. Most excellent. How do I give my mother a namecoin domain and have her visit their webpages? If it involves "download X from namecoin.org", you're already in trouble, since that's already relying on DNS. If we get past that, and the namecoin wallet needs to bootstrap itself - does it also use DNS? If it involves changing system configurations, period, it also won't work, since I've taught my mother to never to do that (she lacks the technical knowledge to add nuance to the restriction).

wyager 10y ago
ISPs could have already tried to ban porn, but they haven't. Facebook isn't an ISP. Just because a single company has content restrictions doesn't mean every company in the world will do the same. Namecoin doesn't need DNS to bootstrap. Why would you need to download something? Do you need to download a DNS client for your grandmother? If such a system becomes adopted, OSs include it in the background, like DNS. If you can't be bothered to read the namecoin paper, look at the great success of products like Google DNS. Nothing fancy, but an excellent privately run DNS.
- falcolas 10y ago
  > ISPs could have already tried to ban porn, but they haven't. Yes, they have. For one example when AOL was both an ISP and service provider, you bet your butt they blocked porn and objectionable speech. > Facebook isn't an ISP. I'm not sure I agree with this - the Free Basics program sure quacks like an ISP duck. > Just because a single company has content restrictions doesn't mean every company in the world will do the same. With no legal restrictions, what stops them? > OSs include it in the background, like DNS. I'm of the opinion that this describes a future that will never exist. Microsoft, Apple, and Linux distros have no compelling reason to include namecoin support by default, and likely never will. Especially since there is limited to no support for failover or localization of name->IP lookups. Even the lack of support for legal disputes over trademarked domains (for example, does amazon.bit actually go to the same location as Amazon.com) would scare off any for-profit company. > Namecoin doesn't need DNS to bootstrap. I missed that namecoin uses a number of fixed IPs as seeds for bootstrapping into the blockchain, so DNS control matters less there (well, once you have the software, that is). Of course, IPs are also distributed by a centralized authority, and routing information for IPs can be ignored by ISPs, so it's a mistake to assume the IPs will never change.
  - wyager 10y ago
    >With no legal restrictions, what stops them? You tell me. Most ISPs never had content restrictions, even though they could have. >and likely never will. You're probably right, but the point is they could if the need was there.