[earslap]

I would not trust Kazakhstan to honor the TLD registrations if this took off and made some noise. Reminds me of Libya taking ownership of all those trendy .ly domains claiming you have to obey Libyan laws and regulations to operate them. Still a fun idea taken quite far!

[freeone3000]

>claiming you have to obey Libyan laws and regulations to operate them

It being a CCTLD, this is a true claim. At a basic level, these tlds belong to the country, and that country sets the rules. Libya reclaiming from ICANN was a jerk move but their claims are absolutely right. (Most cctlds already have this requirement.)

[dc396]

Libya didn't reclaim anything from ICANN -- ICANN didn't have anything of Libya's.

[ransom1538]

"claiming you have to obey Libyan laws and regulations"

I always smile when bosses want everything to be GDPR compliant. I am not sure why these laws are more important than the laws from the Chilean Navy. Why are we clicking on cookie popups? We think the EU is smarter than the PII laws from Cameroon? Elitism I say. My websites follow strict guidelines set by proper Constitution of Cameroon doctrines. Every fourth visit to my site we dump all contents in html form (obviously).

[wafflemaker]

> Why are we clicking on cookie popups? Because people want to track us to make money from invading our privacy? You don't need a cookie consent banner if your cookies are needed to serve the client with your service. You can do analytics without cookies. So to answer your question - Why are we clicking on cookie popups? Because website owners don't want to stop selling your privacy and now have to inform you about it.

[askvictor]

> GDPR compliant. I am not sure why these laws are more important than the laws from the Chilean Navy.

Purely market size. Europe is a large market. Same reason that just about every product is labelled with 'known to the state of California to cause cancer' - California is a large market.

[EGreg]

I really don't understand how so many people on HN can complain about centralized control, but then so many (other) people are completely against Web3, solutions like Unstoppable Domains are able to let you own a domain and only transfer it if you sign with your key. Why don't more browsers read a Web3-based domain system like Freenames, Unstoppable Domains, ENS, or Filecoin Name Service?

DNS is a federated database, but it is subject to domain seizure etc. at multiple levels. I've seen people complain that their domain operator can just "steal" their domain!

If browsers won't do it, can't someone start a CCTLD (it's only $250K) and then read the blockchain to resolve the DNS records? I realize that this "someone" would be a central point of failure, but alas, that's how the Web currently still works. The best you can do is some sort of "DNS multicast" I think, but it would still be under the control of one company, sadly.

Personally, I'm a bit surprised why the Web hasn't standardized onion links / magnet links / hashes of content / cids / whatever you want to call them. Tor and Beaker Browser have had it for a long time, and Brave too I think. DNS then becomes just a glorified search engine for a small subset of URLs (the ones without a long path / querystring).

[duskwuff]

> can't someone start a CCTLD (it's only $250K)

No, they can't. ccTLDs are associated with countries. There's no process for creating one that doesn't involve having IANA recognize you as a country.

You're probably thinking of the new gTLD process, which has only been open for applications once, for a brief period in 2012. It's not open to new applications, and the process for applicants was much more involved than a single payment.

[dkarras]

because like most things blockchains (cl)aim to solve (primarily money and its transfer, but in this case ownership of domain names), those things do not really really have a centralization problem. 99.999% of the people do not, and do not need to worry about getting their domain name seized. cryptobros like to pose centralization as a huge problem where it really isn't so that they can peddle you scamcoins to pump and to feed their gambling addiction. "web3 based domain system" solves something that is at most a nuisance (and at best a necessary evil) by introducing massive problems into the equation, all to do something that isn't really a problem in practice (and it doesn't even do it, you admit there is still centralisation, so what did we gain by introducing all those problems, really?)