3 ms·

I really don't understand how so many people on HN can complain about centralized control, but then so many (other) people are completely against Web3, solution

by EGreg 3y ago

I really don't understand how so many people on HN can complain about centralized control, but then so many (other) people are completely against Web3, solutions like Unstoppable Domains are able to let you own a domain and only transfer it if you sign with your key. Why don't more browsers read a Web3-based domain system like Freenames, Unstoppable Domains, ENS, or Filecoin Name Service? DNS is a federated database, but it is subject to domain seizure etc. at multiple levels. I've seen people complain that their domain operator can just "steal" their domain! If browsers won't do it, can't someone start a CCTLD (it's only $250K) and then read the blockchain to resolve the DNS records? I realize that this "someone" would be a central point of failure, but alas, that's how the Web currently still works. The best you can do is some sort of "DNS multicast" I think, but it would still be under the control of one company, sadly. Personally, I'm a bit surprised why the Web hasn't standardized onion links / magnet links / hashes of content / cids / whatever you want to call them. Tor and Beaker Browser have had it for a long time, and Brave too I think. DNS then becomes just a glorified search engine for a small subset of URLs (the ones without a long path / querystring).

duskwuff 3y ago
> can't someone start a CCTLD (it's only $250K) No, they can't. ccTLDs are associated with countries. There's no process for creating one that doesn't involve having IANA recognize you as a country. You're probably thinking of the new gTLD process, which has only been open for applications once, for a brief period in 2012. It's not open to new applications, and the process for applicants was much more involved than a single payment.
- dc396 3y ago
  ICANN says the next round will happen in 2026.
  - EGreg 3y ago
    Do you have more information on this? If you can link to it, that would be great. How much would it cost this time around?
    - vasco 3y ago
      https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/next-round https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/next-round
      - swores 3y ago
        Thanks for that link, and to (not-)answer GP's question on price: > "While the application fee has not been determined, it will be set on a cost-recovery basis. The fee will ensure that the next round of the New gTLD Program is fully funded and does not require funds from ICANN's operating budget. As a point of reference, the application fee for the 2012 round of the New gTLD Program was US$185,000." From the FAQ page for the next round of gTLD sales, via the link shared above: https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/announcements-and-media/announcement-06nov23-en https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/announcements-and-media/announ...
dkarras 3y ago
because like most things blockchains (cl)aim to solve (primarily money and its transfer, but in this case ownership of domain names), those things do not really really have a centralization problem. 99.999% of the people do not, and do not need to worry about getting their domain name seized. cryptobros like to pose centralization as a huge problem where it really isn't so that they can peddle you scamcoins to pump and to feed their gambling addiction. "web3 based domain system" solves something that is at most a nuisance (and at best a necessary evil) by introducing massive problems into the equation, all to do something that isn't really a problem in practice (and it doesn't even do it, you admit there is still centralisation, so what did we gain by introducing all those problems, really?)
- EGreg 3y ago
  See, this is just dogma that gets repeated on HN. It's obvious to any person who honestly thinks about it, that having a third party in control of your DNS (i.e. what IP addresses it resolves to) means that your entire site can be rugpulled from under you. If it becomes big enough. For example: https://www.blackhatworld.com/seo/is-njalla-still-legit.1521208/ https://www.blackhatworld.com/seo/is-njalla-still-legit.1521... Now, you can say, "most people don't care, they just have a small-time operation, just find a reputable domain operator who doesn't have a history of screwing people over." But that's exactly the use case for Web3 and blockchains in general. Why do you have to be forced to trust SOMEONE, with something as important as your brand / identity of your entire organization? And, for that matter, why should an entire community have to trust one guy who can change up the site at any time? That's not very secure, and many of you vehemently insist that no alternative should be made available, to anyone, "because scam"! You don't want browsers to even support it! As your site gets larger and more people rely on it, you don't want to have that major point of failure at any point. I know that some people on HN go so far as to say that banks freezing your money, and ICE seizing your domain name, are very desirable features of the Internet. So, then don't complain about censorship and deplatforming. You can't have it both ways! This just happened, for instance... ICJ officials are being threatened that their funds will be frozen: https://twitter.com/TomCottonAR/status/1781066997666607193 https://twitter.com/TomCottonAR/status/1781066997666607193

by EGreg 3y ago

duskwuff 3y ago

> can't someone start a CCTLD (it's only $250K) No, they can't. ccTLDs are associated with countries. There's no process for creating one that doesn't involve having IANA recognize you as a country. You're probably thinking of the new gTLD process, which has only been open for applications once, for a brief period in 2012. It's not open to new applications, and the process for applicants was much more involved than a single payment.

dc396 3y ago
ICANN says the next round will happen in 2026.
- EGreg 3y ago
  Do you have more information on this? If you can link to it, that would be great. How much would it cost this time around?
  - vasco 3y ago
    https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/next-round https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/next-round
    - swores 3y ago
      Thanks for that link, and to (not-)answer GP's question on price: > "While the application fee has not been determined, it will be set on a cost-recovery basis. The fee will ensure that the next round of the New gTLD Program is fully funded and does not require funds from ICANN's operating budget. As a point of reference, the application fee for the 2012 round of the New gTLD Program was US$185,000." From the FAQ page for the next round of gTLD sales, via the link shared above: https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/announcements-and-media/announcement-06nov23-en https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/announcements-and-media/announ...

dkarras 3y ago

because like most things blockchains (cl)aim to solve (primarily money and its transfer, but in this case ownership of domain names), those things do not really really have a centralization problem. 99.999% of the people do not, and do not need to worry about getting their domain name seized. cryptobros like to pose centralization as a huge problem where it really isn't so that they can peddle you scamcoins to pump and to feed their gambling addiction. "web3 based domain system" solves something that is at most a nuisance (and at best a necessary evil) by introducing massive problems into the equation, all to do something that isn't really a problem in practice (and it doesn't even do it, you admit there is still centralisation, so what did we gain by introducing all those problems, really?)

EGreg 3y ago
See, this is just dogma that gets repeated on HN. It's obvious to any person who honestly thinks about it, that having a third party in control of your DNS (i.e. what IP addresses it resolves to) means that your entire site can be rugpulled from under you. If it becomes big enough. For example: https://www.blackhatworld.com/seo/is-njalla-still-legit.1521208/ https://www.blackhatworld.com/seo/is-njalla-still-legit.1521... Now, you can say, "most people don't care, they just have a small-time operation, just find a reputable domain operator who doesn't have a history of screwing people over." But that's exactly the use case for Web3 and blockchains in general. Why do you have to be forced to trust SOMEONE, with something as important as your brand / identity of your entire organization? And, for that matter, why should an entire community have to trust one guy who can change up the site at any time? That's not very secure, and many of you vehemently insist that no alternative should be made available, to anyone, "because scam"! You don't want browsers to even support it! As your site gets larger and more people rely on it, you don't want to have that major point of failure at any point. I know that some people on HN go so far as to say that banks freezing your money, and ICE seizing your domain name, are very desirable features of the Internet. So, then don't complain about censorship and deplatforming. You can't have it both ways! This just happened, for instance... ICJ officials are being threatened that their funds will be frozen: https://twitter.com/TomCottonAR/status/1781066997666607193 https://twitter.com/TomCottonAR/status/1781066997666607193