RFC - Decentralised Naming System III - prevent domain transfer (dirvine)

Not only the real BO, but any BO (unless you yourself is Barack Obama).
Additionally, he would be able to ask the Independent Commission for Redistribution of SAFE Domains for your DNS registrar info, GeoIP you and then drone you.

1 Like

Easier to just give away that account for a good price of course. People would create an account to hold a prised name. Then repeat-n-rinse.

That would be good, certainly solve some problems, but would it not then allow others

  • People want to sell their business and the name that goes with it.
  • lost accounts and the names used
  • swatters and professional name dealers will simply create accounts with one or more names for each. Then sell the account itself to the highest bidder.

A couple of questions about SAFE (Decentralised) Naming System.

  • Why is the name still being called domain name? Is not SAFE structured differently to a centralisation model?
  • What would your view on calling it “SAFE Naming System (Decentralised)” “SNS” to remove the DNS confusion.
  • What happened to the idea of a name chosen by the user with additional characters (hash maybe) that allows many to have unique names but recognisable ones.
    • The question then is how the network assigns( chooses) the additional characters.
    • If only a few additional characters after the chosen name then maybe someone can come up with a way they could be memorable/searchable

A quick interposed question:

Will users have to pay to register an address? If yes, how would the network estimate the price?

See this comment at the top of this page: the claim is that anything that involves money would be inefficient and anti-egalitarian. (Of course, they may say they don’t want to completely eliminate money from DNS - they just want to “justly” distribute names, which means to allocate them below their optimal price - talk about inefficiency).

I believe we’re putting that through thorough scrutiny here :slight_smile:

I would say there is next to no concesus on the topic of a distributed SAFE naming system. Therefore the question would arguably only make sense in the context of one of the competing proposals.

2 Likes

We need to keep this in mind. It needs to be SAFE and decentralized, with no human corruption involved. In short, the solution must be decentralized, simple and SAFE.

SAFE Naming System SNS not DNS!

I still don’t understand why you guys assist that human readability names should be valuable, and universal. It shouldn’t, and impossible to achieve.

As I said before in other thread, all websites should given a random selected numbers/letters, then users can name it to suit their needs.

I create a website. It gives me,
safe:4wasf234asm

I then tell everybody this site is called safe:discotime but it isn’t enforceable.

And users could bookmark that, and change the name to safe:discotime as I like them to call it, or they can call it, safe:discosucks

No more squatting.
No more fighting over names.
No more buying names.

4 Likes

Cool, how do users get to my version of safe:discotime if there are multiple versions?

For example how do I get to the real SAFE:amazon?

i totally agree with you. totally

It is your end, and your definition for that particular website.

If you want to get to real safe:amazon then you need to use web of trust where community collaborate which site is the real deal, and which site is a malware. Plus, amazon would give out their actual credibility address, and you can compare of the two. If it matches, it is the real amazon. If it is not, then tag it as malware, and inform the web of trust community to avoid it.

I use WoT extensively when I look for new websites, and ensure their scripts are not malware. WoT is an amazing tool.

Edited: https://www.mywot.com/

2 Likes

This means the web of trust is not hard coded into the network, but instead their could be multiple WoTs to choose from? Kind of like the current DNS. I don’t have to use the one my ISP gives me.

I like the idea of freedom of choice.

Look at the link above. It’s just an app on top of the network. If we have multiple WoT app, it would be hard to collaborate.

All WoT users does is submit comments about that particular website.

Edited: Here’s amazon review from WoT. https://www.mywot.com/en/scorecard/amazon.com

1 Like

Can I give you a hug, bro? Finally a like-minded individual :smiley:

2 Likes

How about periodically making owners of squatted sites solve exponentially increasingly difficult (computatively speaking) capcha or math problems to maintain ownership of a site that is being squatted, lest they lose the domain name ownership, with the site then being renamed a long random line of letters and numbers? Being that a effective squatter will have thousands and thousands of domain names, the problems themselves wouldn’t need to be that complex relatively speaking to weigh down the squatter’s computer farm. I doubt squatted domains get accessed more than even the most unpopular of sites except in the most extreme of cases, being that the internet is basically google search results plus an occasional competitor.

