3 ms·

> And my answer is that you don't. If you want content moderation DNS isn't content. And protection against scammers, squatters etc. isn't moderation. It's fu

> And my answer is that you don't. If you want content moderation DNS isn't content. And protection against scammers, squatters etc. isn't moderation. It's funny how even the most primitive societies had rules, and laws, and ways to upholding them. But the crypto utopia where "NFTs make sense for DNS" is invariably "you don't get these protections" and "engineering is full of trade offs" > Trust is a necessary ingredient to most cool things, and as long as it's explicit trust I got no problem with it. If there's trust you have exactly zero need for the crap that is blockchains etc. Because our society is built on trust. > For certain very restrictive applications, the answer is clearly yes. IPFS users host each others' content all the time. IPFS is really, really small. But when police comes knocking at your door for storing someone else's child porn, you will quickly learn that blindly storing someone else's content will not help you. > But can "hosting" here be safely expanded to a wider and more useful set of actions? Of course not. Because you keep assuming that trust is a technical/engineering problem. It's not.

__MatrixMan__ 4y ago
If I used to trust my friend, and I gave him key to my house, and later I decide that I don't trust him anymore, I change the locks: a technology solution to a trust problem. If people want to revoke trust in the bank or the law or AWS, they're probably going to need technology to shore up the gaps made by the loss of trust. I'm not assuming that you can derive trust from technology alone, but I do think that you can use it to get more out of whatever trust you have.
- dmitriid 4y ago
  > If people want to revoke trust in the bank or the law or AWS, they're probably going to need technology to shore up the gaps made by the loss of trust. So. Back to the question about NFTs and DNS, which is literally about trust: How do you handle domain squatters and legal disputes? Oh wait. I know the answer to that: "Technology limitation, you don't get protections" and something about "engineering trade-offs".
  - __MatrixMan__ 4y ago
    If you want something that cuts, you use a knife. If you want something that pinches, you use pliers. If your pliers cuts you, that's a bug. If your knife pinches you, that's a bug. If you want to insulate your dealings from action by third parties, you use crypto. If your crypto is sensitive to action by third parties, that's a bug. I don't know why this is so hard to understand. If you don't like it don't use it. When most people name something, they don't think: "golly, I better make sure the ministry of truth can step in and rename this thing if I'm being bad". And when people want to reference a named thing, they're more worried about whether the reference will fail than they are about whether whoever named the thing had to name it differently than they would've preferred due to hazards in the namespace. Besides, isn't squatting more of a problem because your ownership lapsed and some jerk bought the domain out from under you? If ownership doesn't lapse, the only problem is when the squatter gets the name before you have even distributed it--just pick a different name and distribute that one instead. And legal disputes. What legal disputes? I name my variables whatever I want, what laws am I going to run afoul of by naming my blog whatever I want? If the content is illegal, go censor the content, the only reason that it's customary to censor the name is because that's the weakest link. DNS NFT's would move the weakest link to... I dunno, IP addresses maybe? That'll be something that the cops have to figure out, but it's not a naming system's problem to handle its adversaries' needs just because it has less attack surface than its predecessor.

__MatrixMan__ 4y ago

If I used to trust my friend, and I gave him key to my house, and later I decide that I don't trust him anymore, I change the locks: a technology solution to a trust problem. If people want to revoke trust in the bank or the law or AWS, they're probably going to need technology to shore up the gaps made by the loss of trust. I'm not assuming that you can derive trust from technology alone, but I do think that you can use it to get more out of whatever trust you have.

dmitriid 4y ago
> If people want to revoke trust in the bank or the law or AWS, they're probably going to need technology to shore up the gaps made by the loss of trust. So. Back to the question about NFTs and DNS, which is literally about trust: How do you handle domain squatters and legal disputes? Oh wait. I know the answer to that: "Technology limitation, you don't get protections" and something about "engineering trade-offs".
- __MatrixMan__ 4y ago
  If you want something that cuts, you use a knife. If you want something that pinches, you use pliers. If your pliers cuts you, that's a bug. If your knife pinches you, that's a bug. If you want to insulate your dealings from action by third parties, you use crypto. If your crypto is sensitive to action by third parties, that's a bug. I don't know why this is so hard to understand. If you don't like it don't use it. When most people name something, they don't think: "golly, I better make sure the ministry of truth can step in and rename this thing if I'm being bad". And when people want to reference a named thing, they're more worried about whether the reference will fail than they are about whether whoever named the thing had to name it differently than they would've preferred due to hazards in the namespace. Besides, isn't squatting more of a problem because your ownership lapsed and some jerk bought the domain out from under you? If ownership doesn't lapse, the only problem is when the squatter gets the name before you have even distributed it--just pick a different name and distribute that one instead. And legal disputes. What legal disputes? I name my variables whatever I want, what laws am I going to run afoul of by naming my blog whatever I want? If the content is illegal, go censor the content, the only reason that it's customary to censor the name is because that's the weakest link. DNS NFT's would move the weakest link to... I dunno, IP addresses maybe? That'll be something that the cops have to figure out, but it's not a naming system's problem to handle its adversaries' needs just because it has less attack surface than its predecessor.