That is contrary to the whole point of building a SAFE perpetual web. The goal is no expiration, no on going fees. Pay once, store forever… this is the direction the thinking needs to be in .
No one does. No one should ever be able to claim ‘safe://news’.
I was not aware of that. I figured he was doing a play on words with “traction”. So yes, @traktion is out of luck and would need to get creative.
It’s not going to be long before Facebook will have more dead users than living ones… and yet it’s not terribly difficult to find a person, business, or page, and reliably return to it, is it?
No one likes the idea that people die, but what an awful shame that people legacies can’t be preserved.
If you are into cycling, like me, you may have come across an amazing site by a guy called Sheldon Brown. It’s basically his life’s work as a skilled bike mechanic and teacher, documenting the maintenance and engineering of every conceivable bike part, even really obscure old ones. It’s amazingly helpful for learning, and keeping old bikes going.
Sadly he died a few years ago, but thankfully someone has kept up with the hosting and domain fees, and the site is preserved.
What a tragedy it would have been if that domain was snapped up by some greedy disposable bike manufacturer for a cheap marketing trick, or by another Sheldon Brown who didn’t like bikes.
I think perpetual data and the names pointing to said data are different things and could be treated differently, without breaking with the SAFE principles.
The same answer to why a rich guy should have the right to own a good name like vodka pizza or google?
So you are happy with rich guys doing this?
So why can’t we do that on SAFE? Other people can maintain the NRS if they have the access to it. If they don’t then we still have the history which can be the base of a new website created by some other person who want to keep him alive via a NRS
i like that i can order my pizza at pizza.de - that’s something i can remember 
It would stay alive all by itself, no need for anyone else to have access. It won’t expire, rot, or fall over. And all links to within it will be preserved by default.
Isn’t that the very same rationale behind spam control in the network?
This would also be another method to avoid another type of DoS: an attack on reputation.
Misleading and confusion caused by squatters and scammers would seriously undermine the adoption of the network, and if companies are scared from using it from the bad PR it would get, then it will be really a shame for their customers which is essentially us.
I believe the best compromise is to reserve names for existing companies and give them a chance of getting their name registered within a grace period.
It could even be free and consider this an opportunity as an outreach program to get the first corporate adopters, but psychologically I would recommend to charge at least a symbolic fee for the right of first user or something like that.
This is a common suggestion for new writers: if you ever write a book, charge them at least $2 to your friends and family otherwise nobody will read it and it will be collecting dust as a paperweight.
If something is given away for free, it will not be appreciated and perceived as worthless.
No I don’t want to create communism, all I’m saying is that money doesn’t do a fair thing here unless that’s coming from a real contribution to the network, I’d prefer to have users to have privileges if they are contributing to the network, this is all what the network is trying to achieve, you provide resources then you get credits (safecoin) to use storage/communication/etc.
So the way I see it is that if anyone contributed to the network then he should have the right to buy an NRS name or any other things the network offers. If you become rich by contributing to the network then you have the right to obtain more things from the network than anyone who contributed less to the network, that’s all, so that’s not a communism as far as I know.
Does anyone own a word in the dictionary that is commonly used around the world? Ownership means control. Example:
“I hereby claim the word ‘the’ in perpetuity. Now none of you are allowed to use it.” This is ludicrous. The concept that SAFE would enforce this rule is ridiculous. But people like to own things. That is why there needs to be a public/private demarcation line with common ‘public’ id’s/words being owned/usable by Everyone, and new/invented/creative ‘private’ words/names being owned by Someone. The fundamentals of this partitioning strategy are already baked into the SAFE network design in an analogous manner through the specification of public and private datatypes. This needs to be (metaphorically) embraced by the NRS implementation.
well - http://meyer.se/ - https://meyer.de/ - http://www.meyer.com/ - http://www.meyer.nl/ - http://meyer.pl/
which of those companies deserve to get safe://meyer ? the largest one? the first one? the one with the nicest face? why them and not Mr. Meyer my Neighbour?
Yup. Where there is centralisation, and money involved, there is liability too. Good luck to anyone seeking to arbitrate all that mess.
Yes, that’s all cool, but rich folks will also just buy them from an exchange and possibly before anyone farmed enough to buy all NRS names, as an example, so if you are saying only rich farmers can buy NRS names, yes I like it, but how do you know they are farmers or just obtained the coins from an exchange? that’s all
does this matter at all? if i would be offered enough money i would buy a name for someone else and sell it to him …
(and by buying the farmed coins through an exchange => the farmer => the network would profit again … so all cool from what i see)
Feels like this discussion is about to get silly. It has already moved from useful to positioning IMO.
Let’s not move away from the core mostly agreed aims into polarised more personal beliefs. I suggest there’s a rough consensus (not unanimity) around things like:
Feel free to suggest corrections to the above. It’s just off the top of my head. Now I’m off to work on code for a bit!
PS Would anyone like to make a bullet list of the different solutions / alternatives mentioned so far?
People do fine with phone numbers don’t they and have for a long time, they just associate the number with the name … QR codes are vastly easier than a URL of any sort and can get you the address and the name. Cameras are going everywhere these days more and more devices have them and they are brilliant at picking up these codes.
I think I’m pretty outnumbered here on this debate anyway, so it’s not of much use to debate it any further I think. What I believe is that there will inevitably be multiple NRS’s. Having a single one will be too problematic. It would be nice if we could abandon the idea of domain names altogether, but given what I read here it’s not a popular view.
Well in such cases I guess that an auction among all the Meyers wouldn’t be a crazy idea. Those who really need it would get it.
Instead of having random people placing a bid on any name, having the bid restricted among those who have the same domain name under a different gTLD extensions would make sense.
After the grace period, it would open for anyone to register any name for free.
I think this would cause enough pressure for the companies out there to secure their place.
No I don’t want to do that either, I was trying to come up with a solution that was all, it’s not perfect and it has problems as discussed in the thread, that’s all cool. You shouldn’t do what you are doing with my comments, I’m not trying or thinking any of what you try to say I’m doing. I’m just sharing some thoughts, ideas, and point of view, that’s all.
We’re all just sharing ideas here. It does sometimes feel though that some people think I’m trying to steal their birthday cake and so they don’t give very well thought out replies sometimes and just reiterate their mantra … you will not steal my cake … you will not steal my cake …
lol
Edit … I know, I’m an naive asshole. I’ve come to terms with it.