Lol…we’re not squabbling, we always go on like this (me and blindsite)…it’s just friendly banter…
No, I wouldn’t say so, “uniqueness” has to be tied to a particular thing or place to be able to call it unique. I mean something could be unique within the context of the SafeNet whether the Universe is infinite or not.
The only thing you could say about an infinite Universe is that you couldn’t say with any certainty that anything unique existed within it.
This would not affect the fact that it would still be unique to the SafeNet…
You seem to be using a variation of Blindsite’s argument only based on the infinite properties of the place rather than the complex properties of the ID . The properties are not important, other than whether it is one of a kind within whatever context you are claiming something to be unique.
Incorrect. I enter the name “Al-Kafir” as a public ID but you have already entered it and I get an error saying it already exists. That is not my inability to come up with the phrase Al-Kafir and possibly annoy you but rather the system forbidding me from using it because you have gotten there first. Al-Kafir is not a unique phrase. No more than Adam or Bob or Charlse or Dennis is. There are plenty of people, very different people named Adam or Bob or Charles. Imagine you wanted to name your child Bob and went to register the name but the government said “Sorry that name is taken, please choose a different more unique name.” But we already know there are dozens of people named Bob and people tell them apart just fine.
But people aren’t identified by a hash. They are identified by a NAME. You don’t register a hashe you register an alphanumeric phrase for people to see. The hashe is created based on that phrase. The HASH is unique the name is not. Certainly you can make a unique piece of data based on a memorable piece of data but given there are only so many linguistic combinations and given there is no recycling on safe again those names are going to run out sooner or later.
Lol…yes, I get your point, but think there may be some confusion and we’re talking at cross purposes here. What you are describing is how I last heard DIrvine explain how it would work…multiple bobs and not sure if changed or not.
All I’m saying is that from my basic conceptual, non technical understanding which I concede I may be wrong about the “Bob” must logically have some “additional” input added prior to hashing in order to maintain uniqueness. I’m just reasoning that “same” user names cannot result in different hashes otherwise.
I agree you can have multiple bobs, but the “bob” alone cannot be hashed - I thought this was how it worked anyway but will read up.[quote=“Blindsite2k, post:135, topic:9933”]
But people aren’t identified by a hash. They are identified by a NAME.
My understanding was the Network identifies by hash and users by name…
Just to mention that if you take the multiple word idea as just 1 example and used say a choice of 4 words from 4 random columns containing say 50 words each, taken from say 20 or so possible columns, I think you could be generating somewhere in the region of billions of unique names - wouldn’t you?
The thing that stands out to me is that we are talking about something that will affect a minority of users (businesses etc). Otherwise, this is analogous to treating the use/ownership of “vanity” personalised car number plates as if it were a Human right.
The only right a user should have is to a unique and memorable name - unless they pay. And if they pay, then the admin work and rewards etc should be the property of the Community, rather than Maidsafe, (I think they’d agree) which can only be achieved in the form of a Dao.
Ok, say I am the only white person in a classroom of black people - I would be unique within the context of the classroom - not relative to it. I couldn’t be relatively unique, I either am or I’m not.
However, if we look within the context of the whole school, there is 1 other white person. I am still unique within my class, but not my school. My colour is relatively uncommon, not relatively unique.
You can’t call something unique without giving it some context.
You also can’t say something is more or less unique relative to something else - it either is or isn’t.
That’s how I see it anyway…
SAFO: Safe Access For Only those that are prepared to spend 15 hours trying to figure out how to get connected to the safenet and then another 10 hours trying to figure out how to setup a counterintuitive identity system, and then another 5 hours trying to find someone by some ultra dumb anomalous moniker.
I’m scanning through threads to find what the latest actual ID implementation plan is actually. I’m still working from idea at beginning of this thread last year - is this still current or is it summarized somewhere do you know? Cheers
Apologies ahead of time for the long post…
Quick Summary => SUDS/SUDO evolution via Public ID dictionary prefixes
I just started up the web hosting manager and it asked me to type in a “public id”, so I came to the forum to look for suggestions on id names and found this thread. Very informative.
I can see the positives and negatives to both sides to the argument. On the one hand you have the entrepreneurial minded who want to keep things familiar and easy to use for the masses while at the same time initiating a gold rush via simple word registrations, thereby monetizing the safe dns to the future benefit of either the site owners who get lucky enough to register first, or the network itself by holding certain names ransom (I think that discussion might have been on another thread). On the other hand you have those that are tired of domain squatters making creative life difficult on the oldnet and view that model at work in perpetuity on SAFE as an unholy union. After reading over some of your solutions to various concerns I’d like to offer a hybrid approach which I personally feel to be the best of both worlds. Perhaps this has been mentioned before on the forum and if so I apologize. Otherwise, please consider the following:
When I first browsed the internet years ago I relied a lot on directories, some people still do (craigslist, 4chan). Why not use the safe dns as a built in self-subscribing low-level directory feature. This would be accomplished by having the network reserve every single word in all human language dictionaries prior to launch. To some extent you could view this as the reverse of the .com,.net,.org dns extensions of present day where instead the SAFE network uses common language safe dns prefixes in order to guide the structure of this “safe universal directory structure” (suds) in a more egalitarian manner. For example:
If someone wanted to use sentences like:
or if they just wanted some unique hash:
they could do that too. It might also be good to reserve some space for traditional nationalities (cities, towns, and map data as well) for the good karma, although a lot of those will come out of the dictionary search:
There might be some name collisions, but MaidSafe along with the community could get some kind of consensus to sort them out pre launch.
