Public ID's (Discussion)


#21

An (initially :wink: , concise) case for NOT facilitating cybersquatting.

I suppose everyone here except the familiar trolls would prefer to see safenet user adoption skyrocket. So perhaps having every single clearnet site cybersquatted to make a few bucks by us, early adopters, is slightly detrimental to that purpose. My reasoning is that current internet users derive value from its use by using familiar sites, with well established brands. (in fact a very small percentage of sites claim the largest user numbers). Rushing to claim these very valuable digital property/domains (I would assume for the sake of future profits), would be creating a great barrier for these sites and services to make the switch and bring in with them their valuable loyal users, which we want, increasing the overall value of Safenet.

WE WILL SHOOT OURSELVES IN THE FOOT if we are greedy and shortsighted.

Therefore, I propose that all current registered domains on clearnet are reserved by maidsafe or other trusted party, and provided to their current owners at their request, without an expiration date and free of charge (or applying a cost based, processing fee structure).

Facilitating user adoption should be a priority if we want to reach a network effect large enough to diminish the risk of a hard fork by a consortium of parties (like current domain registers and tech behemoths like google, apple, facebook and such, or major media publishers and media companies). Excluding or creating barriers to port or mirror clearnet content to safenet will greatly decrease its value. Users go where the content is, let’s not create barriers for that content to be present in safenet.

(and by the way, hardforks of safenet would not be the end of the word, I would guess users would just adapt and have a varying percentage of vaults farming for different networks until a significant network effect develops on one of them). But safecoin ecosystem value would probably reflect such schisms).


Urbit is a virtual city in the cloud (address space crowdsale)
#22

We (who care about this project) will shoot ourselves in the foot if we sit back and do nothing.

Maidsafe does not seem interested at the moment so the community should start to take action in proposing a squatter system through the CEP IMO.

Please PM me or @19eddyjohn75 if you would like to help. Thank you.


#23

@Safety1st Although I agree that we should take action, it’s better to do so together as a community. We can create a community powered publicID auction, I willing to contribute $1000 to that. But all the money generated from this would go to Maidsafe, maybe a little would be set aside to pay for web related costs. Most important to me is that Maidsafe gets money in the kitty.

Sorry i have to go to work, have a nice day everybody:stuck_out_tongue:


#25

@nicklambert is probably correct, that it is too early to be thinking about this. Better to spend your energy on something else.


#26

@bitbybit

Seriously, why would MaidSafe or anyone else reserve IDs for current (btw. that changes every second) owners on the clearnet? It really doesn´t make sense to me. A large part of current ownership are domains is risk investment/domain squatting. Then you have corporations that claimed their right to own certain domains because they own a trademark.

I remember opposing the idea to sell publicIDs for several reasons

  1. with close to 0 cost we will see a lot of domain squatting within the first months of the SAFE network. I then expected users to turn towards decentralized DNS and what we currently see as “domains” will be merely cryptic keys. Then of course clear domain names will be irrelevant.
  2. it´s unlikely to provide sufficient funds
  3. we don´t know the precise implementation, there are several RFC for that matter as @dyamanaka has pointed out above

However, I believe I have to reconsider 1 and 2:

  1. I still expect massive domain squatting to take place if the price for registering a publicID is close to 0 or 0. If after few weeks you can´t register more than cryptic keys people may turn towards alternative solutions like pet naming system. However, this doesn´t mean that a ID sale wouldn´t find interested investors. It could even raise the value of clear name IDs.

  2. I think it was @happybeing who raised concerns whether a sale of publicIDs will gather sufficient funds to support development of MaidSafe for more than a month. The main reason why I supported that argument was that we were talking about prices in the Cent-range. The example of Urbit shows that people were willing to pay 200 USD for a project that is even more experimental (although we might have to consider that scaricity is higher in the case of Urbit).

A possible implementation I see (EDIT: I realised @19eddyjohn75 proposed something very similar in this [long] thread :wink:

  1. MaidSafe launches a page where users enter their email and a list of publicIDs they intend to purchase
  2. The event runs in two phases: a public auction and a public sale:
    a) whenever a publicID has been entered at least twice, this ID automatically becomes part of the auction. Users who entered the domain are informed 1 weeks ahead. More to the auction later.
    b) whenever a publicID has been entered only once, the user will be informed 1 week ahead that the ID is part of the public sale. In the public sale all entered domains are openly visible to everyone and cost a fixed price (i.e.100$/ID).

I think this give MaidSafe a decent revenue to finance and scale up their operation.

Regarding the auction I think that Second Price Sealed Bids are the best way to go. Possible implementations:

  1. For each ID a Bitcoin address is created. Users send their bids to the address. The highest amount paid from one address after 4 weeks wins the bid. The remaining bids are refunded. This includes, of course, risks for MaidSafe if something goes wrong with the reimbursement. Since we can expect several thousands of addresses, the handling can become complicated and errors may occur.
  2. An Tullock lottery would certainly prevent the hassle of reimbursement, but can´t be carried out with public BTC addresses.

Certainly there are even better solutions, feel free to add.

In general, @19eddyjohn75, I wonder why you don´t consider making a crowdsale for an ID auctionplatform on the SAFEnetwork? @dirvine stated elsewhere that IDs can be easily transferred, if I remember correctly, so it is definitely possible and certainly a market for buying/selling IDs.


