Follow

The problem with DNS isn't just ICANN; throwing it on a blockchain isn't going to fix DNS's problems (not Namecoin, not .eth either). Still phishable, still has squatting issues, etc.

The problem is taking a global-scope approach. Instead, we should start with local contexts.

I've written recently about how blockchains are largely misunderstood by both enthusiasts and detractors alike: dustycloud.org/blog/what-is-a-

But one thing I hate about most ~blockchain solutions is it's *too easy* to throw centralized mindsets on top, reproducing their problems

I guess I still need to write up my "decentralized convergence vs decentralized agents" explanation which gets at the heart of this. Only so much time...

@cwebber my observartion is that humans at large don't want decentralized agency, but rather convenience. That's why I think that the only way to achieve self-hosting, for instance, is to let people host from their phones.

@jonn @cwebber I fear it's worse than that: they're not just differently weighted priorities; convenience is an *overriding* priority for most people. It won't really become a thing unless it's the *default* thing.

@cwebber not only too easy but most of the time, the explicit point of it all

@cwebber One interesting thing I am thinking about in this space is making self-assigned (or publicly assigned) names more trustworthy. For instance, in the Pizza Piano example, when Ben gets the callerid Pizza Piano, their phone would check their trust network using something like the Appleseed trust metric, they could see "Pizza Piano (good trust icon)" and gain more confidence through transitive trust. This could also be used for moderation and other similar messages. For instance, someone can post "paypa1.com: malicious" which would then get shown before trying to open up the site (or would be outright blocked, according to preferences.) but if there was another legitimate service, paypail.com, someone could post a message "paypail.com: commonly confused with paypal.com". These messages would be tied to an id/name pair. so if (back to phones) 123456789 claimed to be "Alice" sometimes and "Bob" othertimes, then each name would be trusted (or moderated) separately.@cwebber One interesting thing I am thinking about in this space is making self-assigned (or publicly assigned) names more trustworthy. For instance, in the Pizza Piano example, when Ben gets the callerid Pizza Piano, thier phone would check tthier trust network using something like the Appleseed trust metric, they could see "Pizza Piano (good trust icon)" and gain more confidence through transitive trust. This could also be used for moderation and other similar messages. For instance, someone can post "paypa1.com: malicious" which would then get shown before trying to open up the site (or would be outright blocked, according to preferences.) but if there was another legitimate service, paypail.com, someone could post a message "paypail.com: commonly confused with paypal.com". These messages would be tied to an id/name pair. so if (back to phones) 123456789 claimed to be "Alice" sometimes and "Bob" othertimes, then each name would be trusted (or moderated) separately. Hope that made sense.

@cwebber I hate this middleclick pastes thing. It drives me off the wall but I haven't figured out how to disable it. So, sorry for the double message.

@powerofzero There’s a way to turn it off in Gnome, but I’m not sure about anything else.

@cwebber @spritelyproject I wonder: is there a petname extension to GNU LibC's NSS just like there is for DNS?

I considered integrating alternate naming systems (might still do *something* for petnames, so websites can use their own) into my browser engine to cover the other corners of Zooko's triangle, but decided I don't want to behave like I'm the only app who matters. Like Firefox/Chrome did with DoH.

@cwebber Don't think I'd seen Backchannel before; it's interesting that it seems to be *almost* a capability design. It has introductions, per-contact "identities" vs. global ones... no delegation it seems but otherwise it's pretty close I think?

@cwebber By local contexts do you mean the use of petnames or something else?

@cwebber The design of the GNU Name System was (is?) interesting because it also revolves around petnames, with some work determining what user interfaces could make it practical.

git.gnunet.org/bibliography.gi

@civodul I think GNS got a lot wrong tho but that's an expansion I don't have time for right at the moment :\

@cwebber Ever tried installing GNS? To me, it seems there are not too many alternatives available of, say, routable naming authorities.

Even what could be the "IPv6" of naming in the Internet, NDN, doesn't progress any better, nor would IPNS or the likes. How'd we get here?

I mean, in local context, DNS plays out its full potential already: service discovery in private networks through OpenWRT, Pi-Hole or etcd in k8s alike is a breeze.

What'd be missing would be some kind of public escrow ...

@cwebber ... similar to how we get our certificates at Let's Encrypt, but that only verifies domain ownership, and is as such already building on top of the DNS.

The other way round, how could I as an end user subscribe to your naming authority and inherit your localised perspective on domain name spaces to date?

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Octodon

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!