Reply to topic  [ 45 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Name Squatting once again... 
Author Message

Posts: 1081
Post Re: Name Squatting once again...
pianist wrote:
somename wrote:
Perfect! At least it's clear that it's even not important what the truth is - as long as miners all agree to always vote 1 (or 0, it doesn't matter), they always get to distribute the spoils among them.


He will get the revenue in any case.

But it's true that they can vote automatically without even reading any documents. :(

I'd go even so far to conjecture that this is precisely what will happen. Even now, when miners "simply" have to set up a merge-mining script and mostly forget about it, we are not seeing 100% of Bitcoin's hash power merge-mine Namecoin - they are basically throwing away free money and not willing to do some one-time setup for it. Do you really believe they would care to research trademark ownership of names and enter individual votes into their system in best faith for some (relatively) minor fees?

_________________
BTC: 1domobKsPZ5cWk2kXssD8p8ES1qffGUCm | NMC: NCdomobcmcmVdxC5yxMitojQ4tvAtv99pY
BM-GtQnWM3vcdorfqpKXsmfHQ4rVYPG5pKS
Use your Namecoin identity as OpenID: https://nameid.org/


Mon Sep 07, 2015 5:23 am
Profile WWW

Posts: 317
Post Re: Name Squatting once again...
BTW these are the current namespace stats of unexpired names with 40+ occurrences:
Code:
    583672  d
     32602  u
      9722  i
      4217  id
      1238  (empty namespace)
       684  a
       664  m
       662  o
       661  f
       660  b
       660  e
       660  g
       660  h
       660  j
       660  k
       660  l
       660  n
       658  c
       219  p
       149  ip
        93  tor
        92  bit.co.in
        70  app
        54  i2p
        49  s
        40  r
        40  x


Mon Sep 07, 2015 2:16 pm
Profile

Posts: 1837
os: linux
Post Re: Name Squatting once again...
cassini wrote:
BTW these are the current namespace stats of unexpired names with 40+ occurrences:
Code:
    583672  d
     32602  u
      9722  i
      4217  id
      1238  (empty namespace)
       684  a
       664  m
       662  o
       661  f
       660  b
       660  e
       660  g
       660  h
       660  j
       660  k
       660  l
       660  n
       658  c
       219  p
       149  ip
        93  tor
        92  bit.co.in
        70  app
        54  i2p
        49  s
        40  r
        40  x


Thanks Cassini. Looks like either u/ has declined a lot relative to d/, or OneName representatives were incorrect about their registration numbers. Even so, they've squatted far more names than even exist in the id/ namespace. They are definitely the largest identity squatter, if not the largest name squatter.

_________________
Jeremy Rand, Lead Namecoin Application Engineer
NameID: id/jeremy
DyName: Dynamic DNS update client for .bit domains.

Donations: BTC 1EcUWRa9H6ZuWPkF3BDj6k4k1vCgv41ab8 ; NMC NFqbaS7ReiQ9MBmsowwcDSmp4iDznjmEh5


Mon Sep 07, 2015 2:45 pm
Profile

Posts: 80
os: windows
Post Re: Name Squatting once again...
biolizard89 wrote:
Thanks Cassini. Looks like either u/ has declined a lot relative to d/, or OneName representatives were incorrect about their registration numbers. Even so, they've squatted far more names than even exist in the id/ namespace. They are definitely the largest identity squatter, if not the largest name squatter.


1) As far as I can tell, their use doesn't really interfere with anyone
2) They're doing free marketing for the Namecoin platform
3) More such companies may come on board
4) Over time, if the project executes well, it will become advantageous to use the "standard" namespace

Can someone explain how NMC squatters prevent him (or anybody else) from using Namecoin, and why the same didn't happen with DNS squatters (after all, we're all using the WWW, even though the Namecoin Web site is using a less desirable .info domain)?
We got to page 4 and no one can seem to answer this question.
The fact that some don't like it doesn't mean it shouldn't be allowed.


Tue Sep 08, 2015 4:51 am
Profile

Posts: 10
os: linux
Post Re: Name Squatting once again...
somename wrote:
Can someone explain how NMC squatters prevent him (or anybody else) from using Namecoin, and why the same didn't happen with DNS squatters (after all, we're all using the WWW, even though the Namecoin Web site is using a less desirable .info domain)?


.bit zone is not supported by software and there is no any reason to add support for .bit into any software.

Are there any good websites in .bit zone? No! But almost all good domains are taken by squatters.

For example, I want to make a mirror of my website in .bit, but domain is taken by squatter. What can I do? I tried to contact him via BM, but no reply for 2 weeks. Will I pay squatter more than 0.1 btc? No, because buying .bit domain is not important for my business, I want to get it just for fun.

Usual domains work everywhere and there are no problems with them which coulld solve NMC.


Thu Sep 10, 2015 7:29 am
Profile

Posts: 80
os: windows
Post Re: Name Squatting once again...
pianist wrote:

.bit zone is not supported by software and there is no any reason to add support for .bit into any software.

Are there any good websites in .bit zone? No! But almost all good domains are taken by squatters.



These arguments - if they were true - would mean that squatters have zero economic interest to squat.
Why would someone register google.bit knowing they can't sell it because it's useless?
And then turn off their phone/bitmessage just to make sure nobody makes them a $1 million offer for the domain.

As far as your personal problem (with the "squatter") is concerned, if he's not interested to sell, the name will expire. If he is, he'll sell it once .bit becomes more popular. Also, you can't actually know if he's a squatter or not. Maybe he owes the same domain in TLD .za or some other.


Thu Sep 10, 2015 1:43 pm
Profile

Posts: 80
os: windows
Post Re: Name Squatting once again...
> News is out. Yes, ID transactions on http://coinsecrets.org is us migrating 32,000 uses to Bitcoin #blockstack
https://twitter.com/muneeb/status/642714729169985537

Now we know the 30+K of "squatted" names will probably expire.

I guess the anti-squatting proponents now have a reason to celebrate. Holders of NMC aren't as happy because they've been selling more than buying (down more than 12% at the moment).

But who could have known? According to anti-squatting proponents in this topic, the squatting was not good for the platform.


Sat Sep 12, 2015 7:01 pm
Profile

Posts: 10
os: linux
Post Re: Name Squatting once again...
domob wrote:
they are basically throwing away free money and not willing to do some one-time setup for it.


If I were miner, I would not mine NMC not to give my power. The less NMC network power is, the less squatter's domains cost. Before starting to mine NMC, I wouldl fork it and change game rules.

Moreover, at the moment I even don't want to make a .bit mirror.

Squatting is a rot of NMC


Sun Sep 13, 2015 1:57 pm
Profile

Posts: 80
os: windows
Post Re: Name Squatting once again...
pianist wrote:
If I were miner, I would not mine NMC not to give my power. The less NMC network power is, the less squatter's domains cost.


But you're not. If you were a bitcoin miner and understood economics and mining, you'd be mining NMC to get a better return on invested capital.

pianist wrote:
Before starting to mine NMC, I wouldl fork it and change game rules.


You are always free to do that. The beauty of Open Source software!


Mon Sep 14, 2015 9:30 am
Profile

Posts: 7
Post Re: Name Squatting once again...
ALL INTERESTED AND INVOLVED PLEASE!!!! READ

We see this issue of names has been an issue for a while now. Much like bitcoins scaling issue this could become a mess as well. We give our input of how we need to make the right move forward.
1. Namecoin has been developed to be decentralized. Lets try 100% to keep it that way. It will prevent any corruption that can occur when individuals or entities control a large part of the network. Mining power must be always decentralized and distributed at all times.
2. Namecoins governing principles must be built into the client itself and not governed by any individual or entity. This can be done with a built in voting system in the client.
3. Squatting must be left to market forces to determine the outcome of who will end up with the disputed name. This can be done with a name auction system built into the client.
4. Name registration and renewal fees need to be determined by the market and cannot be set by any group of individuals.

