4 ms·

This is too late since all the domains are squatted and there is little to no incentive for those squatting these domains; and these domains have been available

by eof 13y ago

This is too late since all the domains are squatted and there is little to no incentive for those squatting these domains; and these domains have been available to apple, etc for as long as anyone else. Unless they are just going to reset the blockchain; the I don't really see how this type of "rule" will be implemented or supported by the namecoin hash power. There might be more support for - A .bit pool bounty to companies that become early adopters of .bit - A .bit pool bounty to companies if some number of major DNS server support the .bit domain directly - A sort of 'emminent domain' reward to the 'squatters' in a way that relates the "price" (paid in namecoin or bitcoin, probably) to the (alexa, or other) ranking of the domain with a time table for these companies to purchase.

itistoday2 13y ago
You seem to have not understood the proposal. The proposal is about introducing new namespaces that map today's DNS into namespaces that can be looked up in the Namecoin blockchain. .bit domains are stored in the "d" namespace. These would go into others (that don't exist yet) based on their extension.
- eof 13y ago
  Oh; you are right I obviously missed the crux of the proposal. However, I still think the proposal is flawed but for a different reason. How do you determine who owns the .com domain? When a domain is seized by the government does the com/piratebay domain respect the blockchain or the centralized DNS now updated signtaure? If it's the latter.. what's the point of using the blockchain version at all?
  - itistoday2 13y ago
    How do you determine who owns the .com domain? When a domain is seized by the government does the com/piratebay domain respect the blockchain or the centralized DNS now updated signtaure? If it's the latter.. what's the point of using the blockchain version at all? Expiry dates would be set to match those from today's DNS entries, so that addresses new owners. As far as domain-seizures go, first it should be emphasized that this issue affects probably less than 1% of 1% of internet domains. However, to answer the question: if the domain was stolen from its owners prior to the expiry date, I personally see no reason to change the entry contents in the blockchain to match that of the stolen property. They can wait for it to expire and then register it like everyone else. :-p Meanwhile, I doubt the piratebay would be using the .com (and we know that they can't today). They'd be using the .bit (or whatever else), because they'd be protected from such theft. ^_^
  - dangero 13y ago
    Good point. The entire value of NMC blockchain is to remove reliance on the current DNS system which this would kind of nullify. Another related topic is that a judges ruling is meaningless in regards to NMC, so for example, if someone were to steal google.com by stealing the private key, google.com would have no recourse besides paying a ransom. They cannot get a judge to force the address to be given back. Their domain name would be hijacked forever. In the case of bitcoin, it's great that you can't revert a transaction. In the case of domains on NMC blockchain, I'm not so sure.

by eof 13y ago

itistoday2 13y ago

You seem to have not understood the proposal. The proposal is about introducing new namespaces that map today's DNS into namespaces that can be looked up in the Namecoin blockchain. .bit domains are stored in the "d" namespace. These would go into others (that don't exist yet) based on their extension.

eof 13y ago
Oh; you are right I obviously missed the crux of the proposal. However, I still think the proposal is flawed but for a different reason. How do you determine who owns the .com domain? When a domain is seized by the government does the com/piratebay domain respect the blockchain or the centralized DNS now updated signtaure? If it's the latter.. what's the point of using the blockchain version at all?
- itistoday2 13y ago
  How do you determine who owns the .com domain? When a domain is seized by the government does the com/piratebay domain respect the blockchain or the centralized DNS now updated signtaure? If it's the latter.. what's the point of using the blockchain version at all? Expiry dates would be set to match those from today's DNS entries, so that addresses new owners. As far as domain-seizures go, first it should be emphasized that this issue affects probably less than 1% of 1% of internet domains. However, to answer the question: if the domain was stolen from its owners prior to the expiry date, I personally see no reason to change the entry contents in the blockchain to match that of the stolen property. They can wait for it to expire and then register it like everyone else. :-p Meanwhile, I doubt the piratebay would be using the .com (and we know that they can't today). They'd be using the .bit (or whatever else), because they'd be protected from such theft. ^_^
- dangero 13y ago
  Good point. The entire value of NMC blockchain is to remove reliance on the current DNS system which this would kind of nullify. Another related topic is that a judges ruling is meaningless in regards to NMC, so for example, if someone were to steal google.com by stealing the private key, google.com would have no recourse besides paying a ransom. They cannot get a judge to force the address to be given back. Their domain name would be hijacked forever. In the case of bitcoin, it's great that you can't revert a transaction. In the case of domains on NMC blockchain, I'm not so sure.