4 ms·

There is Handshake [1] which is getting significant [2] adoption [3]. [1] https://handshake.org/ https://handshake.org/ [2] https://twitter.com/opera/status/1

There is Handshake [1] which is getting significant [2] adoption [3]. [1] https://handshake.org/ https://handshake.org/ [2] https://twitter.com/opera/status/1476841607005622273?s=20 https://twitter.com/opera/status/1476841607005622273?s=20 [3] https://www.namecheap.com/about/press-releases/21-09-22/namecheap-now-offers-handshake-domain-names https://www.namecheap.com/about/press-releases/21-09-22/name...

tptacek 5y ago
Handshake has no meaningful adoption. It's a pre-mined cryptotoken, traded on exchanges; essentially, the Handshake founders decided to sell the Brooklyn Bridge, which is something that blockchains make feasible. No mainstream browser will ever support Handshake. More's the pity! If the Handshake DNS root heist works, it'd open up new business models for all of us. I had been looking forward to minting ARPCoin and charging everyone to join their WiFi networks.
- rasengan 5y ago
  - tptacek 5y ago
    I work every day on DNS stuff (I own our firm's DNS server, and we're in an environment where it's truly "always DNS") and land naturally on any thread about DNS here. This particular thread isn't about Handshake; it's about setting up an alternate root hierarchy with standard DNS. Regardless of that fact: the guidelines demand that we not make insinuations about other commenters here, and this is the second weird interaction we've had in a row where you've done that. Please stop. My understanding is that you're a strong supporter of Handshake. I think Handshake is a crock. It is fine for us to disagree. But you will disagree with me civilly.
    - rasengan 5y ago
      > essentially, the Handshake founders decided to sell the Brooklyn Bridge, which is something that blockchains make feasible. > the guidelines demand that we not make insinuations about other commenters here, and this is the second weird interaction we've had in a row where you've done that. Please stop. Not that two wrongs make a right (nor did I state anything that isn't provable), but the insinuations started with your comment (including from previous comments) which was more than an insinuation but actually borderline slanderous (claiming fraudulent activity including stating things were sold that weren't owned, etc.). I also hope that you too will follow the same guidelines that we all strive to follow. > I think Handshake is a crock. It is fine for us to disagree. But you will disagree with me civilly. What about that comment is civil? What about your previous slanderous comments are civil? Finally, what about my factual statements aren't civil? I really hope 2022 is a better year for you.
      - tptacek 5y ago
        The guidelines require us to be civil to each other. They do not require me to generous or to assume good faith of Handshake. I believe Handshake is a crock, you do not. I'm not impugning you (as you did me); you are not Handshake, or, as far as I know, any of its founders. It is fine for us to disagree. I have the better of the two arguments and am very comfortable leaving it there.
        rasengan 5y ago
        Where was I impugning you? Can you point to the specific text/example? I'm genuinely curious and wish to have a better understanding of how you are interpreting and seeing things as I've asked the opinion of others and none seem to agree with you. Despite what you claim in your slander, what [1] I [2] said [3] is [4] backed [5] by [6] fact [7]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24241737 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24241737 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22908576 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22908576 [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23350441 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23350441 [4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29929657 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29929657 [5] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22900567 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22900567 [6] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22900986 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22900986 [7] Your comments serve as the facts.
DenseComet 5y ago
You can't really count Opera as "significant". Handshake domains are only accessible by a tiny percent of people, make stuff like HTTPS very difficult[1], and no matter how devices eventually use Handshake, you'll always need to have a domain on a normal TLD because there will always be devices (like TVs and old phones) that will not support it. And what benefit do you get anyways? A custom TLD? There's already so many new TLDs but most domains are on gTLDs or ccTLDs because thats what people recognize. Even Google and Apple barely use theirs. Ownership? Not really. Handshake only manages TLDs. Buying a subdomain (like you can on Namecheap) doesn't happen on the blockchain, the owner of the TLD can take it away anytime. Say what you want to say about ICANN, but they do have rules (such as contingency plans) that new TLD owners have to follow. In what world is buying a handshake subdomain from an unknown person beholden to nobody better in any way? [1] https://www.namecheap.com/support/knowledgebase/article.aspx/10484/2278/namecheap-handshake-tlds/ https://www.namecheap.com/support/knowledgebase/article.aspx...
- rasengan 5y ago
  > You can't really count Opera as "significant". 380m+ users seems significant to me. > Handshake domains are only accessible by a tiny percent of people Actually, NextDNS which is a Firefox resolver also supports Handshake, so I imagine it's not a tiny percent of people. > make stuff like HTTPS very difficult Additionally, HTTPS is completed by Handshake since it removes the need for a "trusted certificate authority" which, as many articles have mentioned as of late, is not so trusted [1][2]. > you'll always need to have a domain on a normal TLD because there will always be devices (like TVs and old phones) that will not support it. TVs and old phones can support handshake since it's just regular DNS protocol. > And what benefit do you get anyways? You will cryptographically own your own name. > A custom TLD? A name all-inclusive. Hard stop. > There's already so many new TLDs but most domains are on gTLDs or ccTLDs because thats what people recognize. I've been around for a long time -- the internet has evolved and continues to evolve. People change quickly. > Ownership? Not really. Handshake only manages TLDs. Cryptographically owning things is likely a more constant ownership than a 'binding ownership' by a legal contract in some jurisdiction. Some of the statements you made about subdomains may or may not be true, but it's not any worse than today and likely better since there will be more options of TLD owners to choose from should one choose to purchase a TLD. [1] https://github.com/imperviousinc/beacon-ios https://github.com/imperviousinc/beacon-ios [2] https://blog.mozilla.org/security/2021/12/09/improved-quality-of-intermediate-certificates-with-enhanced-oversight-and-automation/ https://blog.mozilla.org/security/2021/12/09/improved-qualit...

