Author [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] Topic: Version DAC  (Read 1130 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline davidpbrown

Version DAC
« on: October 16, 2014, 04:41:36 AM »

I wonder that 'DNS' does not do justice to what KeyID could provide.

You might have seen a while ago that Julian Assange acknowledged Namecoin's potential went beyond simple DNS.
Julian Assange: I Told Google’s Eric Schmidt to Embrace Bitcoin
Quote
Speculation on bitcoin’s future
Assange also discussed the development of a decentralized alternative to the domain name system, a concept that has since served as the foundation for namecoin and other block chain projects.

He said:
Quote
“So this bitcoin replacement for DNS is precisely what I wanted and what I was theorizing about, which is not a DNS system, but rather short names [...] short bit of text to long bit of text tuple registering service. Cause that is the abstraction of domain names and all these problems solved. Yes, you have some something that you want to register that is short, and you want to couple that to something that is unmemorable and longer.”

I wonder that there is no talk here of KeyID/DNS being about version stamping, whether that be for text or I wonder any other content. Perhaps that would not be a matter of unique ownership of the version stamp but would be providing an option to have a unique reference that could act like a URL and perhaps then would see software that validates the content has not changed. For example, if the content of a webpage has not changed, how do you *know* that?

Has this been considered? What are the options here for that I wonder? If I wanted to version stamp this message, so that I could evidence the content had not changed, could I do that by parsing the content through KeyID and finding a unique stamp for it?.. Perhaps for a fee.. I'll take +5% for the idea! :D
฿://1CBxm54Ah5hiYxiUtD7JGYRXykT5Z6ZuMc

Offline biophil

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 774
  • Incentives run the world
    • View Profile
  • BTS: zebulon
Re: Version DAC
« Reply #1 on: October 16, 2014, 02:18:42 PM »
I wonder that 'DNS' does not do justice to what KeyID could provide.

You might have seen a while ago that Julian Assange acknowledged Namecoin's potential went beyond simple DNS.
Julian Assange: I Told Google’s Eric Schmidt to Embrace Bitcoin
Quote
Speculation on bitcoin’s future
Assange also discussed the development of a decentralized alternative to the domain name system, a concept that has since served as the foundation for namecoin and other block chain projects.

He said:
Quote
“So this bitcoin replacement for DNS is precisely what I wanted and what I was theorizing about, which is not a DNS system, but rather short names [...] short bit of text to long bit of text tuple registering service. Cause that is the abstraction of domain names and all these problems solved. Yes, you have some something that you want to register that is short, and you want to couple that to something that is unmemorable and longer.”

I wonder that there is no talk here of KeyID/DNS being about version stamping, whether that be for text or I wonder any other content. Perhaps that would not be a matter of unique ownership of the version stamp but would be providing an option to have a unique reference that could act like a URL and perhaps then would see software that validates the content has not changed. For example, if the content of a webpage has not changed, how do you *know* that?

Has this been considered? What are the options here for that I wonder? If I wanted to version stamp this message, so that I could evidence the content had not changed, could I do that by parsing the content through KeyID and finding a unique stamp for it?.. Perhaps for a fee.. I'll take +5% for the idea! :D

I kinda feel like this is the sort of thing that toast/BM/I3 had in mind when they started rebranding bitshares DNS into a more abstract "namespaces" DAC.
So maybe you'd register the version number of your message in KeyID and link it somehow to the hash of the message; then you'd have this nice cryptographic proof that (1) you own the message, and (2) you haven't changed it since you registered the version. I bet this particular application will seem pretty trivial once we actually start seeing people using KeyID for stuff.

One thing that's been pervasive in toast's jargon lately is this concept of "bringing something on-chain." I think what he means by this is that some applications relating to namespaces can be included in the KeyID protocol, e.g. DNS registration. That is, they can be "brought on-chain." Other applications could store and reference data on the blockchain without the blockchain actually "knowing" what that data is or means. Maybe version tracking/registration could be an example of this.

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2


Offline davidpbrown

Re: Version DAC
« Reply #2 on: October 16, 2014, 03:03:55 PM »
I've not seen anything of the rebranding to more abstract "namespaces" DAC.. all seems very much DNS cf Namecoin and domain ownership and p2p websites, rather than the namespace abstract thought.

I'm expecting more broad offering would be relatively trivial but would need pushing in the direction of copyright and ownership. I wonder there would be a lot that could be done for free similar to a SHA256 hash and that then helping make KeyID widely visible, with options for formal integration into the blockchain following on naturally for a fee.
฿://1CBxm54Ah5hiYxiUtD7JGYRXykT5Z6ZuMc

Offline biophil

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 774
  • Incentives run the world
    • View Profile
  • BTS: zebulon
Re: Version DAC
« Reply #3 on: October 16, 2014, 04:00:03 PM »
I've not seen anything of the rebranding to more abstract "namespaces" DAC.. all seems very much DNS cf Namecoin and domain ownership and p2p websites, rather than the namespace abstract thought.

Well, for a long time this subforum was actually called "namespaces." I hadn't noticed they changed that to KeyID. Their documentation has been so sparse that it's hard to follow this abstract namespaces thread, but according to my reading of toast's jargon, that's exactly what he has in mind.

 

Google+