The future of domain names

[Kaleido]

You have got to be kidding about "blockchain domains". What a load of cobblers. If you think that businesses will be happy to put their entire business on something that is gone the moment they lose their "private key" then you're having a laugh!

I don't think anything in particular. I was merely posting something interesting related to the future of domains. Thanks for your opinion.

 

[cloud]

Why?

If that was a question to me, I'm not against it because they have used it in response to a business need. They wanted something as a backbone to their automated process that is non-disputable, externally verifiable and is a replacement for humans to progress domain sales though. If their blockchain says so, then it is 'the truth'.

 

[Siusaidh]

I think we probably all dream of some new naming system that just starts to emerge, so we can get in early like we wish we had in 1990 or something with the early domain names.

When I think of all those domain names just not even existing yet, and waiting to be registered, it makes me so mad! I came on board in 1998, and even then there were so many useful domain names available, but I only bought a handful for personal use.

Now if new technologies started to emerge, the usernames or something could be a case of first-come first-served. I got a nice gmail username when they first appeared. But in all likelihood, the domain era was just its own thing.

I sometimes think it appeals to similar tendencies that stamps have for stamp collectors.

It's kind of the hunter-gatherer thrill.

 

[RobM]

No my question was to your statement:

'I personally think that what Dan.com have done with "blockchain technology" seems quite sensible and innovative.'

What they have 'done' can already be automated...and often is.

 

[cloud]

No my question was to your statement:

'I personally think that what Dan.com have done with "blockchain technology" seems quite sensible and innovative.'

What they have 'done' can already be automated...and often is.

You're preaching to the converted at this point. However, Blockchain seems like a decent fit for this application. You submit a transaction to it, others can download it and verify it to guarantee that it hasn't been tampered with over time.

- Bob owns x.com
- Mildred agreed to pay $1 for x.com (contract signed by both parties)
- Dan bot initiated transfer of x.com from Godaddy to LCN
- Mildred accepted transfer of x.com
- Bob transferred x.com to Mildred successfully
- Funds released to Bob

I can take a copy of the blockchain and see the trail on the stupid convoluted blockchain forever and verify that it happened. Whoopdiedoo!

 

[RobM]

Yes but that's my point. It's creating a 'solution' to a problem that doesn't exist *and* has to rely on other people adopting it.
This is blockchain summed up. That's probably why it hasn't gained the traction it seems to believe it should have.

 

[cloud]

True. But not for the Dan.com application. They are using it for their own business needs. Who am I to say that the fact you can verify things in the past is or isn't solving a problem in their business...?

 

[RobM]

A few thousand of those transactions and it'll only be 100Gazillabytes in size Blockchain is bloated, inefficient, and really quite a poor way of approaching a perceived problem. It is the betamax or video disc of technology

 

[cloud]

A few thousand of those transactions and it'll only be 100Gazillabytes in size Blockchain is bloated, inefficient, and really quite a poor way of approaching a perceived problem. It is the betamax or video disc of technology

Not to mention the amount of electricity used. The dan blockchain probably isn't going to be subject to the same bloat as the crypto ones .

I'm a software dev and I can't think of a common or simple way that I could guarantee that something hadn't been tampered with other than a checksum of some kind. But you have to store the checksums somewhere and who's to say that the checksum list hasn't been tampered with and how can anyone who comes to it without any knowledge guarantee that it hasn't been tampered with........... therefore as far as I understand the crapchain solves that particular problem.

 

[cloud]

.

 

[lazarus]

-

 

[brett]

I remember the days of Direct Navigation. You could park your names and comfortably make the reg fees. I then scaled....haha! Doesn't work these days.

 

[Sam]

I remember the days of Direct Navigation. You could park your names and comfortably make the reg fees. I then scaled....haha! Doesn't work these days.

It still does work if you have the right names

 

[brett]

It still does work if you have the right names

Yes, I get a few that way - but just sadly not as good as it was!

 

[Sam]

Yes, I get a few that way - but just sadly not as good as it was!

Yes rewind to 1998

 

[dee]

Blockchain has been the buzzword for a while now, the same as 'cloud' was before it. I think the technology will find it's niche rather than everyone trying to lever it into everything at the moment. Let's face it...bitcoin kicked it all off and while there's money to be made it will be the wild west for a bit.

I personally see a future for things like smart contracts based on blockchain tech. So say you download load a song or a music video and the rights holders automatically get paid. Finance also can probably benefit. Things like swift interbank transfer systems that have brought interbank money transfers down from days to seconds ( ripple being the blockchain backbone, and is currently in use)

No matter what system we end up on, in the cloud, distributed web, whatever.... as humans we rely on language to communicate and associate things with memory.

man wants to see nude women..... searches for 'naked women' ends up on nakedsluts.eth or wherever. Either way there's a language element, and then there's also a locality issue. The domain system works fine at the mo.

 

[RobM]

The thing with those examples:
1) there are already sites and mechanisms for artists to get paid when their songs are played/downloaded
2) the only thing holding up interbank transfers....is banks. There is a reason for that - they earn! Even if it was down to technology they can still process *far* more transactions without the infrastructure needed for bulky transaction details as it stands.
So basically, again, it is simply not needed here.

 

[dee]

It is the betamax or video disc of technology

lol..... betamax was a better than vhs technolgy aswell. JVC licenced vhs to anyone and their dog. Sony waited to license betamax. Job done. VHS won as costs came down for consumers.

Money always wins.Your average punter doesn't give a shite about quality over quantity

 

[RobM]

VHS won because of porn. We had both in my house and betamax was better quality. However there was a lot of porn about on vhs only and that was the tipping point. At least in UK anyway. Also, as you say, licensing issues.

 

[dee]

1) there are already sites and mechanisms for artists to get paid when their songs are played/downloaded

Agreed. But they don't get paid for most plays/ downloads It relies on honesty and people pirate / distribute / copy. Its been going on since i was a kid with cassettes and has been magnified exponentially by digital tech. When DRM gets sorted to the point they cant , then the film/music industry with grab hold with all it can .

2) the only thing holding up interbank transfers....is banks. There is a reason for that - they earn! Even if it was down to technology they can still process *far* more transactions without the infrastructure needed for bulky transaction details as it stands.

Agreed. 100 % . But again, economics will win. There are already banks using the system, so its shit or get of the pot. Customers will go elsewhere.