Showcase and Discuss ‘Handshake’ TLDs and SLDs

[Levi_charlz]

Decentralisation is already taking big bites out of legacy systems and ‘Handshake’ TLDs and SLDs are disrupting the Domaining status quo.

Handshake aims to put the entire naming process on its own blockchain. The 100,000 most popular domains (as determined by the Amazon-owned internet analytics company Alexa) are off-limits for now, but unlike ICANN, Handshake allows you to register any other domain you want via auction.

https://www.namebase.io/domains#search

Have you invested in any? Please feel free to share any investments you have made.

 

[Elad n]

Problem is just not big enough with domains.

Major companies have no reason to go this route when they can secure the .com

 

[Donnyd]

It will all depend on who takes it on as a browser. Regardless idiots are asking 10 million 50000 or whatever for names they bought for 10 tokens or HNS just weeks ago. Handshake will come out on top as long as people stop asking stupid amounts for domains. Once brave and duck duck accept these extensions watch out! They will not accept just any old extension from an outsider IMO.

Just wait till yahoo and bing accept. Since google will not for sometime if ever people will gravitate towards these search engines. Or a whole new website for the decentral web will come about and you willl download it and be on your way. Google going to be in big trouble if they don't accept as they will lose millions of traffic visitors daily.... Just a matter of time.

 

[Keith]

I still take issue with their bidding process. To me Virtual/ was awarded to a bidder who absolutely bid less -

Note that they confirmed my total bid as 20,700 hns but it’s sold for 2222 hns. No excuse here. Maybe I should legally challenge this.

 

[Keith]

 

[Perfect Names]

Web3Service
.com

Web //3// studios // com
Web//3// metaverse// com

 

[DomainHacks]

Epik.com bought epik/

Source: @robmonster
https://mobile.twitter.com/robmonster/status/1428408879877132288

 

[domaindia]

I still take issue with their bidding process. To me Virtual/ was awarded to a bidder who absolutely bid less -

Show attachment 188612


Note that they confirmed my total bid as 20,700 hns but it’s sold for 2222 hns. No excuse here. Maybe I should legally challenge this.

What is it you are planning to challenge? It clearly shows your bid as 713. Blind does not count as part of your bid. Its just a way to try and thwart any potential bidders....

Its clear the winning bidder is bidder #9 who pays the second highest bidders price. See Vickrey Auction

Unfortunately you took the bronze on this one.

 

[MKM]

Problem is just not big enough with domains.

Major companies have no reason to go this route when they can secure the .com

This.

1) Companies that are lawfully conducting their businesses have little fear of losing their domains. Despite a few corner cases where entire TLDs have been affected, the conventional gTLDs are more than protected by both technical and cross-border legal frameworks. One audience I can see this appealing to are those that conduct businesses outsider the law and are constantly being threatened. Any business owning such handshake domains would be at the mercy of the registrar of the TLD since transfer options might not be easy and that's a huge risk for the businesses. This will end up in businesses contesting for their own TLDs which is already happening with ICANN. Say, in future, if ICANN makes it increasingly easier for business to own up their own TLDs if they desire so, then why would any business risk some private registrar with their brand identity?

2) Decentralization also makes it difficult to establish authority. ICANN's authority is accepted worldwide across all bigtechs in the industry. Even if this handshake technology is superior, it still has to go through the maturity curve to establish itself. If and when the technology proves its capability, what prevents the bigtechs from forming a consortium and rolling out their own blockchain under ICANN undermining any existing blockchain initiatives? After all, bigtechs have spent good money while contesting for popular TLDs and they are not going to sit on their hands and watch some early adopters run away with premium extensions.

3) Technical challenges such as dealing with blockchain forking, reverting back existing changes due to legal actions have not been tested with this technology.

4) Lack of search engine visibility. A lot of business rely on this. It is probably still the single most significant reason for going online for many small business.

All these reasons are without even accounting for the risks and challenges that are associated with using a proprietary name resolver.

 

[jamesau]

This.

1) Companies that are lawfully conducting their businesses have little fear of losing their domains. Despite a few corner cases where entire TLDs have been affected, the conventional gTLDs are more than protected by both technical and cross-border legal frameworks. One audience I can see this appealing to are those that conduct businesses outsider the law and are constantly being threatened. Any business owning such handshake domains would be at the mercy of the registrar of the TLD since transfer options might not be easy and that's a huge risk for the businesses. This will end up in businesses contesting for their own TLDs which is already happening with ICANN. Say, in future, if ICANN makes it increasingly easier for business to own up their own TLDs if they desire so, then why would any business risk some private registrar with their brand identity?

2) Decentralization also makes it difficult to establish authority. ICANN's authority is accepted worldwide across all bigtechs in the industry. Even if this handshake technology is superior, it still has to go through the maturity curve to establish itself. If and when the technology proves its capability, what prevents the bigtechs from forming a consortium and rolling out their own blockchain under ICANN undermining any existing blockchain initiatives? After all, bigtechs have spent good money while contesting for popular TLDs and they are not going to sit on their hands and watch some early adopters run away with premium extensions.

3) Technical challenges such as dealing with blockchain forking, reverting back existing changes due to legal actions have not been tested with this technology.

4) Lack of search engine visibility. A lot of business rely on this. It is probably still the single most significant reason for going online for many small business.

All these reasons are without even accounting for the risks and challenges that are associated with using a proprietary name resolver.

A lot of great points and well thought out.

My personal view is that it should be browsers that control what is visible. Your choice in browser and filter level should dictate what you want to see, not your government or some other politicized entity.

As much as I personally align with the way Twitter censors content, I still think there is a possible future where this gets out of hand. Corporations having the power over what we access could get messy.

Decentralization is not about letting all people access all things. It's about not letting corporations dictate. In the best case it's about democratizing this so in fact we could all vote for what should or should not be visible.

Sure most browsers will still end up deciding what we see, but the choice will always be there to get a different browser. The problem with platforms like Twitter is you can't just change your settings.

 

[MKM]

First of all, I am not debating the decentralization of the internet. My concerns are around the suitability of blockchain in achieving that decentralization. Do I have a better alternative? Nope, but that doesn't deter me from scrutinizing the existing choice of technology.

Secondly, the internet is not all about web browsers since a large part of internet today is used by web-API invocations, crawlers, bots, IoT devices and stuff of that nature. Also, browsers are not the constraint here. The Tor project has already dealt with their alleged inadequacies of existing browsers by forking out their own implementation. Not only that, the Tor browser has become the primary choice for several actors that stand to benefit from the anonymity it offers. Why can't the handshake evangelists follow a similar strategy and see where it goes?

If someone has issues with how the authorities or big techs are handling the current system, then there are existing avenues (such as anonymous .onion addresses) to work around that. But I wouldn't expect anything like that to be part of mainstream where law enforcement agencies do not have sufficient control. Sure they can't take down the real domain/site but there is always a chain of accountability where the buck stops at whoever is unable to pass the accountability.

 

[Nsnsa]

Recently i registered all .1 extension

MV.1
Shop.1
Team.1
Plus.1

I have no idea how to start sell or park them on landing page cuz they are not like normal domain! No browser have support handshake domain!

 

[Rammbo]

Recently i registered all .1 extension

MV.1
Shop.1
Team.1
Plus.1

I have no idea how to start sell or park them on landing page cuz they are not like normal domain! No browser have support handshake domain!

I wanted get shop.1 but I see u were the one who got it

 

[Rammbo]

I registered Player.1