With that in mind, SAFEnet could determine a site to be a squatted domain based on the number of visits to the site relative to other sites that have been online for a similar time, minus the top twenty or so percent of sites that take eighty percent of the traffic and then give the aforementioned capcha/math tests to the domain holder until the site starts getting more traffic.

Kind of like the current DNS

I also want to make emphasis that even with SNS, we still need a trust to the address that we choose to connect to. At this stand point, would it be better if we just use random selected address, with contact (bookmarking) name system? AKA android contact list.

When you connect to the address, the address will give you sns name. From there, you can make a decision; do you want keep it, or is there a same name as other (if so, then you can change into your needs, or add additional note to the name, such (dude:product)).

Okay. We’ll use a private DataStructure in their accounts, as a contact name system.

Also, you did make a good point… With this, we can choose different public sns DataStructure. Each public DataSturcture has reputation system, aka WoT app. It is like blacklist, where you store a txt that blocks these address. Same thing, but more freedom to choose from.

We have two different zones;
Public Naming Zones - Approved by the group / individuals.
Private Naming Zones - freedom to name them as they see fit

Gotta love all this brainstorming. For example, in this case, different people - depending on which “public sns DataStructure” they use - follow the same link and end up on completely different sites.
And this “idea” was already proposed and discredited in another “RFC DNS” topic, so it’s not even an original bad idea.

@neo you are too generous. A better approach is to simply create redirects and rent the names by month. And as soon as you find a better payer, redirect to his site.

2 Likes

Under my suggestion, No. He could only inform the search engines that his site was verified real The search engines, if they want to be popular, would give the correct site a higher position than the phony ones.

1 Like

It seems to me that everyone is still thinking in terms of a DNS model.

The SAFE Network is decentralized, so we need to think in these terms. The approach that makes the most sense to me is to build in a simple voting system. True democracy and decentralization go hand in hand.

All of the following instances assume desire of domain.safe ownership. The voting system would determine whether it’s their right or not.

Proposed voting model

  • Private owner wants to keep their domain/s private: Volunteer Moderator option? The poll would revolve around the domain itself [to honour the SAFE Net user’s anonymity] where the poll page could show some detail about the domain name, a few alternatives, “complainant” details [if any] and legalese about ownership.
  • Private owner wants to be a publicly listed owner: Automatically set to a publicly listed poll
  • Corporate/Org owner wants to keep their domain/s private: Volunteer Moderator option? The poll would revolve around the domain itself [to honour the SAFE Net user’s anonymity] where the poll page could show some detail about the domain name, a few alternatives, “complainant” details [if any] and legalese about ownership.
  • Corporate/Org owner wants to be a publicly listed owner: Set to a publicly listed poll

It seems a domain name (or SNS, I like that idea) with a complaint brought against it would have to be a central official SAFE webpage (plus an archive of disputed domains?).

Hopefully this doesn’t add more stress to the dev team. This could be treated similar to a crypto currency exchange. The MaidSafe Foundation builds the voting and backend CMS, but another [vetted] non-profit Org steps in and owns the role of managing SAFE domains.

To be fair to @anon81773980 in his suggestion SNS doesn’t really exist as such.

  • for each native (binary) address some metadata is kept
  • this metadata includes the name site owner has given to the site himself
  • this info may be marginally useful to search engines but doesn’t have many other uses
  • it’s the “nickname” in Zooko triangle

BTW while I love the idea of collecting user feedback (analog of https://www.mywot.com/) my gut feeling is to run this as an app allowing potentially multiple mywot implementations. This would allow the most well-designed service of this kind to gain most popularity.

1 Like