Re: [GNUnet-developers] Goodbye ".gnu"

[Schanzenbach, Martin]

> On 4. Mar 2018, at 15:15, carlo von lynX <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> I generally welcome this new development, although
> 
> On Sun, Mar 04, 2018 at 08:45:51AM +0100, Schanzenbach, Martin wrote:
>>> 1) IETF doesn't want us to use those, having rejected our draft for 4+
>>> years now, so clearly trying to play nice doesn't work.
> 
> Which isn't surprising at all that they grant a special condition to
> a relevant subsystem of today's Internet, Tor, while joining the
> rough consensus in regards of this project of an excentric German
> researcher to wait and see if there's any running code and adoption
> in the pipeline.
> 
>>> 2) ".gnu" confused people. I expect that if you create a nickname
>>> "trump" and then start to map the ".trump" TLD will be way more intuitive.
>>> 
>>> 3) GNS shouldn't be just for ".gnu", we want to replace DNS after all.
>>> So this is a step towards liberating all the TLDs and refute Cerf's
>>> assertion that ICANN owns the global namespace.  Instead, from now on,
>>> GNS can just use _any_ TLD for which it is configured, overriding
>>> ICANN/IANA.
> 
> These reasons I find more convincing.
> 
>> As I understood the significant change is that GNS now initially determines 
>> the "root" zone by checking the TLD against local egos, right?
>> This is where you lost me. I would have expected the DENICs of the world to 
>> still be the authorities over their TLD.
> 
> That is against the spirit of GNUnet, to further promote the structures
> of authority of the broken Internet. Everyone is empowered to do it for
> themselves, for as long as the broken Internet remains legal.
> 
>> However, if I must create a local ego and import all the data, _I_ manage 
>> the zone. I don't want that.
> 
> In the secushare architecture we intend to go a step further: by
> aggregating the data of our social neighborhood it is the social
> consensus that defines where "BILD" should point to, rather than
> the legal entity that pays for the brand.

Ye. I was talking in technical terms. What I was trying to say is that you 
can't have it both ways, but CG cleared it up!
Now, naming in GNS all comes down to personal petnames anyway.
But I do not see anyone managing a "de" petname. It just does not really make 
any sense unless you are an organisation that gives "de" some meaning so that 
others can use it accordingly (this is basically what DENIC does, or "pin").

> 
> So by putting the distributed social graph next or on top of GNS, we
> are not only bypassing ICANN, we are also obsoleting Google Search.
> 
> Things are what the People think it is, which may at times be a
> filter bubble, but that depends on the size of secushare adoption
> or societal mandate (if we agree on wanting an Internet for the
> People and thus require it by law). So the People may think that
> BILD should point to bildblog.de rather than bild.de - or produce
> a search results page by which 60% recommend the PKEY of a legal
> entity that currently identifies as bild.de whereas 30% recommend
> bildblog instead.
> 
> I think an implementation of the secushare distributed graph is
> what GNUnet needs the most to actually provide an alternative to
> cloud-based monopolists and ingrain the perspective into the minds
> of IETF, general population and legislators - that an Internet
> of the People based on GNUnet can actually be achieved.
> 
> As always with things that could change the world for the better
> but hardly anyone knows and comprehends: it has been a challenge
> to find any financing.
> 
> 
> --
>  E-mail is public! Talk to me in private using encryption:
>         http://loupsycedyglgamf.onion/LynX/
>          irc://loupsycedyglgamf.onion:67/lynX
>         https://psyced.org:34443/LynX/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GNUnet-developers mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers


- Martin

GPG: 3D11063C10F98D14BD24D1470B0998EF86F59B6A

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP