Public ID's (Discussion)


#62

Worst idea ever. Rent is one of the worse invention ever. To whom who created the rent idea shall damn in hell all eternity.

The goal is to abolish rent.

And again… there is already a solution to the problem which nobody refuse to take. It’s a sad state of affairs.

Search, “petname” / “no dns”. Thank you very much.


#63

A petname system doesn’t provide equivalent and valued functionality, which is why hardly anyone uses it. It doesn’t deliver universal addresses, which is one of the most valued properties of domain names and why so many people value and use them. If it was as good a solution I’d be all for it.

Here, rent is used in a different way completely, and it seems you haven’t understood the proposal. Try understanding the use of rent here before commenting.


#64

What if we have something that’s more like a cycle/recycling process, sort like in nature (if we continue the farming metaphor).

To me, “rent” is paying x amount every y unit of time.

Instead, what if we pay x amount upfront for a y unit of time. After y passes, the fee you paid is returned to you and the publicID is now up for grabs again.

Pros:
It’s not like rent, which solves @Grizmoblust’s problem, because you get a refund after the period is over; and it solves @Blindsite2k’s problem of forgotten/lost accounts eternally holding onto a publicID.

Cons:
This wouldn’t really solve squatting, unless the squatter forgets to renew the publicID (i.e., repay the fee). I’ve also read in other threads that SAFENet has no concept of time, so I’m not sure how the network will know when y is over (though, this is a problem with the regular rental model as well).

Forgive me if this idea has been proposed before in the other threads about DNS; I’ve skimmed through parts of them before, but their lengths are pretty daunting…


#65

It would solve squatting if it cost a bit more every time you bought a new public ID. Normal people might have a handful of public ID handles. Even if it costs a minute amount like a few cents to buy it if it increased every time it would become cost prohibitive for large scale squatting. You might still have small scale squatting but you wouldn’t have a business based on it. 1 ID = $1 the next one = $2 the next = $4 the next $8, $16, $32 and so on. Even if the base price was like $0.000000001 if it keeps doubling the effect is the same and very quickly becomes prohibitive while still allowing normal users to afford public ID handles.


#66

Raising the price alone isn’t effective because you can just create a new account and buy at the lowest price. Then you get into whether to charge to create an account which has its own problems.

Charging a small rental is more effective because you can’t escape the fee and it costs a lot if you squat on and hold a lot of IDs. It also ensures that you don’t get orphaned IDs because once the rent stops being paid the Id will be released.


#67

This isn’t a problem on a decentralized network.

Have to explain this every day, it feels like :stuck_out_tongue:

There is no ICANN or other DNS system on SAFE that can have a monopoly in any way, like exists today.

There will be hundreds to billions of DNS services on decentralized networks, as opposed to 1 today.

If one of them here bought up by squatters, people will choose other DNS providers and hook their browsers into them instead.

Look up the “petname” system like he said

Many of the problems with controllable, server based networks don’t exist at all on truly free, uncensorable, anonymous encrypted networks.

Need to change our thinking, and understand deeper


#68

Buzz wrong. It is highly popular. Cough, cellphone contacts cough.


#69

A petname system doesn’t provide equivalent and valued functionality,

Actually, it is more functional than what we have right now. We can have billion different types of micro dns than de-“centralized” one dns system.


#70

Your personal contacts are used very differently to the Internet. We’re talking about very different kinds of use.

For example, to share a phone number you will ignore your pet name (because it is not a universal address) and instead give out the raw ‘address’ (the phone number) but sharing websites is rarely done like that because the domain is an easily spoken/written /recognisable universal address.


#71

There will be hundreds of services yes but people still have unique public IDs. Service.publicid and so far if you aquire a public ID no one else can get that public ID, ever. And if people forget their accounts or refuse to sell public ID it will be the same as domain squatting on the clearnet.


#72

No it isn’t.

It’s the same usage. The only reason why we used the current model of DNS is because it was pushed down in our throats by governments, and private organization is funded by governments.

Again, you forget to perceive that we already have multiple different dns, aka

.com
.net
.org
.io
.me
.in

and so forth. Each of these ending domain are controlled by certain organization but still correspond to the centralized government, ICANN.

Under safenet, it will operate exactly the same, the only difference is that people have a choice to use specific user micro dns rather than rely on “centralized” DNS which is maidafe, and ethereum established at this moment.


#73

I don’t think that is right but at all really, and I think that’s where this argument is coming from

If I have “WOM” ID from ID provider #1, then you can still have it from provider #364228712

Because that’s how I understood it from the many many DNS threads, so I think that system applies to IDs. Wouldn’t make sense not to


#74

I see what you’re saying, but let’s look 30 years into the future. For 25 years SAFE has been the default network by which information is shared and there are now billions of domains registered by IoT ‘things’ as well as people and companies. I own company called JPL Enterprises and I want a memorable domain. The ID jpl got snapped up at the start by some old bugger and jpl.com, jpl.co.uk etc went the same way.

