6 ms·

> attempting to sell the Brooklyn Bridge Handshake reserved the top 100,000 Alexa domains and allowed all trademark name holders to claim theirs. Not to menti

> attempting to sell the Brooklyn Bridge Handshake reserved the top 100,000 Alexa domains and allowed all trademark name holders to claim theirs. Not to mention the ten million in FOSS grants for developers to build tooling Sadly the ideologues will somehow decry their attempts for an alternative while defending the indefensible ICAAN.

verdverm 4y ago
What about everyone else after the 100k? What recourse are they left with when their domain is/was taken by another party? Which party should own the domain? How would doubly registered domains be resolved?
- kelthuzad 4y ago
  They will remain on their original tld, so brand.com will remain brand.com, they just won't automatically receive their own brand tld, unless they manually start the auction themselves.
  - verdverm 4y ago
    so those below 100k were not reserved, a squatter bought their brand tld, what recourse do they have? What about new brands that have reached the 100k mark since the great reservation?
    - kelthuzad 4y ago
      if a brand was not significant enough to reach internet search significance why should they be entitled to their own tld? why should be some company "co" from country x be more entitled to their own tld than the company co with the same name from country y? If they feel they are, they can a) manually start and win the auction b) buy the tld c) use an alternative like .brandHQ,.getbrand,.usebrand or whatever d) just keep using their original domain brand.com, which is the most simple and straight forward solution that requires no effort on their part. By your logic the evolution of the internet would forever stagnate because developers would be stuck reserving an infinite amount of tlds that keep on popping up, it's just unrealistic and not pragmatic. reserving 100k of the most popular domains is a good faith effort and a pragmatic solution. And if you want to talk about fairness let's first start talking about the corruption of ICANN[0][1][2] before criticizing emerging solutions. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/sep/21/icann-internet-us-government https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/sep/21/icann-int... [1] https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/09/website-domain-more-expensive-00023524 https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/09/website-domain-more... [2] https://circleid.com/posts/20210413-insult-and-injury-of-us-governments-failure-to-enforce-icann https://circleid.com/posts/20210413-insult-and-injury-of-us-...
      - verdverm 4y ago
        [flagged]
        kelthuzad 4y ago
        [flagged]
        verdverm 4y ago
        Was I trying to make an argument? I'm pretty sure I was asking about edge cases that are hard to deal with so that I might understand how the other party thinks before formulating deeper opinions. Are you seeing straw men where there are none?
        kelthuzad 4y ago
        >Was I trying to make an argument? No and that's exactly the problem, we're not on reddit. You asked me a question and I elaborated in a detailed manner to which you responded in a low quality manner with no substance which was just name calling. >I'm pretty sure I was asking about edge cases that are hard to deal with so that I might understand how the other party thinks before formulating deeper opinions. I gave several perfectly valid solutions that are pragmatic and realistic, if you don't like them, then you can point them out and explain your reasoning but resorting to hand-wavy rants won't be constructive or helpful for any serious dialogue.
        verdverm 4y ago
        > why should be some company "co" from country x be more entitled to their own tld than the company co with the same name from country y? Because in some cases, that is the rule. See Rule #5 https://github.com/handshake-org/hs-names https://github.com/handshake-org/hs-names > if a brand was not significant enough to reach internet search significance why should they be entitled to their own tld? Why should any brand be entitled to such things? > but resorting to hand-wavy rants won't be constructive or helpful for any serious dialogue. Can you quote where I did this? I could for you
greyface- 4y ago
Handshake requires domain owners to pay a biennial "mining fee" to maintain their names, even for names that were "airdropped" to FOSS projects. This is no less of a grift than ICANN.
tptacek 4y ago
Oh, that's nice of Handshake. Definitely it makes sense to me now that Handshake should be able to sell the domain namespace! Why not, if they're going to donate to FOSS? My question to you is: if I donate MAC addresses to FOSS projects, can I tokenize ARP? I promise to be nice about it. The first 10,000 IP addresses can have their ARPCoin for free. Seriously, this FOSS donation thing with Handshake: it's like selling people the Brooklyn Bridge, but promising generous new bike lanes. See, the FOSS stuff? It wasn't the problem with the plan.