#27

It seems like MaidSafe has fewer immediate funding issues at the moment with the extra MAID and the price rise from Yuanbao, at least for now. And they seem to be working on many other plans for funding, before having to sell ID’s to people


#28

Actually @dirvine stated explicitely that selling the coins would be the LAST option to consider, not the first.

Always good (and necessary) to examine diverse ways of funding. I don´t see how this is an argument against considering an ID sale.

EDIT: actually David said earlier they will look into it and that it will become very easy prospectively with data chains. (click)


#29

People, average users, already have familiar habits and entrenched behaviours on the web. They go where the content is. Making it difficut for current users to use these services ported to safe by way of creating a barrier could slow adoption rates. Facilitating it would asimilate them, raising visibility and the overall value of the ecosystem.

Thats the case. Its not a case of giving something for free, its a case for thinking strategically. (btwy i dont think youtube and the like will be with us for many years, its just a cog in the ad machine, so a decentralized approach to content distribution would likely make that model obsolete in the medium term, but short term, i say make it easy to adopt).

As for other technical solutions that solve current namespace isues and make cybersquating irrelevant im all for that since cybersquating feels a bit like bullying for turf, a fancy, crowd-approved name to extort latecomers using the current value of the legacy system as ransom. Its just not an elegant solution.

The more i think about it, the more it seems this could even be considered a potential attack vector, by registering every pronounceable combination of sylables and their many variants with a bot thus unableing anyone from having memorable public ids.


#30

Will Public ID’s be used as a SAFE Coin wallet address?

A farmer needs to setup a wallet address when starting a SAFE Vault.


#31

I do think they have different key pairs as everything has different IDs


#32

Are you saying a wallet APP would have to create it’s own SAFE wallet address (ID)?


#33

I am sure you can add your “coin wallet” keys to a wallet app

And its an easy enough function for a vault to ask the network for a new key pair for a coin address when starting. OR it can use one that is given it from config or the user. No need for complexity.

Then when one opens an account they can supply that key pair as the coin address and use one coin to start storing (and store permanently the account)


#34

Hello Everyone!

I just finished my installation of MaidSafe on a Mac OS X, (Everything is great!) and I have some questions in regards to the Public ID.

  1. Question: I have a server network with 3 computers. If I install MaidSafe in all three, - Can I create a different public ID for each installation on each computer?

  2. Question: Once a public ID has been created, - Can I change my public ID to other one? or If I am not happy with my actual Public ID, - Is there a way to change it to other one?

Thanks!
\E


#35

Yes

You can create as many as you want for now (unfortunately via new accounts atm) , it may be limited on release (i.e. you may need to delete an old one to create a new one, with a limit perhaps of 3, but not fixed yet).


Is having a single Public ID really a good idea?
#36

Hi @dirvine ,
Thanks for your response!

I suppose I can use the same (2) passwords for the second installation on the other computer or I have to create 2 different ones?


#37

At least the first one (account secret) must be different.


#38

At least the first one (account secret) must be different.

:slight_smile: I find out the hard way! Tried to create the second account using the same password and it did not accept it. Therefore, I do have to create 2 extras passwords for each account! Thanks! :+1:


#39
  • How one change their public id?

  • Suppose we find out that our public id is someone else business and we do not want to be part of it.

  • Is there a way to change our public id?

Thanks!


#40

Public id discussions are so interesting if perhaps quite difficult to follow across threads, so perhaps this suggestion will have already been listed and dismissed, but here it goes.
the way I understand it there are two separate tasks with different purposes.

One part is authenticating an individual node (human users so far), on a self authenticating network. (I consider this an intrinsic quality of a network, node creation.)

The Second part makes those names useful, being able to find the app, the person, asset, the domain you want, consistently and reliably. This would be an emergent network property (nodes establishing relationships, communication protocols among each other)

Right now, from what im reading, it seems we are trying to solve the two problems with one solution based on the clearnet top down model of centralised DNS, with the self imposed limitations of that paradigm.

With that in mind , here is a path to explore:

Part One.

For the requirement of the individual user authentication, a randomly generated keyID, non pronounceable (like a bitcoin address), is generated, with an optional field for name. Everyone can rush in to call themselves googles, apples, gods or turds, whatever they wish, etc. It can sound like a username, a real name, a registrar suffix, a post code an area number etc. But since anyone can call themselves anything , it wont make sense to search or trust any of these. They will hold no intrinsic value. but they do if they can be linked to the resource, (human, intellectual, etc) they claim to be or represent.

Part Two.

Design a way to group or map those keyIDs , perhaps using “proofs of ……” stake, human, resource, time* etc, creating webs of trust protocols. Maybe decorum is this…? And maybe use those protocols to create a decentralised verified address registrar, with datachain??? safe://theguardian.real …. being “real” the registrar name….? and real its suffix?

By separating the two functionalities we obtain infinite namespace, nullifying first mover advantage (making SAFE more inclusive to late adopters), and really make the network more flexible and adaptable.

I suppose the challenge then would be creating Web of trust protocols, not a small feat i would imagine.

This is really a half cooked idea, and I am quite the ignorant of technical details, but, just in case some part of this resonates with anyone here, there it is.

*maybe creating a external time keeping protocol by connecting atomic clocks to a public datachain!


#41

I’ve not seen this idea mentioned - has anyone considered having IDs of a certain format being freely available, and then IDs of a more desirable format coming with a ‘cost’ of some sort?

For example “dave1965” could be free, whereas the obtaining of an ID like “dave” would have some sort of cost associated with it.