Namecoin Forum

The upcoming launch of .p2p has spurred a some friction between the Namecoin and Bitshares communities. However, the distance between the two communities is small. From browsers to Linux distros and programming languages, the beauty of free software is that we never have to take a single approach and that competition isn't the zero-sum game fundamentalist Chicago-school economists make it out to be.

I'm in this game to win it, but "winning" is the creation of decentralized, secure, and usable naming systems for the internet. Getting accepted into the IETF, building zero-knowledge registrars, aerogel lightweight browser clients, anonymous domain purchasing, and price stability are just a few items that need to get worked out.

From low-level cryptocurrency development choices to funding models and governance styles, Namecoin and Bitshares have taken a lot of divergent choices. Sticking to our academic backgrounds will allow us to build more robust security models, recruit top talent as well as defend ourselves against political and legal attacks. However, it also means we have to beg for funding, work in our spare time, and struggle to build consensus. Hell, even Linus had to work on Linux part-time for 6 years.

I wouldn't be working on Namecoin if the technology and solutions we are building wasn't reusable. BitShares has already benefited greatly from our work, borrowing our specs, XYZ, and more. The bottom line is that attaining our ultimate goal of a censorship resistant and usable web will require significant blood, sweat, and tears from lots of really smart people. We are happy to do our part are looking forward to BitShares contributions and competition.

Indolering & the Namecoin Development Team

Need to get everyon'es okay first :p

.

indolering wrote: BitShares has already benefited greatly from our work, borrowing our specs, XYZ, and more.

Correct.
And how did we benefit ?
Don't forget that our system is more on community interests oriented and their system is more on profit which is reflected also in their starting and funding system. Due to this details their system is bearing definitely more regulatory risks and they are also more liable for censorship if put under pressure.
So sharing with them the legal risks while they cash the profit wouldn't bring much. Cooperation exactly on this field could be counterproductive for us.
At least this is my opinion.

Of course nobody can stop you to speak with them or with Google. We can also take code snippets from any software which is open source and permits their licensing. We could also develop with their developers some parts of the software. This could bring advantage.

It seems that the BitShares guys are open to some form of cooperation: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9111.0

Apparently their current plan is to implement an auction-based mechanism around domain ownership, similar to this suggestion: https://github.com/namecoin/namecoin/issues/181 (which is making some people very unhappy, including myself). See here for details: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9126.0

pmc wrote:It seems that the BitShares guys are open to some form of cooperation: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9111.0

Apparently their current plan is to implement an auction-based mechanism around domain ownership, similar to this suggestion: https://github.com/namecoin/namecoin/issues/181 (which is making some people very unhappy, including myself). See here for details: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9126.0

We certainly could need additional funding.

phelix wrote:

pmc wrote:It seems that the BitShares guys are open to some form of cooperation: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9111.0

Apparently their current plan is to implement an auction-based mechanism around domain ownership, similar to this suggestion: https://github.com/namecoin/namecoin/issues/181 (which is making some people very unhappy, including myself). See here for details: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9126.0

We certainly could need additional funding.

@Indo: tbh I have not noticed the friction. Are you sure they have benefited so much from us? Anyway it is a good idea to connect.

Despite some seriously overzealous marketing fanboys who like to ruffle feathers, many in the BitsharesDNS community realize that cooperation is a win-win. I made an analogy in one thread there about how this is Mosaic vs Netscape circa 1994. It's foolish to fight over the miniscule existing marketshare. ICANN has hundreds of millions of domain names registered, decentralized solutions will likely be measured next year only in the hundreds of thousands. The real fight is to get significant portions of the legacy market to switch over to decentralized TLDs. I've been thinking about an interesting idea along those lines lately, but it's not ready for primetime, and it's not on topic.

Yes the gains have been one-sided so far, since they're still building their system. But early learning opportunities would include their auction mechanism. The chance to observe what works well and what doesn't has some value. Another closely related place to watch would be their identity management system keyhotee. There will always be agents provocateur, but smarter folks should prevail. Kudos to all who want to engage in a constructive way.

phelix wrote: @Indo: tbh I have not noticed the friction. Are you sure they have benefited so much from us? Anyway it is a good idea to connect.

I'm mostly going off of what others have said about investors on their forum as well as some private conversations of our own.

But your right, it's been pretty light, I've updated the original OP.