Search found 610 matches

by indolering
Wed Jan 21, 2015 9:32 pm
Forum: General Discussion
Topic: Forum Logo / Official Namecoin Logo
Replies: 48
Views: 14820

Re: Forum Logo / Official Namecoin Logo

Unfortunately there is no "the current logo" as the logos currently used are all slightly different. Different as in coloring and shadow of the N, color of the coin, Indolering style rotation of the N or not, color of the text. Our own websites and software sometimes use two different logos next to...
by indolering
Tue Jan 20, 2015 8:23 pm
Forum: Project direction
Topic: PROPOSAL: Name Epochs
Replies: 12
Views: 3864

Re: PROPOSAL: Name Epochs

biolizard89 wrote: Every name_update generates a new public key, so I don't see how that would make any sense.
Ahh, well I didn't know that and it certainly doesn't!
by indolering
Tue Jan 20, 2015 7:48 pm
Forum: General Discussion
Topic: Forum Logo / Official Namecoin Logo
Replies: 48
Views: 14820

Re: Forum Logo / Official Namecoin Logo

And, for the record, I vote to keep the current logo.
by indolering
Tue Jan 20, 2015 7:06 pm
Forum: General Discussion
Topic: Forum Logo / Official Namecoin Logo
Replies: 48
Views: 14820

Re: Forum Logo / Official Namecoin Logo

We need an official logo that we have rights on. I would like to see some sort of legitimation through a vote or whatever. I contacted the original owner and we have the rights to it. Put some pressure on this thing? It seems like you are provoking a confrontation, why didn't you bring this up in a...
by indolering
Tue Jan 20, 2015 6:13 pm
Forum: Project direction
Topic: PROPOSAL: Name Epochs
Replies: 12
Views: 3864

Re: PROPOSAL: Name Epochs

Somewhat related to this discussion (insofar as I believe that part of the discussion that prompted this idea had to do with d/name and dd/name getting out of sync) is my proposal to allow owners of d/name to control the creation of d/name/child. We could just tie the child's registration period to ...
by indolering
Tue Jan 20, 2015 5:52 pm
Forum: Project direction
Topic: PROPOSAL: Name Epochs
Replies: 12
Views: 3864

Re: PROPOSAL: Name Epochs

It seems like you are trying to specify a unique ID for each owner of the name, so why not just count the number of public keys that have owned the address? If you are trying to tie things to the initial registration, we could output a short hash of the public key, domain name, and the name_new hash...
by indolering
Tue Jan 20, 2015 5:19 pm
Forum: Project direction
Topic: A place for service providers (i.e. OneName)
Replies: 1
Views: 1574

Re: A place for service providers (i.e. OneName)

Note that this would also be a more secure replacement of the practice of setting up an import. For example, in d/ it is recommended that users setup a record under dd/name and import this record from d/name, enabling users to store d/name in cold storage. Using d/name/import would be more secure si...
by indolering
Tue Jan 20, 2015 1:27 am
Forum: Project direction
Topic: A place for service providers (i.e. OneName)
Replies: 1
Views: 1574

A place for service providers (i.e. OneName)

So, I was thinking about the problem we are having with OneName providing another identity service on the blockchain under a legacy namespace. We all agree that duplicate namespaces are a serious problem, but resolving the current situation is tricky. However, I think I've figured out a solution to ...
by indolering
Mon Jan 19, 2015 10:35 pm
Forum: Project direction
Topic: We made it to the second round of OTF funding!
Replies: 0
Views: 1809

We made it to the second round of OTF funding!

We very much appreciate your submission to RFA’s Open Technology Fund for consideration. We have been reviewing many projects and appreciate your patience during the process. Upon evaluation of your submission, we have decided to invite you to submit a full proposal. Yay! I will be working on it th...
by indolering
Mon Jan 19, 2015 10:09 pm
Forum: Project direction
Topic: Encryption Spec Requirements
Replies: 9
Views: 3770

Re: Encryption Spec Requirements

I just don't understand why you want to put this into Namecoin value fields, why wouldn't you just link to your encrypted blob? Then you can have arbitrarily large encrypted payloads and we don't have to support a complex scheme directly within Namecoin software. I just don't see this as a major use...