Now lets consider each matter. If we were to allow mining power to move into the hands of a few, we all know the problems that come with it. Maybe moving to proof of stake might not be a bad idea. The cost of registering a new name should be set at an amount that varies according to what it costs the network of miners to bring that name into blockchain. In order to achieve this, let us give an example. Assuming an individual or entity wants to register a name and that name is broadcast. It should first be made aware to the miners that someone wants to register a name and each miner should relay within the client to that person how much they will charge to process that name. A registration cost can be reached by looking at what price each miner is asking. Each miner must not be able to see what the other will charge. In this way the person can take the offer or reject which ones he does not want but at the same time the miners can cover cost plus profit, because they need to survive in order for the network to survive. This will motivate more miners to the network and prevent some monkey registering a whole bang lot of names at a monkey low fee that is static. At the same time the person or entity registering the name, must not be revealed to the network as this will definitely result in, bribery, corruption, fraud, extortion, collusion, exclusion etc etc etc etc… and the list goes on. If at a later stage if one wants to buy or sell a specific name then they can do so within the client and must pay for it within the client using only the networks currency which is namecoins. Name renewal fees must work the same way, whereby the fees cater for miners cost plus profit. Miners must be able to indicate to the individual wanting to renew a name, how much they will charge. However miners must not be able to tell which name the person wants to renew, as this will result in unrealistic demands by miners.

Now on the matter of transaction processing fees for similar services such as transfer of coins or names could be done in a similar way as this again gives more miners a reason to participate, and profit. We need more miners to keep the network healthy and to this this we need to give the miners profitable reasons to participate. Here again the name of the entity or person and the name being transferred must not be revealed to avoid all of the above mentioned negatives – bribery etc etc. What is important here is that transactions must be kept private/anonymous for both sides – miners and network users. No network will ever function smooth, corrupt free and bribe free if any individual has knowledge of the opposite transacting party and it’s transaction worth. There will always be attempts to influence the outcome if this is the case. It is crucial that all is done anonymously within the client for all parties. Implement it this way and you will watch namecoin grow. Remember that transfer of names from one party to another must have a built in release that results in both buyer and seller getting what they want. For example the name can be released into a time limited window which goes back to the owner if the buyer does not release payment into the same time limted window within the client. It must be an automatic escrow built within the client for the two parties involved. No! No! external parties or payment must be involved. Then only we will see a very efficient and vibrant ecosystem.

Now on the matter of how the projects of namecoin, take shape and direction. As we see that bitcoin is going through this wrestling match phase and we all know how messy it is. In the end some will feel like they been taken to the undertakers. To avoid the undertakers the best way forward is to have a built in voting system that gives all namecoin holders a chance to choose the outcome of any decision. Here again everything must be kept anonymous. Bribery corruption extortion etc gets eliminated.

Please remember in all of the above suggestions it is very important to have equal, non biased, anonymous, decentralized processes and operations built within the namecoin client for all parties involved in any namecoin decision or transaction. No!! miner, network operator, buyer, seller, entity, individual, company, institution, or government must be allowed to influence any outcome, that can harm the functioning , credibility, decentralized, anonymous and fair nature of the namecoin network.

Now on the matter of name squatting. Name squatting here again must also be left to market forces of supply and demand. If one entity holds a name and the other entity wants it then there must be a built in communication system in the client whereby the prospective buyer can contact the seller. Here again the different entities names must not be revealed. To let the prospective buyer contact the prospective seller, there must be a one click button whereby the buyer can send a message to the possible seller. The seller must ensure when the name is registered or renewed also provide a contact email address that must be stored in his wallet/client. It must not be possible for the buyer or seller to see each others email, just a contact button. The email address and message must always be encrypted.