Essentially I am suggesting that MaidSafe do the dictionary attack ahead of time and sequester those names. Next, I think you could take things one step further. if someone where to actually visit the root safe://mathematics id, it would provide some kind of an index with descriptions of all public id extensions that are found by longer id word combinations. This could be through users posting to some kind of a wiki, with user ratings and comments, or there could be a crawler app located there that would run GETS to crawl, summarize, and organize all the public ids under a given safe dns prefix.
Let’s face it, claiming a single word out of the dictionary to be your own personal domain is not really that creative. And if there are businesses on the oldnet that have chosen their business names that way then they will need to be creative in order to differentiate themselves. (ex: safe://apple.farmers.of.new.york vs. safe://apple.computers)
Maidsafe could probably put out a CEP for the best dictionary attack script and then use it prior to launch. Under this system you would still get some squatting with two and three word dictionary attacks and that is probably just fine. People that come up with a single word that’s not in the dictionary would be just fine too. At least the low hanging fruit will be set aside and people would need to show some innovation. Due to the perpetual nature of SAFE, I think it is too just dangerous to allow for the possibility that common language dictionary words could EVER be locked down. How far would we be if words used in computer languages were copyrighted FOREVER and only one person could use ‘if’ or ‘else’ or ‘while’ or ‘do’ or ‘main’? It seems like this type of self-subscribing directory structure would help ensure “Satisfactory Addresses For Everyone”.
EDIT: This concept for a “public reserve” or “game reserve” (analogy to reserve land set aside for endangered species) for Public IDs would address some of the discussion about domain squatting that took place in a related thread.
I just finished making a website after writing up those thoughts.
It looks like the safe dns puts the pubid as the domain extension,
and has whatever the user wants for the website name as the prefix.
So I guess this idea doesn’t really work? I’ll need you or others to clarify…
Not only popular words. Every single word known to humankind and currently listed in world dictionaries at launch.
It just struck me that if this kind of safe dns system is feasible, then the landing page for a single word pubID could start as just a standard dictionary definition of that word in whatever language it was written followed by a wiki index for extended or “sub pub” IDs that could grow from there. This would be an interesting dataset to use during beta testing. You might be able to have a competition to see if anyone could damage network security enough to delete a word. At network launch the genesis data in SAFE ends up being an immutable dictionary of all global languages… unified in binary. Wait a second, this theme is starting to sound vaguely familiar…
“Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.”
That was probably the first time in my life I’ve quoted scripture… eh don’t judge me I’m still a scientist… my mother would be proud.
True, anyone could, but if the original is well defined I think people would stick with it by consensus or laziness. It becomes the safe reference dns. Having lot’s of pet names does give infinite reusability and I understand its benefit, but it does lead to higher complicatedness. I think there is a lot of value to having some kind of reference point via a unified safe dns “language” that is consistent for all users across all apps. SAFE network would be able to do this in an equitable and non-centralized way after genesis. That way, when I tell someone “hey go checkout the updates at safe://apps.whiteoutmashups” there is no confusion based on what version or flavor of app they have chosen. I also don’t need to worry about someone squatting “safe://cats” or “safe://moose” for all eternity since there is still a decent chance I could get “safe://moose.jlpell” or “safe://sometimes.cats-eat-food-all-day”. It’s a lot more complicated to say “hey go download petnamingsystem-v0.905.tgz, install it, run it, give it authorization, then find me at safe://cats”. Seems like using human language as a safe reference system would be a neat compromise that everyone might be able to agree on and it would constrain domain squatting to some degree but still allow for it at the same time…
One good example of using a reference system and also having pet customizations is how the gentoo portage package manager works. There is a standard reference package tree that people trust, but the system also allows for easy customization via “overlays” created by either the user or downloaded from others. It’s a really nice user friendly and customizable system that the safe dns standards could draw from for inspiration.
I was just thinking more about this kind of “public reserve” for the Public IDs based on single dictionary words and collections of well-known common proper names (priscilla, elvis, troon, boston, sydney, etc)…
It would appear that proceeding in the same manner that things are handled on alpha 2, the dictionary based system I suggested would mean that you could never have anything like:
Since hotdog, hot, not, and dog are all reserved by the system due to being single words in the english dictionary they would use the root addresses safe://hotdog, safe://hot, safe://not, or safe://dog as the location for the hypothetical MaidSafe Foundation “public reserve” information.
However, you could have :
safe://hotdog.nothotdog or safe://hotdog.not-hotdog
Since nothotdog is not-in-a-dictionary and would be a valid Public ID for someone to claim. This situation would fit fine with the way the webhosting manager is working now and so individuals would choose where they end up in the public “safe unified directory organizer” or SUDO (linux copycat but sounds better than SUDS for now until there is a better moniker) when they type in the name of their “service”. However it would likely mean that people would need to use weird spelling, l33t speech, @ symbols, or hyphenated multi-word publicIDs in order for things to be valid. Although this will not likely be an issue considering some of the user names on this forum.
Maybe the MaidSafe Foundation would be in control of the dictionary based sites at first, providing an initial wiki type page with multisig keys that would allow the community to manage those domains much like the Wikimedia Foundation does with wiki pages etc. Maybe not. I think there are a lot of different options though that could make sense…
Some of this would address the concerns posted here.