Topic: namecoin are low, why? (Read 5161 times)

I really like what you are doing.  The above is one of the reasons I find it hard to support Namecoin, I don't like the fact that there is value attached to Namecoin that has nothing to do with it's services.  In theory itself I cannot find the benefits to Namecoin being a commodity on top of it being something of use.  Either be a "money" or be a "service", but when you try to be both, it will be automatically rejected every time.   

The value of the services Namecoin offers exceeds the value of it as a coin.
The value of the name coin "Coin" exceeds the value of it's services it renders.

It seems only one of these statements can be true.  I know I am simplifying things, but I am trying to understand them as I blurt all this out, what is it about the Namecoin technology that cannot be replicated and put out as some kind of open source program that people could just run to keep things going?  Would somehow the "miners" rule the Namecoin-bit-web because they control the hashing power?  In fact, would the 51% attacks that threaten coins be something that could threaten Namecoin, and if that is the case, and just being theoretical here, if that were to happen, what would happen to the domains and sites?

Open Transactions "nyms" (pseudonyms) also are hashes, so are similarly just un-memorable gobbledegook to humans. Server and currency contract IDs similarly.

Thus it could be useful to have namespaces in namecoin to allow looking up a server or currency or nym's ID using a memorable name.

This could also help a little against spoofing of currencies that become popular; instead of relying upon some random website somewhere that tells you to import some contract from their site, expecting it to be the contract of some well known well reputed currency, and just trusting it, you could look up the currency by its famous name (careful here though of fonts that fool you by using characters that look similar to other characters) in a currency ID namespace in namecoin to find its ID as recorded in namecoin by, one might hope, the actual issuer/signer of its actual correct contract.

In other news, my Open Transactions server, still in alpha testing stage, now supports bitcoins (BTC), britcoins (UKB), botcoins (MBC), and devcoins (DVC) in addition to namecoins (NMC), enabling trading among them all. (The bottleneck of course is I only want to issue the corresponding digital tokens in numbers no greater than the number of secured by hardcoded checkpoint in clients coins I have as reserves.

That means one cannot simply send me coins and I issue tokens, because the coins you send me will not be secure enough to be a good secure reserve to back tokens with until after the release of clients that have hardcoded checkpoints protecting the block you sent those coins in from attackers trying to unravel the blockchain.

How long it typically takes for more than half of the hashing power of a blockchain to update to code that includes such updated hardcoded checkpoints probably varies from chain to chain. SO this will proably have to be a slow-growing exchange. Hopefully though it will be all the more secure for taking its time in this way.

-MarkM-

Greetings, I've read this thread with interest as I'd like to be able to use namecoin to link to TOR hidden services and possibly to I2P eepsites.

I'm the author of AnonymOS  http://anonymos.earthsociety.org. A Gnu-Linux operating system with TOR, I2P, and Bitcoin client pre-installed. It also has many tweaks for enhanced security and privacy -- I daresay it's the most secure OS (of it's kind) on the planet.

But it needs to be better.  I'm soon to release the next version with installer, currently it's only a live-cd or you have to buy a USB drive from me to use it installed.

The beauty of this all rolled into one OS is that it makes it very easy for someone who has little knowledge to take advantage of anonymizing services -- and bitcoin too. Critically -- I2P is a router by default (unlike TOR), with many built in apps and services. The more people that use AnonymOS, the stronger the I2P network becomes -- in fact it can grow in power much more quickly than TOR has and will soon overtake TOR.

I'm seeking advice and knowledge on how to implement namecoin in either this edition, or in a later server edition that includes in-built web server and software for creating TOR-hidden-service blogs.

I see that the US government is moving more and more toward censoring people and I think we really have to start jumping into these alternative networks en masse. For example -- http://tradewithdave.com/?p=8567

Thanks for any help and thoughts.

Cheers

There must be something useful for namecoin. I don't find darknets to be very fast. Perhaps namecoin can serve as an intermediary to finding darknet content.

In order for NMC to be valuable, it must be useful for its intended purpose: domain name registry.

I believe I have hashed out ad nauseum the world's non-demand for a new cryptographic top level domain consisting of nothing but cybersquatting trolls, just on the premise that Wikileaks and PokerStars had to switch TLD's and were inconvenienced for a day or two.  The NMC trading price should make that fairly clear.  I am surprised to see continuing discussion about the .bit domain - something absolutely no one in the world (outside of NMC) cares about, certainly not enough to go and reconfigure their browser or their network settings for.

Until NMC is adapted to the few places where there's an unsatisfied demand for cryptographic name registry services - namely, the .onion domain - to the point it is usable by the average downloader of the Tor bundle with only minimal (e.g. 128k) bandwidth - NMC is a worthless coin.

