I think what is different with Seneca’s approach is that registering is unique because it’s the domain + public key so there can be countless, therefore it can still be cheap and not a bidding war.
What the browser has to do is resolve the highest rank which is the “continuous auction” part, someone not getting PtD or without a community etc is going to have to pay continuously whereas a legitimate domain that is in use ought to be able to afford keeping a top rank. Doesn’t have to be excessively expensive either.
Plus would still work with the idea that 1 SN(T) can afford you 1B (or whatever number) of domains.
Flexible and a win win for sustainability and adoption to me.
Imo, NRS should be practically free for almost all names. However, distributing current big names in this way will lead to squatting. We’ve talked to death about it, but £200 for safe://google will be an utter, total bargain. However, safe://1aszl3 would barely be worth a penny. Same number of characters, safe data storage cost, but completely different context.
For folks who just want a name it should be near free. For those who want a very special name, it is a completely different ball game. Balancing the two will be key to the success of NRS, imo.
I still think that maidsafe could hold big names and auction them off. It would fund the project with the money that some squatting chancer will claim otherwise.
Isn’t this not taking into account Seneca’s idea? Perhaps I’m misinterpreting and not doing or justice but if a domain is domain name + pub key to the network then can there not be x number of Google.com’s because each registered is unique? It just comes down to who has highest rank for the browser to resolve with close ties being presented to the user.
Seems like a good solution to me and quite unlike the above auction systems mentioned.
And auctions like this are often peppered with people deliberately bidding just to jack the price up. When someone really wants something they will keep bidding higher and the trolls love pushing them up.
I agree since we wish to always have Safe for everyone, even those with little. And if each file I want to publish pubically has to pay bigger for the NRS name for each file works against people wanting to publish scientific/technical notes/tables/papers since they often fit in the 3 chunks but costs significantly more for the human readable name.
If NRS is a modest 10x the cost of a chunk store then each paper is costing 3+10 put costs for each table/note/paper rather than 3+1. A 3 times increase in cost. So if I were to publish a ton of tech stuff from the 60’s then its costing 3 times to do it.
But if NRS is 20x or 50x the cost then no way can they have a human readable NRS for them
Normal you publish many files on one domain instead of registering a domain name for each individual file though. At least on the web, but it’s an interesting ideas having the possibility of a unique domain name for a file. safe://neo/mytechnicalpaper.pdf vs safe://mytechnicalpaper.pdf
This will be possible, and so a reseller market and bidding on domains creates itself.
But if this is the default, then what does onboarding look like? I create a Safe, then choose a SafeID like @jimcollinson, and then an auction starts? How long does it run for? How long do I have to wait to get my name? A week? Then I get outbid at the end, and I’m back to square one.
Thanks for confirming this and very glad it is still the case.
Imo, auctions should only be part of secondary/reseller markets. It shouldn’t be integral to the primary market.
However, this means the primary market has a danger of being dominated by would be secondary market dealers. They will be ready to arbitrage between the network price and the market price. For big names like Google, Apple, etc, they will make a fortune doing so too.
Personally, I’d much rather see this fortune turned into something which will help to fund the network and it’s apps. It is such low hanging fruit that I’m surprised it hasn’t already been written into the launch plan, tbh.
Maybe not that many, but even if no-one else bids, I still have to wait for the auction to finish… bit of a strange experience.
Or maybe someone sets up a bot to just bid on every NRS auction that is opened, because naturally those names are more valuable. So the rich people and the squatters still win, because now I have to buy back my name from a bot on the secondary market anyway, or maybe I win my bidding war agains a bot, but I paid more than I bargained for, the bot just drove up the price because it can. And having waited a week already, just to get started!
If you read Seneca’s proposal carefully you will understand that the auction is permanent. A public name is priceless and this is healthy for the network. I think that Big Tech companies fighting for popular public names could finance the whole network.
On the contrary, a personal name will be cheap unless it is too short or it is too common or you are unlucky and someone with the same name insists on getting it. In that case be creative and add a small variation on your name like you currently do to create your username in some popular sites.
Anyway your instance of the name will remain accessible but not directly if you are out bid.
Am I right in thinking that there could be a countless number of the same NRS name such as safe://Google but to the network each of those has a unique address and it’s up to the browser to resolve the highest ranked (paid/maintained) of the sites?
I highlighted my main point to the question. I like the mentioned approach.
Ties or close ties in rank are presented to the user or able to be kept as a bookmark from a previous visit.
This is such an awful concept. I don’t understand why one can think it has any benefit other than to perpetuate the status quo in the domain name market. The typical domain name market approach is something we should be veering from, not replicating.
What are domain names anyhow? The expensive ones are just common generic words. These common PUBLIC dictionary words should be free to use like air in order to convey a persistent message that allows simple navigation of the network.
Privatization of individual words is the death knell of any language. That’s what trademark registration is for. Have you every had to write code in a proprietary computer language? It’s ridiculous.
I would not implement auctions as core feature, more likely at application level where people can sell their domain NRS as an NFT/DBC? But for that a core feature like multisig or HTLC would be great as some kind of escrow service.
If a NRS is available one should be able to buy it on-demand, first come first served. A rich economy in selling domains is great way to attract economic health for Safe Network.
We could make a list of very popular domain names and let Safe Network allocate those to indexes of relevant popular data. But to what extend would you do that, and does it really make things better?
Freedom to choose and buy/sell any NRS domain is in my opinion best way to go and resonates the power of the individual. Anyone can still buy a NRS cheap, you just need to be creative and anyone you share it with can be visiting your domain more easily.
My thought is that if I choose a mid-level popular site name, say a shopping site. Then I outbid the actual store for a few hours/days and my safesite is essentially a clone of the actual store except the payments for goods ordered go to my account.
Then I rake in the payments, ignore the orders since I’ll never send anything out LOL.
Scammers delight it would seem to me. Just outbid the true site and scam all the people coming to the store by using the NRS name. The length of time the scammer gets is the time it takes for the legit store owner to realise and then outbid the scammer. @JimCollinson Sounds like a disaster to me, your thoughts
In the end people will want a NRS name to always go to the site that it always has gone to. Perpetual Web concept
Yes, anybody can create its own content of a public name. When you send a link it will point to your instance. Also if you navigate to a specific instance of a public name the browser can memorize this instance, so anytime you type this name you can retrieve it.
The problem is when you navigate to the public name for the first time by just entering the name (without link and without history). How the instance is selected?
Seneca’s proposal answers this question by choosing the one that was the most expensive for its owner. But the other instances are still accessible, a list could be presented maybe ordered by decreasing cost or creation date (if feasible), it’s a matter of client side UI.