tptacek 5y ago

Handshake has no meaningful adoption. It's a pre-mined cryptotoken, traded on exchanges; essentially, the Handshake founders decided to sell the Brooklyn Bridge, which is something that blockchains make feasible. No mainstream browser will ever support Handshake. More's the pity! If the Handshake DNS root heist works, it'd open up new business models for all of us. I had been looking forward to minting ARPCoin and charging everyone to join their WiFi networks.

rasengan 5y ago
- tptacek 5y ago
  I work every day on DNS stuff (I own our firm's DNS server, and we're in an environment where it's truly "always DNS") and land naturally on any thread about DNS here. This particular thread isn't about Handshake; it's about setting up an alternate root hierarchy with standard DNS. Regardless of that fact: the guidelines demand that we not make insinuations about other commenters here, and this is the second weird interaction we've had in a row where you've done that. Please stop. My understanding is that you're a strong supporter of Handshake. I think Handshake is a crock. It is fine for us to disagree. But you will disagree with me civilly.
  - rasengan 5y ago
    > essentially, the Handshake founders decided to sell the Brooklyn Bridge, which is something that blockchains make feasible. > the guidelines demand that we not make insinuations about other commenters here, and this is the second weird interaction we've had in a row where you've done that. Please stop. Not that two wrongs make a right (nor did I state anything that isn't provable), but the insinuations started with your comment (including from previous comments) which was more than an insinuation but actually borderline slanderous (claiming fraudulent activity including stating things were sold that weren't owned, etc.). I also hope that you too will follow the same guidelines that we all strive to follow. > I think Handshake is a crock. It is fine for us to disagree. But you will disagree with me civilly. What about that comment is civil? What about your previous slanderous comments are civil? Finally, what about my factual statements aren't civil? I really hope 2022 is a better year for you.
    - tptacek 5y ago
      The guidelines require us to be civil to each other. They do not require me to generous or to assume good faith of Handshake. I believe Handshake is a crock, you do not. I'm not impugning you (as you did me); you are not Handshake, or, as far as I know, any of its founders. It is fine for us to disagree. I have the better of the two arguments and am very comfortable leaving it there.
      - rasengan 5y ago
        Where was I impugning you? Can you point to the specific text/example? I'm genuinely curious and wish to have a better understanding of how you are interpreting and seeing things as I've asked the opinion of others and none seem to agree with you. Despite what you claim in your slander, what [1] I [2] said [3] is [4] backed [5] by [6] fact [7]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24241737 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24241737 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22908576 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22908576 [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23350441 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23350441 [4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29929657 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29929657 [5] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22900567 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22900567 [6] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22900986 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22900986 [7] Your comments serve as the facts.

DenseComet 5y ago

You can't really count Opera as "significant". Handshake domains are only accessible by a tiny percent of people, make stuff like HTTPS very difficult[1], and no matter how devices eventually use Handshake, you'll always need to have a domain on a normal TLD because there will always be devices (like TVs and old phones) that will not support it. And what benefit do you get anyways? A custom TLD? There's already so many new TLDs but most domains are on gTLDs or ccTLDs because thats what people recognize. Even Google and Apple barely use theirs. Ownership? Not really. Handshake only manages TLDs. Buying a subdomain (like you can on Namecheap) doesn't happen on the blockchain, the owner of the TLD can take it away anytime. Say what you want to say about ICANN, but they do have rules (such as contingency plans) that new TLD owners have to follow. In what world is buying a handshake subdomain from an unknown person beholden to nobody better in any way? [1] https://www.namecheap.com/support/knowledgebase/article.aspx/10484/2278/namecheap-handshake-tlds/ https://www.namecheap.com/support/knowledgebase/article.aspx...

rasengan 5y ago
> You can't really count Opera as "significant". 380m+ users seems significant to me. > Handshake domains are only accessible by a tiny percent of people Actually, NextDNS which is a Firefox resolver also supports Handshake, so I imagine it's not a tiny percent of people. > make stuff like HTTPS very difficult Additionally, HTTPS is completed by Handshake since it removes the need for a "trusted certificate authority" which, as many articles have mentioned as of late, is not so trusted [1][2]. > you'll always need to have a domain on a normal TLD because there will always be devices (like TVs and old phones) that will not support it. TVs and old phones can support handshake since it's just regular DNS protocol. > And what benefit do you get anyways? You will cryptographically own your own name. > A custom TLD? A name all-inclusive. Hard stop. > There's already so many new TLDs but most domains are on gTLDs or ccTLDs because thats what people recognize. I've been around for a long time -- the internet has evolved and continues to evolve. People change quickly. > Ownership? Not really. Handshake only manages TLDs. Cryptographically owning things is likely a more constant ownership than a 'binding ownership' by a legal contract in some jurisdiction. Some of the statements you made about subdomains may or may not be true, but it's not any worse than today and likely better since there will be more options of TLD owners to choose from should one choose to purchase a TLD. [1] https://github.com/imperviousinc/beacon-ios https://github.com/imperviousinc/beacon-ios [2] https://blog.mozilla.org/security/2021/12/09/improved-quality-of-intermediate-certificates-with-enhanced-oversight-and-automation/ https://blog.mozilla.org/security/2021/12/09/improved-qualit...