Decentralized control of a centralized finite resource (domain names) requires consensus. For example, Joe Smith and Joe Blow both want joe.com.
You want a protocol that gives consistent "global" state without any centralized / trusted users - blockchain/bitcoin is one of the only technical solutions to provide that.
I agree that it's a garbage solution in practice, but that's why it's got cryptoshit bundled in.
A potential different solution to DNS monopoly, if that is a problem that needs solving, is multiple name-resolution providers that have differing records on what name points where. (The tradeoff is that an owner may need to register their name with multiple different providers).
Agreed. Blockchain is a convoluted solution, but it’s a solution for distributed consensus, if one feels that’s required. But in general I would argue the current root system has served us well and is open and free.
The world you describe, effectively with multiple roots, is coming. Russia have a switch (they’ve even tested it), to anycast out the root DNS IPs within the country, and block them externally. In theory this doesn’t make another “internet” (if IP space is still globally routable,) but in practice it does. Don’t be surprised if other countries follow suit (should they fail to leverage control of current infra via ITU or something.)
https://learn.namebase.io/starting-from-zero/how-to-get-a-na...
This is so convoluted it actually makes the whole thing a non-starter