Namecoin Forum

Actually, I think that putting the auction value into name_new causes two potential issues: 1) It somewhat goes against the hash commitment behind name_new, as the value locked will likely give people watching the network a clue about what name someone is trying to register. This may not be a big de...

That is an interesting proposal. I think currently there is no rule that prevents people from taking back out excessive value (above 0.01 NMC) locked in a name, though, so we would have to add this as another part of the soft-fork restriction. Either require the value to never go down (rather than b...

That's indeed an interesting idea. I honestly do not see this happening anytime soon on Namecoin, because it would be a quite large change in the near- to mid-term (and also the immediate benefit does not outweigh this complexity at the moment), but it is good to have some ideas for when we may want...

That's certainly an interesting approach. In the past, there were various ideas about ensuring that names are distributed "economically efficiently" - but my view is that this is not actually a good goal for Namecoin. One of Namecoin's main advantages over e.g. the DNS system is censorship-resistenc...

We've just tagged Namecoin Core 0.19.0 in the Github repository (https://github.com/namecoin/namecoin-core/releases/tag/nc0.19.0). This is a new major release of Namecoin Core, mostly incorporating the upstream changes that Bitcoin Core 0.19.0 brought. It also includes a refactor of the mempool hand...

Extracting and importing private keys is certainly a way. But if you have a newer version of Namecoin-Qt, it uses an HD wallet; if you use "dumpwallet" from the console or namecoin-cli, you may see the "xprv" key in there - and I think you can try importing that into Electrum to get the full wallet....

We have just finalised Namecoin Core 0.18.0: https://github.com/namecoin/namecoin-core/releases/tag/nc0.18.0 This is based on the recently-released Bitcoin Core 0.18.0 and thus includes a lot of new features (e.g. improved multi-wallet support) in addition to some Namecoin-specific changes. Importan...

Perhaps, but then of course it depends on the names you have to offer and the price you want. So I suggest you post that information here if you want potential buyers to step up.

So here's my understanding of what you said: If you want to get a chain of nonces and hash commitments, you can do something like H(H(H(N))), then revealing N will reveal all of them. But in the situation I described, you don't need actual hash commitments, and you want to reveal one nonce at a time...

Yes, you can use a hash chain instead. But I'm not actually sure how that would simplify things or reduce blockchain usage, to be honest. You still need to reveal the next preimage from the chain every day, just as if you had generated random commitments. Or perhaps I've misunderstood your proposal ...