Apr 08, 2014 1:24 PM

gotta be in the computer lingo to fuly grasp it.

So DNS is flawed in the sense that it's functions can be regulated by governments etc... A site that I view today may be deemed inaccessible tomorrow... The creators of said site don't want potential customers like me being blocked so they may want to seek alternative, guaranteed TLD's for their customer's to access their site without interference...i.e .bit...

Is the idea for our banks to exist on the .bit domain and be available for these site owners to access in order to set up alternative sites to the current TLD's?...

Scott :p

Eamonn O Brien : I don't think the point is to setup a bank with the .bit domain. I think the idea is to get away from banks and central authorities in general and move towards a decentralised system where all peers are considered equals. I may be wrong however.

SOA (Start of authority) on DNS means you could send the request and Google could direct to Gay Porn. It is the MOST vulnerable part of DNS and set us back YEARS trying to solve the problem.

Namecoin is the first round of deployments that are designed to work around that. If NAMES worked like PERSONS you could have your OWN top-level domain, that YOU control.

...and Google will never be the same :D

Adamski..you giving it a fourth shot here?

Didn't I just see an Adam Thomas post here?

Sup again Niggas ....hahahaha......double dippin.....

Cryptos will bring Common Law back to the Lands & I indorse that......

Does Scott endorse what you 'indorse'? That being, bringing Common Law back to the lands. I had someone tell me common law was freedumb. Is it?

It's not if everyone follows the rules.

...but they don't so common law is a pipe dream.

Scott, what is your take on the common law aspect? Thanks.

I already did. :P

LAW requires adherence and consent. ANY Law.

Well its been stated & is Received= ENdorsed. .

The only thing that works: Comply or die.

My method is just... better.

When my framework is built from all these pieces of innovation (That I spawn) then the rules will be simple: Comply, use the old system...or starve.

do you mean "Comply, or use the old system and starve"?

'It's not if everyone follow the rules.' It is not what? Did someone else just comment and I can't see?

Refresh your page.

No Derek, I mean exactly what i say, and you do not have either the intellect, nor the insight to add to add to it.

Old systems always remain.

ICQ, MySpace, etc are still around, and you can use them. They just wont work very well if everyone you know is elsewhere.

People will use MY framework, because it's just BETTER.

well one comment you say move forward then you say use the old system o.0 :S

Supersede governments, supersede banks...the system will not be destroyed but replaced by providing a superior system and service that the masses flock to (supply/demand with a gentle nudge)...rendering the old system redundant...it will still exist, but if you remain there, you're a dinosaur who becomes just as redundant as they are.

Move into the 'new/better' system (comply), remain in the old system (slave/victim), but you cannot exist in a vacuum because you can never be truly self sufficient, so you'll 'starve' on one or several levels.

That's my take on it Derek Hill, hope that's useful for you.

You will always have a choice. Those who are the first to adopt will profit from the exponential function. It really is that simple.