pull down to refresh
41 sats \ 16 replies \ @DarthCoin 9 Jan \ parent \ on: 🔥 🔥 Over 1 BTC irrevocably burned on the Spaces Protocol 🔥 🔥 bitcoin
idiots wasting their BTC on useless things.
I had similar reaction at first, but after reading docs I frame it as "Names should be neutral and not personal, so you buy it out from everyone".
Winning an auction by burning coins is like paying everyone in the ecosystem pro rata. Which seems sensible for things like domains/names.
reply
Why would you sell an identity?
Why do one even WANT an on chain identity.
Nothing good can come of this.
reply
I never said anything about selling identity. As I understand the use-case here is something like domain registration.
Currently DNS system is permissioned and controlled by a human organization.
This allows for permission-less domain registration. When every web-browsers can resolve such domains we are one step closer towards truly decentralized and permision-less internet.
reply
No it wont.
There is no such thing as decentralized DNS. There will likely never be decentralized DNS that works for your average person.
We have a better chance of decentralizing the money (Bitcoin) than decentralizing names on the internet.
If Namecoin failed and ENS failed and Handshake Failed and DNSchain failed and AlephZero failed
why would some janky hack that relies on bitcoin spam work?
This is the worst possible solution to a non-problem.
reply
There is no such thing as decentralized DNS.
Exactly, that's why they are trying to create it xD
We have a better chance of decentralizing the money (Bitcoin) than decentralizing names on the internet.
Yeah, and if you have decentralized money, you can use it to power other decentralized projects like decentralized domains.
And who you pay TO for that domain using decentralized money? To every participant pro-rata - that is the decentralized way.
If Namecoin failed and ENS failed and Handshake Failed and DNSchain failed and AlephZero failed
And that proves what? You do realize that before bitcoin there were dozens of failed projects, right? That's how you make stuff work - by trying over and over improving each time.
Also IMHO this idea is way better than shitcoin solutions like Namecoin. It directly uses bitcoin and its POW without any shitcoinery on top.
reply
Namecoin is a much better protocol than anything done here. It is a true attempt at a decentralized protocol (not a spam on some other unrelated chain).
Then Larimer tried with DNS on Bitshares. [edit: BitDNS turned into Namecoin]. Also failed.
Every new blockchain tries this. It always fails.
Decentralized still worthless because nobody is going to use your resolver.
Its this simple.
DNS is a critical security control, and you are weakening that control by allowing any malicious spammer ability to set names.
I call this the "CocaCola" problem. Any DNS system that lets an arbitrary user register 'cocacola.namespace' is fundamentally untrustworthy, and will never be adopted.
Ive seen attempts at alternative dns roots for 25 years. Not a single one works today.
The most used "decentralized dns" is ENS, and that broke when Griffith got pinched. Its worthless as the day it was created. 'Decentralized' lol.
You can send your grandmother Bitcoin in a wallet. Easy.
You never will be able to get your grandmother to resolve decentralized names on her phone (especially in a way that does not open them up to malicious name risk).
Its never going to happen.
Stop trying to make it happen.
As a matter of fact NMC was also POW, even mined together with BTC for a while.
Why it failed? I don't know exactly, I think the code was hijacked or something like that, I can't remember exactly.
No, this is just crap scam.
reply
shitcoin mentality to get precious sats from gullible fools
reply
100%. What a waste of precious sats.
reply
deleted by author