Posts: 1129
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2013 11:27 am

Re: Git

Post by domob »

Ok I see - so you do not actually want to propose how to do decentralised Git hosting; I thought that was what your proposal is all about, and was confused about how that relates to your currency. I agree that Namecoin is good to prevent potential censorship on the DNS level - in fact, that was the original reason (fear of a crack down on Bitcoin) why the Bitcoin community discussed "BitDNS" in 2010, which then became Namecoin in 2011.

For discussions of your planned currency itself, I suggest that you post your ideas on Bitcointalk or another forum more suited to economic discussions. That will probably give you more valuable feedback than the Namecoin community can give.
BTC: 1domobKsPZ5cWk2kXssD8p8ES1qffGUCm | NMC: NCdomobcmcmVdxC5yxMitojQ4tvAtv99pY
Use your Namecoin identity as OpenID:

Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2018 7:29 am
os: linux

Re: Git

Post by Pencroff357 »

It's sure that it would be better in terms of currency security and fiability to have something that isn't owned by Microsoft... Hell, even something owned by a big company can be fine as long as said company supports cryptocurrencies; I know that the banking world in general is agaisnt it because it's money that they can't control, but I've gained hope recently, as some companies (here, a real estate one) are beginning to embrace the blockchain and cryptocurrencies : ... rket_5405/

I know that it isn't a fight that's already won, most of the work is still to do, but it's good to see the whole concept being embraced by large scale companies, especially in long term, conservative markets such as this one.

Post Reply