pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @maciek 12 Mar \ parent \ on: Why no decentralized namespace yet? bitcoin
I think it's a mistake to think of namespace as just DNS. Assume you had a namespace that is decentralized, it does resolve to a single name and is universally accessible. It would create an alternative to trademark laws and other institutions created on the foundation of the nation-state for managing intellectual property, reputation, etc. It's a missing piece for decentralized identity. When you combine a decentralized network that enables you to control assets (bitcoin) and another one that does the same for names you can build an alternative to the State.
I agree on DNS not being a target for replacement, my focus is on human readable names for keys at this point as I mentioned.
I disagree though with the step-change of utility in tokenizing titles. We can already tokenize any digital thing, but namespace is an abstract social thing.. This is why decentralized namespace hasn't worked yet, because approaches have been technical-centered instead of socially-centered.
Physical things, even if traded digitally, are ultimately enforced in the meatspace where they exist. The internet is made of physical servers, datacenters, powerplants... This inevitably results in an apex force that is the most efficient at killing people and breaking things in an area... that's not going away no matter what you want to call it.