Domain Registry Takes Sci-Hub’s .SE Domain Name Offline

Post by px43 » Sat, Jan 28, 2023, 8:10 PM UTC

zozbot234 wrote: post #16

teddyh wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The “rent-seeking certificate infrastructure” could be solved if web browsers used the DNS (and DNSSEC) to validate certificates. The DNS, on the other hand, is more tricky. If you want human-readable and globally distinct (and stable) names, you have to have a centralized structure to keep track of who has what name. The best we could come up with was the DNS, which is at least hierarchical instead of completely mon…

Human-readable names can potentially be pseudo-random, and thus securely generated. What's hard (indeed, considered largely infeasible) is meaningful , decentralized, secure names.

Post by detrites » Sat, Jan 28, 2023, 8:22 PM UTC

jeroenhd wrote: post #20

dimmke wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know what? You're right. That's literally the only proposed blockchain application I think I've ever read that I think would actually work.

I don't think it would. The moment the blockchain would start getting any traction, the big blockchain companies would use their capital to get their hands on every recognizable domain name and within days the only remaining "domains" would look like passwords. You could then probably buy readable domains for exorbitant amounts of cryptocoins. I prefer the current registrar setup over anarchist blockchain hellscapes.…

Post by jeroenhd » Sat, Jan 28, 2023, 8:40 PM UTC

from wrote: post #30

jeroenhd wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it would. The moment the blockchain would start getting any traction, the big blockchain companies would use their capital to get their hands on every recognizable domain name and within days the only remaining "domains" would look like passwords. You could then probably buy readable domains for exorbitant amounts of cryptocoins. I prefer the current registrar setup over anarchist blockchain hellscapes.…

You know domain sniping already happens right? There is extensive auctioning infrastructure. And most of the good names were claimed a long time ago. The only way to get an existing domain name without paying the owner for it is to sue over trademark violations or stuff like that which often will cost more than just buying it.

Post by jeroenhd » Sat, Jan 28, 2023, 8:44 PM UTC

detrites wrote: post #33

jeroenhd wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it would. The moment the blockchain would start getting any traction, the big blockchain companies would use their capital to get their hands on every recognizable domain name and within days the only remaining "domains" would look like passwords. You could then probably buy readable domains for exorbitant amounts of cryptocoins. I prefer the current registrar setup over anarchist blockchain hellscapes.…

There's a simple solution for that: to buy a domain on-chain that has an equivalent off-chain, the existing owner first needs to prove ownership of that equivalent domain. After, it can be sold freely (as uniques could already). The on-chain contract could be written such that a buyer generates a token, supplied to an on-chain verification oracle that checks token.owned-domain.TLD exists, and if it does grants issuan…

Post by swagmoney1606 » Sat, Jan 28, 2023, 8:47 PM UTC

counttheforks wrote: post #19

Kukumber wrote: post #15

they should just mention that the content is only available for people to train their ML model Microsoft can get away with it, we might as well do the same

What is this referencing? Just ChatGPT et al illegally slurping up everything they can get their hands on, or something more specific?