Another very very important factor is that the message that must be allowed to be sent to any party, must only come from a drop down box of messages. For example one message could read like this: “Hi I am interested in buying x name from you.” In this way spam can be eliminated and it will keep the network free of junk. The drop down box of sentences will also eliminate bribery,corruption, extortion etc etc etc….This way the transaction outcome will not be influenced unduly. However email addresses must never be revealed at all cost if not then all communication must only take place within the client. There must also be a transaction fee for sending the emails or messages within the client, and this will reduce spam.

As for the matter of who is the rightfull owner of any domain name, we need to look at it as a matter of who bought/registered the name first is entitled to ownership and if he/she has to transfer it to another person or entity then he or she must be entitled to compensation. And if he/she wants to sell then he/she must not be forced into the transaction and must not be punished for not selling. If any of the namecoin miners, network operators, buyers, sellers, etc etc do have an influence on the sale, of the domain name, then they could also land in hot water with law by influencing the outcome, so its best for transactions to take place in client, anonymous and decentralized. We ask, Should any individual third party, be allowed to practically hand over any .bit domain to whom he sees as the owner he wants it to be, when at the very start of namecoin it was the original buyers of those domain names, that gave namecoin support? Namecoin was supported by those very same buyers and not by all those companies and institutions who did not want to participate in the purchase of those domains, pay the fee, support the miners, create huge network activity. Now that namecoin seems to have a future then those buyers must just handover those domain names to others without compensation? So it seems that these companies/entites were just waiting for everyone else to do all the work and then lay claim to names when it has value. All those companies that want the names they want, then the best is to have a decentralized anonymous auction system in the client. Otherwise namecoin is going to become a very huge battlefield with each individual/ entity taking each other on in court and guess what? Yes!!! Namecoin, its miners etc etc in the middle!! A very very important matter is that domain name owners identities must never be revealed in any way within the namecoin client, because some domain owners might be using domains to rise up against abusive,dangerous,oppressive and unfair people,entities,governments and regimes. Do you want .bit domain name holders to be tracked down and hunted by all these groups, for standing up to them for what is right, non abusive, fair, safe and non oppressive.

Another important factor to consider is this. If all the names are eventually handed over easily without an auction system to those entites that own the .com versions then let us consider this: Will it mean that we have a decentralized new world order? No!! NO!!! No!!!. Simply put, the current world order has too many corrupt entities and that very same corrupt world order will come to live in namecoin!!. Whoever wants whatever domain name, then they must pay for it. Let a decentralized anonymous in client name auction decide that. We should let the decentralized free market nature of namecoin decide.

For miners etc etc to take decisions on who gets google.bit or facebook.bit is only going to lead to a minefield of legal implications and this will only result in namecoin becoming more of a focus for government regulators and kill the whole decentralized nature of the coin. Think of all the bribery, corruption, extortion that will take place if any entity can influence the outcome. Names should just be traded decentrally and anonymous within the namecoin client using an auction system whereby the seller puts his name up for sale at his own price and let the market forces determine the outcome. The seller should be allowed to set a reserve price if the bids are not at prices what he/she wants. The auction should have a time limit, thereafter he can reauction if need be. Here again both buyer and seller must commit name and namecoins before it is released to any of them. If one has not commited then he cannot take transfer of the opposite parties asset. The auction must also result in the winning bidder paying a percentage fee of the winning bid price to the network operators. This is very important here again to motivate network operators/miners to participate.

Now with all points mentioned here, we want to sum it up all in few words. Everything will work out well if built on the foundations of both buyer and seller transacting in a decentralized, anonymous, in client, encrypted namecoin network. Remember, free markets work best. Well if namecoin developers don’t consider these points mentioned above then we have on the horizon, developers who are going to fork namecoin, when they see the legal mess that the current namecoin, its miners/developers etc etc can end up with.


Wed Sep 30, 2015 8:33 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 45 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.