NMC must be traded though, in order to serve its eventual purpose.  In an ideal world, NMC hits an adoption rate and people buy the NMC to register their domain, rather than setting up graphic card miners and waiting until they mine enough NMC to register a domain.  So it MUST have an exchange for those people that don't want to mine the NMC themselves.  Of course, right now its essentially just another altcoin, lots of trading/speculative value, no mainstream use (although NMC is more useful than any altcoin at the moment).


Until just recently, NMC exchanges were very low (0.005-0.006), but a few big buyers got the price to triple.  Of course, the difficulty is also about to triple compared to what it was not long ago, due to more merged mining adoption (BTC Guild added about 50% more hashpower to the network).

namecoin is high
actually the first place compared with solidcoin, litecoin and more

I don't understand what you hate about ripple or namecoin.
Although not as much as LETS, Ripple is kind of local, so if you don't get the people around you to use it, you can't use it.
I'm currently trying to use ripple in my town through villages.cc, but I guess it will take time until enough people want to use it.
It seems hard to start like LETS.
For namecoin, I guess you would prefer a domain chain with no currency where the miners mine for fees paid in bitcoin. That's possible.
Namecoin can always be forked for that, it was just easier and more efficient to do it this way.
But why is so important not to create a new currency with a chain service?
The reason why no services are built in bitcoin is to avoid to store all that data within the blockchain. I think having each service in a different chain (with merged mining) is better for everyone. This way users can download only the chains they need.
But I don't understand what is so bad about a chain with a service using its own currency to pay its miners.
Instead of buying domains directly with bitcoins you can buy namecoins with bitcoins and then domains with namecoins. Not a big difference.

I actually kind of wish Namecoin was just go away as far as being something traded.  I like my digital currencies to have only one purpose.   A neat idea, should just go the way of Ripple or whatever.  Where it has some kind of user base, but not enough to do anything.

Difficulty is now 199569.39467 and will be 472334.32184  (136.68% growth) in about   1d 0hr 21m  according to allchains.info
What will happen to the price?
And what will happen to the price when the diff gets equal with bitcoin?

I suspect that namecoin will rally again to it's 0.07 BTC price again.

you are right:

Afik DNS Servers normally have TCP support (Bind does) and I think this is even in the RFC - for clients or network that cannot support UDP to use TCP instead.

yes UDP does not work on TOR. it is stream based.
my idea:
unknowing client app -> namecoin dns server: give me the address of "something.bit"
namecoin dns server resolves this, if it point to a ip, return it.
if it points to a .onion address. ask tor to map it, to an fake ip address(often 127.0.X.X), and return that.
if it is not ending with .bit, resolve it as normal.
namecoin dns server -> client app: "something.bit" is at 12.34.56.78
client app connects to ip(12.34.56.78). works as usual.

there is no udp packets going out of your computer.

1) How is the network not really secure?
2) If price of NMC has higher but it earned you a lower rate than Bitcoin so that you never mined it were you really losing anything?

How exactly are you hurt by higher hashing power on MMC network and lower prices?

Sorry if I misunderstood, but we both understand that UDP doesn't work over Tor, right?

I am not sure that having a full-blown namecoin client will be consistent with the goals of Tor - at least to the extent such a client participates in the block chain.  It certainly can be an option, the same way power users can run relays and bridges... but I think the Tor development community will consider it a non-starter if using Namecoin depends on every user downloading a large block chain file.

no they don't the namecoin network, is as secure as the bitcoin network.

Nice idea. With that attitude I guess NMC will soon rise to 0.1 BTC

Who thought of giving BTC miners free NMC and who thought of MM ? They deserve a double facepalm right now. Price is utterly miserable and network is not really that much safer.

dns over tcp is not neccesary. the namecoin client could provide a udp dns server, that is pointing to a .onion address, or directly map the address to a virtual host that tor assigns.

or you could just proxy the whole shit.

What really needs to happen is for the TOR project (or actually, the projects that provide DNS resolution for Tor installations, which would be Vidalia and/or Polipo) to implement namecoin DNS resolution support into their software.

That might be a little more complex than it sounds.  For example, the DNS resolution needs to be secure.  Tor is also for TCP, not for UDP, and normal DNS only UDP, so implementing it might require adding support for DNS over TCP.

But yeah... if this gets done right and adopted, namecoins might have a reason to shoot up in value.

I swear I read somewhere that someone had patched the sources of Polipo to support Namecoin resolution, it's a fork or something.  Lobbying for this patch (or some derivative of it) to be included in the standard build might be a worthy goal for Namecoin enthusiasts if they want to see their coins increase in value.

Price now at 0.008. We need to get this TOR thing going to raise the price folks !

I mean even SC is getting better rates than NMC.