Live data from Hacker News

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

hccf.onmy.cloud

241–250 of 410 posts

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

#241
post #120

I’m just using .home.arpa for my self hosted stuff. Free, just have to deal with TLS root cert trust, but once that’s down; you’re golden.

.internal works fine now.

Both of these are meant for operating a home/private network.

.self seems to be geared towards a 'accessible from the everyday net' kind of approach.

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

#243
post #163
post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Somewhere out there is a developer telling this exact same story. ‘I once agreed to build an MVP for a kid who promised to mail me cash. Never showed up. And THAT’S when I decided to get a real job.’

Except I mailed the cash in advance! It’s okay, it was probably another 14 year old. My parents were not happy when I told them I sent cash to a stranger. I remember having to do it in secret because they were very not okay with the idea that you can meet strangers online. Hah.

I think they're describing a scenario where the cash was stolen by a postal worker or for some other reason didn't make the full trip.

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

#244

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…

The much simpler way to avoid squatting is to make .com domains cost $200 a year. This will instantly end the vast majority of domain squatting on the .com TLD and if people can easily get the .com they need for their business then the other TLDs are not going to have much squatting activity.

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

#246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heh…I once was in a state-level coding event (it was a small portion of a larger competition) where half of the test was turning in code on a CD during the competition, with the written half during the event. My CD was deemed unusable for whatever reason (it had worked on XP and Fedora 6 or 7 at home) and didn't count towards my score. I still got second in the event. I declined to continue because I couldn't trust t…

Does high school attendance matter for anything? Genuine question. Always seemed like pre-college schooling always wanted you to think everything was more important long-term than it really was.

It’s needed to get into college and that’s it, which is needed to get your first maybe second job and that’s it, which is needed to…

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

#247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

zkVMs (of which RISC Zero is one example) do not require a TEE. That's the whole point: the privacy properties come out of the math. Basically, nowadays, once you and I can agree on the text of a program, you can run the program on your private inputs and produce a number that proves to me that you actually ran this specific program and not some other. For example, age verification: I can run a program that takes a s…

What does require a trusted computing platform, however, is ensuring that the same program isn't being executed millions of times per second to send millions of different ZKPs to different parties.

ID verification is not enough, you also need some way to prevent one malicious user from re-selling the same ID to millions of others. Without ZKPs, you know what document the user is trying to sign up with, so you can rate-limit that document. With ZKPs, however, you need those rate limits to exist somewhere else.

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

#248

https://hccf.onmy.cloud/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/dot-self.... > Everyone entitled to a subdomain at no cost How are you going to pay for the (substantial) cost of running a TLD without registration fee revenue? Is this a loss leader for other services? Are you operating on a 100% donation model? > No parking, squatting, or reselling How do you plan to tell the difference between a parked/squatted domain and one in…

> How are you going to pay for the (substantial) cost of running a TLD without registration fee revenue? Is it actually a substantial expense? The TLD itself only has to publish the nameserver records, which generally have a TTL of about a day. A DNS response is a few hundred bytes. Big DNS providers like Google and Cloudflare would make requests for every actively used domain every day, but then cache them. Smaller…

You can't do it in the general case.

Most TLDs need to allow domain transfers because projects do genuinely change ownership sometimes. If you allow transfers, you allow reselling by definition (because you can't physically determine whether cash changes hands).

This isn't like tickets, where "return to pool and let an interested party buy it" is a viable strategy. Tickets are fungible, domains are non-fungible.

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

#249
post #216
post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always thought these TLDs were a flight risk to be used in any serious capacity. What if the random state decides you/your business are in violation of [whatever] and kick you off?

What if an elephant steps on the power cable to the server room?

The owners of `queer.af` thought that AF only meant “as f*ck”, without realizing that AF also happens to the be the ISO 3166 code for a country controlled by the Taliban, who didn’t like their domain name [1].

Brits that had `.eu` domains lost their domains due to Brexit [2] (unless they had some other EEA ties).

And if the Chagos deal goes ahead [3] and the British Indian Ocean Territory ceases to exist, then all `.io` domains might disappear too (although considering that `.su`/Soviet Union domains are still a thing, they probably would have stayed around).

[1]: https://www.404media.co/taliban-shuts-down-queer-af-domain-b...

[2]: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/registering-and-renewing-eu-doma...

[3]: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce9m47y1ez2o

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

#250
post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

.io is (British) Indian Ocean (Territory).

I always thought these TLDs were a flight risk to be used in any serious capacity. What if the random state decides you/your business are in violation of [whatever] and kick you off?

I seem to remember bit.ly had some issues when turmoil happened in Libya
Post reply on HN