"An arbitrary gTLD is not something you can get from free, until we have a better solution for DNS that the current appraoch." This implies that there is a bet

"An arbitrary gTLD is not something you can get from free, until we have a better solution for DNS that the current appraoch." This implies that there is a better approach. I agree. There are many possibilities. I have been running own root zone at home for several decades. I routinely experiment with different ideas. I am aware of many possibilities. I do generate a CA pem file using openssl in order to view own traffic. However even with all these hoops we jump through to do such basic things, "Big Tech" seems to actively try to discourage users even more, .e.g., from monitoring their own traffic. For example, subjecting the user to a keylogger in Chrome and forcing them to type some undocumented, opinionated shibboleth such as "badidea" or "thisisunsafe" to proceed. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/35274659/does-using-badidea-or-thisisunsafe-to-bypass-a-chrome-certificate-hsts-error https://stackoverflow.com/questions/35274659/does-using-badi... The subject of the OP is what was originally supposed to be a "non-commercial" TLD, which since abandoned that designation and began charging fees, and, more importantly, the current and future lack of any restrictions on raising those fees. If one is using a TLD in ways that demand transparency, e.g., to represent an entity that is taking money from the public, then involving a third party that accepts personally identifiable information, e.g., a registrar, makes some sense. However, interactions with the public, e.g., commercial uses, are not the only ways the internet can be used and such uses are not the only way domains can be used.