Jumping over from this excellent post by appamatto...


+1, think this is a fantastic idea.

However, I feel that economically, the mainline bitcoin block chain should be a currency-only block chain.

I don't like how bitDNS ties a single "blessed" market -- distributed data publishing -- so closely with the underlying currency.  It seems like those who use bitcoins for reasons unrelated to the block chain data publishing would be more unduly impacted by the use of currency for distributed data publishing.

Someone really needs to start a new block chain, BitX GenCoins.  That would relieve the pressure off trying to stuff all these ideas into the world's digital software-fiat currency.

Not to mention that a decentralized DNS system, which I am not against, will have a tendency to skew towards the illegal/fringe uses where avoidance of the law is paramount.

1) I understand that taking a domain name doesn't shut down the operation, but having a domain name at least makes it easier for the content to be accessed, and easier for it to be profitable for the wrongdoer, who can change hosts, etc, and just update the IP behind the domain.

Thanks for the backup. :p

Yes, I think that the different bit-apps should be as orthogonal as possible, both to each other and to the "uber-chain" of BitX.

Honestly, bitcoin may not be the killer app for the block chain platform.  If this is the case then we run the risk of a more popular app leaving bitcoin in the dust, and then having someone incorporate a currency platform into that app, thereby dwarfing the bitcoin block history and popping the bubble.

That's why I think it's essential to "bind the fates" of the various bit-apps together in a single BitX "uber-chain" that can provide mutual protection for bit-apps like bitDNS and bitcoin as well as easily foster new apps.

Why would the Bitcoin community want to have a distributed DNS system piggybacked on its chain? Yea, you could do that with the old client releases, but the new official client release does not support BitDNS/DomainChain. (I am upgrading, and won't support BitDNS/DomainChain).

That having a domain name would help a hypothetical illicit online business?

That Bitcoin being interwoven with said illicit hypothetical online business by virtue of being its DNS provider is a bad thing?

Then do we disagree?  

You are against the protocol being filled with "other uses" (like BitDNS - an exception to normal use). If the official client only allows standard transactions, then the protocol is not getting "minced".

...unless the use of bitcoin for non-currency purposes discourages currency use.  Some uses of the network can act as an overall disincentive against mainstream use.  If people see that miners care little for currency transactions on the bitcoin network, or all the data spam increases TX fees to annoying levels, currency users will find a new network elsewhere.  If people find out law-enforcement-objectionable data such as "kiddie-pr0n.p2p DNS data" is being managed on this network, that increases the incentive for currency users to go elsewhere.

Maybe that makes some miners happy in the short term, and you happy, but I'm here for the revolutionary new type of digital cash.

And this generalized data timestamping/notary service seems like it has the distinct probability of degrading service for digital cash, if it is even remotely successful.

Heck, the guy from The Pirate Bay is making his own distributed DNS.