verdverm 4y ago

What about everyone else after the 100k? What recourse are they left with when their domain is/was taken by another party? Which party should own the domain? How would doubly registered domains be resolved?

kelthuzad 4y ago
They will remain on their original tld, so brand.com will remain brand.com, they just won't automatically receive their own brand tld, unless they manually start the auction themselves.
- verdverm 4y ago
  so those below 100k were not reserved, a squatter bought their brand tld, what recourse do they have? What about new brands that have reached the 100k mark since the great reservation?
  - kelthuzad 4y ago
    if a brand was not significant enough to reach internet search significance why should they be entitled to their own tld? why should be some company "co" from country x be more entitled to their own tld than the company co with the same name from country y? If they feel they are, they can a) manually start and win the auction b) buy the tld c) use an alternative like .brandHQ,.getbrand,.usebrand or whatever d) just keep using their original domain brand.com, which is the most simple and straight forward solution that requires no effort on their part. By your logic the evolution of the internet would forever stagnate because developers would be stuck reserving an infinite amount of tlds that keep on popping up, it's just unrealistic and not pragmatic. reserving 100k of the most popular domains is a good faith effort and a pragmatic solution. And if you want to talk about fairness let's first start talking about the corruption of ICANN[0][1][2] before criticizing emerging solutions. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/sep/21/icann-internet-us-government https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/sep/21/icann-int... [1] https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/09/website-domain-more-expensive-00023524 https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/09/website-domain-more... [2] https://circleid.com/posts/20210413-insult-and-injury-of-us-governments-failure-to-enforce-icann https://circleid.com/posts/20210413-insult-and-injury-of-us-...
    - verdverm 4y ago
      [flagged]
      - kelthuzad 4y ago
        [flagged]
        verdverm 4y ago
        Was I trying to make an argument? I'm pretty sure I was asking about edge cases that are hard to deal with so that I might understand how the other party thinks before formulating deeper opinions. Are you seeing straw men where there are none?
        kelthuzad 4y ago
        >Was I trying to make an argument? No and that's exactly the problem, we're not on reddit. You asked me a question and I elaborated in a detailed manner to which you responded in a low quality manner with no substance which was just name calling. >I'm pretty sure I was asking about edge cases that are hard to deal with so that I might understand how the other party thinks before formulating deeper opinions. I gave several perfectly valid solutions that are pragmatic and realistic, if you don't like them, then you can point them out and explain your reasoning but resorting to hand-wavy rants won't be constructive or helpful for any serious dialogue.
        verdverm 4y ago
        > why should be some company "co" from country x be more entitled to their own tld than the company co with the same name from country y? Because in some cases, that is the rule. See Rule #5 https://github.com/handshake-org/hs-names https://github.com/handshake-org/hs-names > if a brand was not significant enough to reach internet search significance why should they be entitled to their own tld? Why should any brand be entitled to such things? > but resorting to hand-wavy rants won't be constructive or helpful for any serious dialogue. Can you quote where I did this? I could for you

greyface- 4y ago

Handshake requires domain owners to pay a biennial "mining fee" to maintain their names, even for names that were "airdropped" to FOSS projects. This is no less of a grift than ICANN.

tptacek 4y ago

Oh, that's nice of Handshake. Definitely it makes sense to me now that Handshake should be able to sell the domain namespace! Why not, if they're going to donate to FOSS? My question to you is: if I donate MAC addresses to FOSS projects, can I tokenize ARP? I promise to be nice about it. The first 10,000 IP addresses can have their ARPCoin for free. Seriously, this FOSS donation thing with Handshake: it's like selling people the Brooklyn Bridge, but promising generous new bike lanes. See, the FOSS stuff? It wasn't the problem with the plan.