@stevenroose I think the whole notion of making money on any domain name, not just .org, is absurd. It's a simple database.
It should be priced at the actual cost, which should be very little.
Feel free to charge money on actual value added services.
"Is there nothing the internet can do to block this?"
The fact that it's at all controlled by a corporation (non-profit or not) doesn't make sense.
@kekcoin @FreePietje Yeah if the cost is say 10 cents, it wouldn't cost that much for a big corporate like Google to register all the names that are any sensible combination of 3 words or something for a few million euros. Or a domain for every Gmail username. Or for any username on any social network they see.
I.e. the price is also an anti-spam.
DNS is not bitcoin where there is a (deliberate) limited space to fight over.
Spam is already a problem and/as domain names are already bought en masse with the sole purpose of selling it for a higher price. A higher price doesn't fix it, it only means that the more money you have, the more influence/power you have.
Private equity firms seems to have a LOT of money ;)
I don't know what the proper solution is, but this latest debacle shows again that it is broken
I don't deny that.
I also think that putting a price on it is (a) wrong (solution).
I think the "first come, first serve" rule is fair.
In the .nl TLD there is (afaik) an additional rule that one can be compelled to transfer a domain name if it's in the public interest. Hypothetical example: if some random person got the politie.nl (police.nl) domain name, (s)he can be compelled to transfer it to the actual police organization
Arbitrary? Yes. But I don't mind in this case
@kekcoin @FreePietje First come first serve is basically what Namecoin and ENS do, right? Current DNS as well. The problem is that there are no limits. I think it would make sense to force ccTLD's to only sell to entities existing in the country. And limit to perhaps 5 per person and 10 per company or something arbitrary. And globals should just not exist in that scenario.
I hadn't heard of ENS before and always suspected that Namecoin is one of the very few projects that was trying to find a solution to an actual problem*. But I haven't looked into it, so I don't know.
*) almost all other projects have a solution, blockchain, and they try to find a problem for it. If they can't find it, they'll probably create it and try to convince the world it needs that 'solution'.
@FreePietje @kekcoin The ENS can be useful. Sadly it's built on #Ethereum.. #Namecoin is #Bitcoin merge-mined. So it's supposed to be ideal. I haven't heard much of the project for many years, though.
It would be cool if those crazy web-devs building all the Ethereum infrastructure could do some work on Namecoin. Sadly there are no ICOs throwing millions at them, though. I guess they have misaligned motivations..
The cost of being the authority is part of the actual cost afaic.
If one get to be more authoritarian* because one has more money, that would be a clear indication the 'solution' is wrong.
The current system is already wrong. See https://www.gandi.net/en/domain/tld and explain to me why the prices differ (so widely). (this is not critique on gandi)
Everyone deserves to have a name and that mustn't depend on wealth
*not sure if that's the right word, but I like the pun nonetheless
@stevenroose How about DNS over lightning?
@TallTim How would that work?
@stevenroose Pretty damn well with incentives.