On 12/22/2013 12:58 PM, James A. Donald wrote:
On 2013-12-22 19:44, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
The solution to this is that names should not claimed, they should be
given by the community that values the association. Neither DNS nor
namecoin allows for that, so both are inadequate. As an example,
consider how Wikipedia pages are named: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coke
Wikipedia does a pretty good job on naming. The names of Wikepedia
articles are not politicized, but its articles are severely politicized,
because they rely on Academia and the New York Times as final authority,
and Academia and the New York Times is politicized.
I agree, but who said there can only be one directory for names? If
social groups disagree, they should each manage their own directory,
With the right tools, we could stack directories. Most people will
prefer the mainstream "bourgeoisie" naming directory, while many might
choose to layer smaller special-interest directories on top of that.
Extremist will maintain their own exclusive directories untainted by
mainstream naming.
And while you are at it, you can throw adblock in the mix, because
manipulating DNS names (to point to /dev/null) is one of its tasks.
If it was naming keys, so that various entities wanted each wanted their
own key given a certain popular name, naming keys would also be
politicized.
Yes, we should have some social procedure for naming names, so that the
the major influence is what other people call the key, rather than what
the owner of the key wants to key to be called, but any such procedure
will come under attack.
_______________________________________________
cryptography mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
