Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

.self: A new top-level domain designed to support self-hosting

hccf.onmy.cloud

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 410 posts

Re: .self: A new top-level domain designed to support self-hosting

#181

Post by ipaddr »

anilgulecha wrote: post #179

The "one free domain per person" isn't the interesting part really - that will be hard to police unless domain name is a function of ID proof (avoids squatting). 0) The actual intersting part of a new TLD can be growing reputation by post-facto taking away a domain without recourse in case of squatting. Instead of adversarial takedowns (which produce false positives as noted), let anyone challenge an inactive domain…

Sounds like a bad domain for self hosting. You have to update txt records randomly and your domain can be taken for whatever reason. Whatever value you build goes away if you are inactive. You cannot transfer ownership killing any value you added.

Re: .self: A new top-level domain designed to support self-hosting

#183

Post by BuyMyBitcoins »

anilgulecha wrote: post #179

The "one free domain per person" isn't the interesting part really - that will be hard to police unless domain name is a function of ID proof (avoids squatting). 0) The actual intersting part of a new TLD can be growing reputation by post-facto taking away a domain without recourse in case of squatting. Instead of adversarial takedowns (which produce false positives as noted), let anyone challenge an inactive domain…

I dislike the term “domain squatting”. It should be called “domain scalping”.

Re: .self: A new top-level domain designed to support self-hosting

#184

Post by NewJazz »

Sophira wrote: post #165
kemotep wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

.zip was especially egregious. No one should have allowed that to happen.

There are three TLDs I block on my computer completely, and all of them are file extensions - .zip, .md, and .mov. (Yes, the domain "readme.md" exists. Fortunately, whoever owns it is not using their power for evil and does not have any webserver there... but I'm not risking it.)

.md seems overzealous, no? Do you also block .rs? Would break too much I imagine.

Re: .self: A new top-level domain designed to support self-hosting

#185

Post by layla5alive »

Cpoll wrote: post #172
mort96 wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A friend almost failed an IT class because his website didn't render at all in IE6. This was during the time of IE9. The teacher just hadn't updated their browser in a long time. I don't get how you get to be an IT teacher without knowing the most basic troubleshooting steps to get assignments to run.

I had a similar class where they threatened to fail us if we didn't use Dreamweaver and instead wrote our own html.

Was that class taught by a certain woman who had a business making websites, per-chance?

Re: .self: A new top-level domain designed to support self-hosting

#186

Post by vessenes »

quotemstr wrote: post #96
vessenes wrote: post #78

Hi there. I've done a bit of work on specifying human-centric identity goals for the internet over the last 10 years. May I suggest you look at Microsoft Vega? https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/blog/vega-zero-know... (I have no affiliation). In brief, I think they aim to solve the most important needs for online identity-gated services in a maximally private way. For instance, I'd like to see .self offer the f…

It is good that Microsoft Vega is popularizing zero-knowledge identity-based attestations. It's unfortunate that they're doing so in a relatively inflexible way. I wish the Vega people had oriented their work around general-purpose zkVMs instead of application-specific ZK circuits. The latter is a fleeting efficiency win; the former is a permanent flexibility advantage. ZK-based privacy advocates shouldn't over-index…

Can you talk more about RISC Zero? Does it require a TEE of some sort? I had trouble finding a quality mid-detail spec of how it works; lots of marketing materials basically.

Re: .self: A new top-level domain designed to support self-hosting

#187

Post by akerl_ »

favorited wrote: post #79
pavel_lishin wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not clear whether they're actually talking about domains or subdomains there, which is a worrying sign from a potential registrar.

Any domain that isn't one of the Top Level Domains is also a subdomain.

I mean sure, but if you started talking about google.com as a subdomain, real humans would correctly look at you funny.

Re: .self: A new top-level domain designed to support self-hosting

#188

Post by internetter »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #59

> One Person, One Subdomain > - Everyone entitled to a subdomain at no cost One subdomain, or one subdomain? Would I be entitled to something like "pavel.hosts.self"?

a sub (level below) domain from a top level domain (.self) would presumably be pavel.self

Re: .self: A new top-level domain designed to support self-hosting

#189

Post by foxylad »

aussieguy1234 wrote: post #155
yieldcrv wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The terms of using that tld say it must comply with Sharia law pretty strict and apparently the Minister of that agency doesnt care that .af is a domain hack for “as fuck” in the west

In other words, he doesn't give a fuck

Perhaps he does - dontgive.af does not resolve.
Post reply on HN