[video] BitShares DNS

[phoenix]

Impressive, I like where the DAC industry is going!

[yellowecho]

Okay - toast is the man.  This guy is 20, and he's got potential... (1) He's sharp, (2) He's a good speaker and has potential to become a really good speaker (3) He can develop software like a champ.  I3 could really grow with toast and vice versa, my two cents

  Toast FTW !

[blackbeard]

So browser (copamnies / organizations) are the ones that would have to accept one of those systems? Can they accept a few in parallel?

freespeechme.org  has a free plugin for firefox that handles .bit

I'm sure we could do the same for .dns

dotbit.me just released a one click chrome extension

[toast]

no worries, let's just honestly compete over a long period of time

if we pick different TLDs we won't really interfere with each other and we can learn from each other

[sipak]

I cant get my head arround the economics of domain auction proposed in the video. Why should anybody not actually winning the auction get half of profits? Why this is applicable only to the second highest bid? At least I see the following problem:

I can always use two different identities to make two subsequent highest bids: for example 1000 and 1001 immediately one after another. If 1001 wins I will get the domain for half of that price. If not somebody else will win it doing 1002 and 1003 effectively eliminating true second highest bidder.

Intuitively I don't think this gives any good incentives. In auction we only want bidders who actually want to buy the domain, not profit seeking bidders-speculators, so shareholder could get more profit from true market auction:

If the highest bidder for "domain.bit" is willing to pay maximum 1000 because of his economic calculation and the market for this domain is dense, then the final price will be near this price, so we don't need to pay any bidder to speculate the price higher.

Do we have any real world example of proposed type of "sponsored" auction anyway?

[CrazyCriple]

i like the concept but I don't understand how this will be integrated in the existing DNS infrastructure. All existing ISP's would have to switch? Or is this a whole different sector?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[phoenix]

I cant get my head arround the economics of domain auction proposed in the video. Why should anybody not actually winning the auction get half of profits? Why this is applicable only to the second highest bid? At least I see the following problem:

I can always use two different identities to make two subsequent highest bids: for example 1000 and 1001 immediately one after another. If 1001 wins I will get the domain for half of that price. If not somebody else will win it doing 1002 and 1003 effectively eliminating true second highest bidder.

In order to try this you need 2001 coins. Your first identity pays 1000 coins to the pool, then your second identity pays 1000.5 to the first identity, and 0.5 to the pool, and has to pay a transaction fee. Your net cost is 1000.5 coins plus transaction fees. If somebody beats your bid, you still get half the difference between your second bid and their first bid, so you do make a profit, even if you aren't the second to last bid

[CWEvans]

i like the concept but I don't understand how this will be integrated in the existing DNS infrastructure. All existing ISP's would have to switch? Or is this a whole different sector?

Initially, you'll need to install a browser plugin that knows how to resolve the domain name.

[Overthetop]

It was to communicate "angelshare funding", I didn't mean to imply distribution. DNS will be 50/50 pts/ags.

That is great! 
and how about the volume of DNS? 

[toast]

It was to communicate "angelshare funding", I didn't mean to imply distribution. DNS will be 50/50 pts/ags.

That is great! 
and how about the volume of DNS? 

Do you mean initial supply? I'm thinking either 5 million or 50 million.

[vikram]

Comments from someone when I posted to /r/Namecoin: http://www.reddit.com/r/Namecoin/comments/20m3wu/video_comparison_of_bitshares_dns_vs_namecoin/

Just popping in to point out some innacuracies after watching the video.

