Namecoin Forum

Is it possible to grab /u/<username> to prevent it from being used/owned by OneName or do they own that namespace so that only they can use it?

AliceWonder wrote: being used/owned by OneName or do they own that namespace so that only they can use it?

Nobody "owns" anything in Namecoin world. Only if someone is in posession of a private key for a particular item then you may call it "ownership" of that item.
In other words: yes, you can register any u/<name> or id/<name> if it hasn't been taken by somebody else before you.

Ah okay, thanks. So they just started using u/ for their purpose.

cassini wrote:

AliceWonder wrote: being used/owned by OneName or do they own that namespace so that only they can use it?

Nobody "owns" anything in Namecoin world. Only if someone is in posession of a private key for a particular item then you may call it "ownership" of that item.
In other words: yes, you can register any u/<name> or id/<name> if it hasn't been taken by somebody else before you.

+1 OneName has the right to stay like /id - no problem. Every kind of namespace can be registered. If you dont like OneName then don't use it or fork it and modify it for usage with /id.

Best regards,

Sudo

sudoquai wrote:

cassini wrote:

AliceWonder wrote: being used/owned by OneName or do they own that namespace so that only they can use it?

Nobody "owns" anything in Namecoin world. Only if someone is in posession of a private key for a particular item then you may call it "ownership" of that item.
In other words: yes, you can register any u/<name> or id/<name> if it hasn't been taken by somebody else before you.

+1 OneName has the right to stay like /id - no problem. Every kind of namespace can be registered. If you dont like OneName then don't use it or fork it and modify it for usage with /id.

Best regards,

Sudo

They certainly have the "right" to use whatever format they want. However, it's in everyone's best interest if efforts are made to improve interoperability. That's why the Namecoin devs are irritated with OneName; OneName is intentionally reducing interoperability by refusing to use the formats that everyone else is using. That has a negative impact on end users.

biolizard89 wrote:

cassini wrote:

AliceWonder wrote: being used/owned by OneName or do they own that namespace so that only they can use it?

Nobody "owns" anything in Namecoin world. Only if someone is in posession of a private key for a particular item then you may call it "ownership" of that item.
In other words: yes, you can register any u/<name> or id/<name> if it hasn't been taken by somebody else before you.

They certainly have the "right" to use whatever format they want. However, it's in everyone's best interest if efforts are made to improve interoperability. That's why the Namecoin devs are irritated with OneName; OneName is intentionally reducing interoperability by refusing to use the formats that everyone else is using. That has a negative impact on end users.

Well said. They did not use the new namespace to do anything new. They're doing identity, which is already done on id/ - they're just ignoring it and building another.

I think they could've gotten their "bio" text, and "wallpapers" and the rest by adding one field into the id/ data which references user data stored in their database. There's a minimum of interop issues that way, and no limit to how much proprietary stuff they can store.

I think to remember, the OneName developer team mentioned, that a lot of /id and /d Names are cybersquatted. According to this they decided to start with a fresh namespace.

This is maybe not really a problem, because the features and interface of OneName can be ported to the /id namespace (i am using both - /id and and /u for the time), so the user itself could decide itself, which is fitting better to him. As far as i know somebody started OneID - i don't know if its the contrary approach to OneName, didn't have the time to check it better. For interested users: http://oneid.io. Competition is good (similar to BitShares and Namecoin which try to solve the same thing - they can learn from each other).

My opinion is as well, they could have made OneName working with /id namespace, but they didn't because i assume, the try to make their system working of different Blockchains. Nevertheless it's very usefull that the OneName code is OpenSource. Interested people can just port the OneName code to /ID (i like for example the neat webinterface to OneName) or contribute code to OneID.io instead.

I happened to get u/google but this was before onename started doing their thing.

Bitcoin wrote:I happened to get u/google but this was before onename started doing their thing.

Oh no, so the evil squatters already occupied u/ as well! I guess they'll have to start a new namespace then.

Just joking.

domob wrote:

Bitcoin wrote:I happened to get u/google but this was before onename started doing their thing.

Oh no, so the evil squatters already occupied u/ as well! I guess they'll have to start a new namespace then.

Just joking.

haha I was bored. I think I got the whole keyboard not just u/google lolz