3 ms·
> Pro is, if the rights holders win, it may fan the flames of decentralized naming schemes and alternate roots, and start crystallizing the need for a free inte
by stingraycharles 4y ago
> Pro is, if the rights holders win, it may fan the flames of decentralized naming schemes and alternate roots, and start crystallizing the need for a free internet in people's minds.
Hasn’t the main trend of the past few decades been that, despite limiting our freedoms, everything gets more and more centralized, mainly because it’s more reliable / convenient / cheaper ?
I’m doubtful in DNS ever being replaced with an even more decentralized version. It’s already one of the most decentralized protocols widely in use right now, and the trend has clearly been more centralization of DNS, not less.
- dividedbyzero 4y agoI guess it would be both, like with Linux on phones and desktops as a reaction to proprietary OSes becoming more restrictive – it fans the flames for LibreDNS and Stallmann-approved Gnu-DNS in some circles like the privacy-conscious subset of HN, and some of those actually use it where possible, but overall they are an inconsequential rounding error, and everyone else gets centralized and non-overridable SecureDNS™.
- mistrial9 4y agonothing occurs in a vacuum; as has been well-described here, when Freedoms are fringe, then Freedom-minded people get the strange bedfellows of actually depraved and actually criminal, while the Law-and-Order people isolate themselves and their populations with distrust, circular-restrictions and unchangeable rules. Its not the active people, its the bandwagon that the active people have to live with as a social consequence
- causi 4y agomainly because it’s more reliable / convenient / cheaper ? And as a consequence the user population on average becomes more ignorant, less likely to care, and less technically capable. It's one thing to crush internet freedom when half your users are programmers. It's entirely different when half your users don't know what a "file extension" is.