• you state "namecoin price per domain is fixed", that is incorrect. Namecoin has been around for years now, the cost of the domains started out at 50 NMC each. They appear to be fixed only for now.
• Bitshares' PoS being better than Namecoin's PoW is a strawman argument, as no extra energy whatsoever is spent mining namecoins. Mining namecoins is virtually free, so long as the Bitcoin network exists.
• You could have put a bit more planning into the video, I am not impressed watching you hum and haw about what you're going to talk about next... but I understand I would probably make a similarly awkward video. Just watch it and edit it before you release it next time, you will be received much better I guarantee it.
• yes and no are not points. Also, I wish you would have elaborated more on what exactly a domain auction is and how it works via bitshares.
• you come off as snarky/rude towards namecoiners by smirking every time you mention how namecoin works. (like duhhh, right guys? Namecoin is soooo dumb and outdated!) We've been around for a lot longer than you, son. Give us some respect.
• who/what do you guys keep looking at off in the far distance when speaking to the camera!??! Jesus! lol
• it is not set in stone that namecoin domain purchase transactions will be eaten by the network, miners may receive them at a later date after registration in the future, namecoin is still in it's infancy.
• wtf is "ageoshare funding"? Is that what you said? And then wrote AGS funding? I looked it up and couldn't find anything about it.
• claiming namecoin has no funding is an outright lie.
• that's where I turned off the video.

All in all, you guys need some serious work on your professionalism, bullying competing coins, and public speaking skills. You failed at all 3 of those in this video.

[bytemaster]

Comments from someone when I posted to /r/Namecoin: http://www.reddit.com/r/Namecoin/comments/20m3wu/video_comparison_of_bitshares_dns_vs_namecoin/

Just popping in to point out some innacuracies after watching the video.

• you state "namecoin price per domain is fixed", that is incorrect. Namecoin has been around for years now, the cost of the domains started out at 50 NMC each. They appear to be fixed only for now.
• Bitshares' PoS being better than Namecoin's PoW is a strawman argument, as no extra energy whatsoever is spent mining namecoins. Mining namecoins is virtually free, so long as the Bitcoin network exists.
• You could have put a bit more planning into the video, I am not impressed watching you hum and haw about what you're going to talk about next... but I understand I would probably make a similarly awkward video. Just watch it and edit it before you release it next time, you will be received much better I guarantee it.
• yes and no are not points. Also, I wish you would have elaborated more on what exactly a domain auction is and how it works via bitshares.
• you come off as snarky/rude towards namecoiners by smirking every time you mention how namecoin works. (like duhhh, right guys? Namecoin is soooo dumb and outdated!) We've been around for a lot longer than you, son. Give us some respect.
• who/what do you guys keep looking at off in the far distance when speaking to the camera!??! Jesus! lol
• it is not set in stone that namecoin domain purchase transactions will be eaten by the network, miners may receive them at a later date after registration in the future, namecoin is still in it's infancy.
• wtf is "ageoshare funding"? Is that what you said? And then wrote AGS funding? I looked it up and couldn't find anything about it.
• claiming namecoin has no funding is an outright lie.
• that's where I turned off the video.

All in all, you guys need some serious work on your professionalism, bullying competing coins, and public speaking skills. You failed at all 3 of those in this video.

Interesting feedback... but the answers clearly show that we need to improve our descriptions of things:

1) From the perspective of NMC holders, they are paying a heavy fee to 'miners' who may happen to share work with Bitcoin.  The point is it doesn't matter what the 'profit margins' are for the miners, paying them is still an expense on the network.

2) Price fixing even if the price changes by algorithm is still price fixing.  In other words, at any given point in time all names are the same price and that price is not set by market forces.

3) The purpose of the video was to get something out there quick, not to spend hours planning and editing. 

4) If there are any mistakes regarding funding that would be an honest misunderstanding. 

[toast]

Yeah that guy doesn't get the economics yet. He has a point about video quality though, please *don't* use the video on the main site. That should be another animated "what is bitcoin?"-style video. I will make more informal videos but they should all be forum-level exposure.

[Gentso1]

Don't worry about the quality of the video or the fact that you may not have looked the camera in the eye.
No one invested in pts or ags because they cared about how well you spoke in the video.

I personally thought it was a quick informal way, that didn't cost you and your team much time but also allowed you to get your point out

So thanks for the quick explanation

and I believe you have some coding to get back to

[Ohpinot]

Video was great, do more of them.  Ignore the haters.  Honestly if you were spending months making really professional videos instead of DACs, I don't think anyone would be happy.