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

Eu.org, free domain names since 1996

nic.eu.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 210 posts

Re: Eu.org, free domain names since 1996

#201

Post by tasuki »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #173
tasuki wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something something blockchain! I believe for "real" ownership of domain names, a blockchain would actually make sense.

This doesn't require blockchain. The registrar could charge you a one time fee to buy the domain forever if ICANN allowed it. It doesn't. Permissionless blockchains are especially ill-suited for this purpose because KYC for domain names is a thing.

Well then you're still relying on the registrar, on ICANN, and your local legal system. But also, yes: with a blockchain, you're still relying on the blockchain, which can be attacked. There are no 100% solutions for virtual goods ownership :)

Re: Eu.org, free domain names since 1996

#202

Post by ricardo81 »

usr1106 wrote: post #187
ricardo81 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>technically The 'public suffix list' is one: https://publicsuffix.org/learn/

Yes, that's the list I had in mind. So it's not a normative document, but an empirical document maintained by volunteers. The introduction tells what is the difference between a domain (registered by one entity) and a subdomain (any number can be created by the same entity): If a website sets cookies for something above their domain, e.g. co.uk or org.eu the cookie would be valid on other entities' websites. Browsers…

Agree it is fragile, and indeed since there's no authority there's no authority to ask.

The likes of uk.com and others owned by Centralnic have been around a while.

I've never been sure what to call these since they aren't (as in top) TLDs.

Re: Eu.org, free domain names since 1996

#203

Post by justsomeguy123 »

anunay03 wrote: post #130
justsomeguy123 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe renewal makes sense to prevent squatting but the question remains: who receives the money paid?? If the money were to be used to secure the network somehow, it would make sense. If the money just goes to the creators... it was all just a money grab.

I am unsure about the speicfics but Handshake appears to burn the money paid. So that's fine. However most of the potential token supply (like 50%) was premined/airdropped to ssh keys of Github users with >15 followers.

> Handshake appears to burn the money paid. So that's fine.

That's not necessarily fine if the fee is in custom tokens. By burning they are just reducing supply, locking in the amount paid and increasing the value of their huge holding. It's pretty terrible.

Re: Eu.org, free domain names since 1996

#204

Post by dizhn »

logifail wrote: post #199
dizhn wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually if I remember correctly (at least in NJ) the registration shows the name of the creditor as the owner. That was my only past experience. Mine was a vote in the "no you don't own it" direction and mine was financing not even a lease. (Not that they are fundamentally so different)

Vehicle registration rules in the UK[0] make a clear distinction between the "registered keeper" of a vehicle (the person who "keeps" it, uses it day-to-day, and who is responsible for taxing it), and a vehicle's owner. A vehicle's registration papers show the keeper's name and details but the document states in large letters "This document is not proof of ownership". [0] https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-registration/new-a…

I think our paperwork shows the registration info of the person who registred it. Like in UK this is not ownership by itself. The paperwork also has a section for any liens on the property. This can be the creditor from the beginning or a private person or a government entity can have a claim due to debts. Nowadays these are all in the system of course. The paper card does not mean anything. Everything is looked up on the spot.

Re: Eu.org, free domain names since 1996

#205

Post by anunay03 »

justsomeguy123 wrote: post #203
anunay03 wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am unsure about the speicfics but Handshake appears to burn the money paid. So that's fine. However most of the potential token supply (like 50%) was premined/airdropped to ssh keys of Github users with >15 followers.

> Handshake appears to burn the money paid. So that's fine. That's not necessarily fine if the fee is in custom tokens. By burning they are just reducing supply, locking in the amount paid and increasing the value of their huge holding. It's pretty terrible.

Oh I mean it's fine as a concept, since everybody gets the money (in a situation where all the tokens were obtained "naturally").

Ofc in this case the Devs and the "sponsers" have 10% of it, so yea.

Re: Eu.org, free domain names since 1996

#206

Post by lern_too_spel »

tasuki wrote: post #201
lern_too_spel wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn't require blockchain. The registrar could charge you a one time fee to buy the domain forever if ICANN allowed it. It doesn't. Permissionless blockchains are especially ill-suited for this purpose because KYC for domain names is a thing.

Well then you're still relying on the registrar, on ICANN, and your local legal system. But also, yes: with a blockchain, you're still relying on the blockchain, which can be attacked. There are no 100% solutions for virtual goods ownership :)

With a Blockchain, you're still relying on your legal system and the people running the nodes. The Blockchain doesn't make the law go away.

Re: Eu.org, free domain names since 1996

#207

Post by sam0x17 »

vinay427 wrote: post #193
sam0x17 wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How the TLDs work is a really classic example of US imperialism. For example .gov is impossible to get for non-US entities, yet literal towns have .gov domains within the US, and there are even examples of people using .ca to mean california. Meanwhile outside countries have to resort to things like .gov.uk. That's right, tiny rural towns in the US have a better domain than the main UK government sites. Likewise .com…

> For example .gov is impossible to get for non-US entities I'll gladly concede this point. I do agree that ICANN favors the US for .gov (and .mil). It would definitely be preferable if these weren't approved at all or at least weren't restricted to US entities. > Likewise .com typically implies US, as affirmed by the .com.mx, etc variants I responded to this in my previous comment. As far as I know there wasn't a de…

My point is that the non-existence of a us-specific com suffix (.us.com) combined with the existence of country specific com suffixes (.com.mx, etc), implies that .com is us oriented, in a central sort of way affirmed by ICANN arguably. If com is for everyone, why have .com.mx? etc

Re: Eu.org, free domain names since 1996

#208

Post by MaxBarraclough »

bartvk wrote: post #56
aaomidi wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh not really. There’s really not much of a difference. For example would you consider .co.uk domains as subdomains

Visually and in perception, there's a huge difference.

I don't think there's much difference in perception. bbc.co.uk is a perfectly ordinary domain, for instance.

Re: Eu.org, free domain names since 1996

#209

Post by MrPromethee »

mike_d wrote: post #200
FernandoMax wrote: post #139

It seems more like "free sub-domains" not domains. EU.org is not endorsed to any European Union initiative. These things are quite unstable. I've seen URL shorteners (even one from goo.gl) and URL "redirectioners" and a lot of things like that disappear. Like Geocities in the wind. Sadly only archive.org is a source of memories.

> EU.org is not endorsed to any European Union initiative. EU.org predates the European Union.

A website created in 1996 doesn't predate an organization founded in 1993. However, it does predate the .eu domain.

Re: Eu.org, free domain names since 1996

#210

Post by happymellon »

sgjohnson wrote: post #189
happymellon wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is just how US law is structured though. They could just as easily say that they will reclaim the loss through recovery of your assets or by weight in blood. https://www.bristol.gov.uk/council-tax/what-happens-if-you-d... In the UK the process is different, which just shows that they don't have to take your house to reclaim outstanding taxes. The point is that the government has options, if the property recovery…

Council tax is not the same as property tax.

They are government taxes based upon the value of your house.

The government can take whatever they want in repayment as they are the government.

Post reply on HN