In fact there are so many domains registered that I can’t even get closer than j.89674.p09.l9755^@^£. So even though my company is hugely important and doing amazing work, no-one can find it unless they’ve had their implanted memory chip freshly upgraded or they can plug into the Universal Hive Mind, which isn’t always available because the BT engineer bot won’t do home visits for less than 4.5 MAID, which is a hell of a lot of money.

I feel rather bitter about this. Just because I was born 30 years too late, there’s no way I can get a memorable domain for my amazing company. What makes it worse is that I know that most of the things with the most memorable jpl combinations are in fact toasters, lightbulbs and fuel tanks.

Back in the old days, I think, if I were a Google or a BBC I’d just buy one. Some things were better back then.


#75

True you could have competing DNS providers but is your audience going to switch over? It’s the same problem people have with social media. The majority of people use Facebook because the majority of people use Facebook. You can use something else but getting people to switch over is a struggle because they need to leave their data and contacts behind and need to learn a new system.


#76

It’s very very very different.

We’re talking about an anonymous, totally free network for anyone to create and compete in ways that you have never ever seen exist yet.

Facebook has many types of control and monopoly over the market right now, that won’t be possible on SAFE.

Lots of its functionality will be broken down into smaller parts and apps will fairly compete on those


#77

Why? Take Facebook vs Diaspora and/or Steemit as a comparian to Established SAFEDNS#! vs NEw SAFEDNS#2 and Really New SAFEDNS#3 Why would someone jump ship from DNS#1 (facebook) to dns#2 (Diaspora) or dns#3 (steemit) anymore than they jump from one social media platform to another? Right now people are free to choose whatever social media platform they wish. Facebook doesn’t have any more control of the market than people give them. Howe would being on SAFE prevent one DNS from having more control than any other? Multiple DNS systems compete on SAFE just like multiple social media platforms compete on the clearnet. Facebook infact took over from an older social media platform (which still exits by the way) called myspace. So I’m really failing to see your point. Now I fully agree competition is good thing but how user disinclination to jump from one platform to another without good reason to I can’t fathom. Furthermore businesses would be even less inclined to do so as that could incur additional costs.

What does it being anonymous have to do with human behaviour and adoption rates of new platforms? Sure anyone can CREATE a new dns system but that doesn’t guarentee it will be taken up. Diaspora gives users greater control, freedom and privacy but by and large a lot of people still don’t know it even exists. Then you have to convince people to use the new product. Just because a superior product is created does not guarentee adoption because people need to be educated and convinced adapting and adopting the new software is of greater benefit than staying with the same old same old.


#78

It seems that the different naming services would have similar names for the major APPs/services and its the lesser known ones that are more likely to be different.

Facebook - all my friends will not see me if I move.

Different naming services - oh the name of facebook is now faceless But Me and my friends are still on facebook and faceless because they are the same social site.

The comparison is apples and oranges because one is changing social media site and the other is how sites are named.


#79

I genuinely do not understand how pet names systems can provide a solution anything like as easy to use and as effective as the universal DNS-like public IDs MaidSafe have implemented (which is I expect why we have it, after all the discussions I referenced above).

@Grizmoblust You don’t seem to recognise the differences in functionality, usability or implementation between the two types of system, and why people will choose one that just works (no apps/add ons) and is universal and memorable, compared to something that is not standardised across all applications and websites.

To me it appears like saying we should have lots of different private postal services, each one using its own address scheme. So to send a letter to you I’m going to have to sign up with the provider you registered your house with because the address you gave me won’t be understood by the service I’m already using.

This is de-railing this topic though, so I’m not going to continue replying here about pet names systems, only the MaidSafe public IDs system. If you want to discuss more about pet names I suggest using one of the existing topics or start a new one and link from here (reply on new topic).


#80

I think a problem that will occur is that scammers will register names that people trust on the current internet.

For the internet there are mechanisms to deregister scammer’s registered names.

But in SAFE implementation there is no way to deregister them and any scammer who registers a name the same as a trusted site will be able to scam people for years.

So in essence we have to make changes so why not change DNS to user centered rather than centralising SAFE.

Now for testing and prior to APPs being developed then I agree the current system is most likely the best/easiest system to implement for the tests/alphas


#81

Okay I posted this idea here:

Basically why not have every account have it’s own unique dynamic hashe that would essentially act as it’s own strand of DNA. The hashe is generated based on one’s activity. So it changes based on everything you do. It’s encrypted randomized data so is worthless for tracking WHAT you do. The point of it is to differentiate one account from the next so the network can tell each account from the next one. This would mean that it wouldn’t matter to the network if there were two Bobs in existence because they wouldn’t have the same “network DNA” so to speak. And if one wanted to tell them apart one would just have to compare a segment of the hashe. As far as humans finding the right human one could release multiple pieces of information or have an ID code or something. Similiar concept to having a first name, last name an phone number. You might have the same lfirst and last name but you probably won’t live in the same town and certainly won’t have the same phone number. If all you know about someone is their publicID that’s going to be rather vauge but if you know two or 3 or 4 bits of info it narrows it down quite a bit. An app could even be written for finding people.