5 ms·

They've reserved the top 100k Alexa domains on HNS for the original DNS owners. They're actively thwarting ICANN's overreach and centralisation of control by re

by ajvs 5y ago

They've reserved the top 100k Alexa domains on HNS for the original DNS owners. They're actively thwarting ICANN's overreach and centralisation of control by redecentralising the internet again. But sure, everytime HN sees a legitimate use case for a blockchain it's a "scam".

tptacek 5y ago
Is it a coin-like? Can you speculate on the coin-like? Did they pre-mine the coin-like and gift it to themselves and people they wanted favor with? If so, do I care that they've "reserved the top 100k Alex domains on HNS for the original DNS owners"? How nice of them.
coldpie 5y ago
> sees a legitimate use case for a blockchain I'm still waiting....
dc396 5y ago
Bollocks. What ICANN overreach? Creating around 2000 new top-level domains over 20 years at the request of the "global multi-stakeholder community" that anyone can be a part of? You prefer Handshake be the sole determiner? Why Alexa 100k not 10k or 1m? Who made them god of the root again?
- southerntofu 5y ago
  ICANN overreach? You mean like opening a gTLD program (why not) but only for the richest corporations on earth. By making a 100k$ entry ticket they have made sure that only bda commercial actors are able to operate a gTLD, leading to outcomes such as many unprofitable gTLDs closed down over the years [0] and certain TLDs raising prices by over 100% from one year to the next [1]. Moreover, ICANN-affiliated industrial cartel is trying to keep this for-profit status quo, as exemplified by njal.la registrar operator Peter Sunde being denied ICANN accreditation despite being well-known (despite my political disagreements with him) as a good-faith actor [2]. [0] https://dzdb.caida.org/tlds/graveyard https://dzdb.caida.org/tlds/graveyard [1] Forgot which as i haven't been affected, but HN folks will probably find links to comments on here talking about. [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26326795 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26326795
southerntofu 5y ago
So only the top 100k domains get to keep their names, and the rest of us can find new ones because we'll be domain squatted by early miners with tons of coins? > They're actively thwarting ICANN's overreach and centralisation of control by redecentralising the internet again. I'm all in favor of that. ICANN and its affiliated TLD/registrar mafia is screwing everyone. However, Handshake depiste the good stuff (distributing lots of cash to free software project) is not effectively decentralizing DNS governance, it's centralizing it in different hands: who controls the Handshake source code? what is the treat model of its blockchain in regards to Sybil attacks? Can the persons with the biggest wallets control the network? If so, it sounds like ICANN all over again, with "coin" speculation added on top. > a legitimate use case for a blockchain A blockchain in itself has many usecases as an append-only ledger. However, i've yet to see a legit usecase for a public blockchain, because trying to establish global consensus among unlimited untrusted peers is "hard" to say the least. DNS sounds like a good usecase for a DHT, where Sybil-resilience has been better researched in the past decades. The root zone would simply be a well-known entry in the DHT, much like it currently is a set of well-known IP addresses and DNSSEC keys. I strongly recommend you watch ICANN's "Emerging identifiers" session [0] from ICANN66 where both Handshake and GNS are presented. I found it very informative that Handshake is more concerned with the domain acquisition process (auction) while GNS is more concerned with solving actual problems we have with DNS (security and privacy). [0] https://icann.zoom.us/recording/share/M8N-Duq935XheIZoBedIwmi3VqRUAe2iOPwECiTNLxKwIumekTziMw https://icann.zoom.us/recording/share/M8N-Duq935XheIZoBedIwm... <-- sorry for linking to Zoom, it appears ICANN doesn't have a Peertube yet

by ajvs 5y ago

tptacek 5y ago

Is it a coin-like? Can you speculate on the coin-like? Did they pre-mine the coin-like and gift it to themselves and people they wanted favor with? If so, do I care that they've "reserved the top 100k Alex domains on HNS for the original DNS owners"? How nice of them.

coldpie 5y ago

> sees a legitimate use case for a blockchain I'm still waiting....

dc396 5y ago

Bollocks. What ICANN overreach? Creating around 2000 new top-level domains over 20 years at the request of the "global multi-stakeholder community" that anyone can be a part of? You prefer Handshake be the sole determiner? Why Alexa 100k not 10k or 1m? Who made them god of the root again?

southerntofu 5y ago
ICANN overreach? You mean like opening a gTLD program (why not) but only for the richest corporations on earth. By making a 100k$ entry ticket they have made sure that only bda commercial actors are able to operate a gTLD, leading to outcomes such as many unprofitable gTLDs closed down over the years [0] and certain TLDs raising prices by over 100% from one year to the next [1]. Moreover, ICANN-affiliated industrial cartel is trying to keep this for-profit status quo, as exemplified by njal.la registrar operator Peter Sunde being denied ICANN accreditation despite being well-known (despite my political disagreements with him) as a good-faith actor [2]. [0] https://dzdb.caida.org/tlds/graveyard https://dzdb.caida.org/tlds/graveyard [1] Forgot which as i haven't been affected, but HN folks will probably find links to comments on here talking about. [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26326795 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26326795

southerntofu 5y ago

So only the top 100k domains get to keep their names, and the rest of us can find new ones because we'll be domain squatted by early miners with tons of coins? > They're actively thwarting ICANN's overreach and centralisation of control by redecentralising the internet again. I'm all in favor of that. ICANN and its affiliated TLD/registrar mafia is screwing everyone. However, Handshake depiste the good stuff (distributing lots of cash to free software project) is not effectively decentralizing DNS governance, it's centralizing it in different hands: who controls the Handshake source code? what is the treat model of its blockchain in regards to Sybil attacks? Can the persons with the biggest wallets control the network? If so, it sounds like ICANN all over again, with "coin" speculation added on top. > a legitimate use case for a blockchain A blockchain in itself has many usecases as an append-only ledger. However, i've yet to see a legit usecase for a public blockchain, because trying to establish global consensus among unlimited untrusted peers is "hard" to say the least. DNS sounds like a good usecase for a DHT, where Sybil-resilience has been better researched in the past decades. The root zone would simply be a well-known entry in the DHT, much like it currently is a set of well-known IP addresses and DNSSEC keys. I strongly recommend you watch ICANN's "Emerging identifiers" session [0] from ICANN66 where both Handshake and GNS are presented. I found it very informative that Handshake is more concerned with the domain acquisition process (auction) while GNS is more concerned with solving actual problems we have with DNS (security and privacy). [0] https://icann.zoom.us/recording/share/M8N-Duq935XheIZoBedIwmi3VqRUAe2iOPwECiTNLxKwIumekTziMw https://icann.zoom.us/recording/share/M8N-Duq935XheIZoBedIwm... <-- sorry for linking to Zoom, it appears ICANN doesn't have a Peertube yet