[agentultra]

While far from perfect the existing system has many properties that are good enough.

Protecting against malicious users grabbing all of the good names first using zero-trust blockchain networks requires the protections we all know against Sybil attacks. These protections are problematic for numerous reasons I don't think I need to enumerate here.

The point is that not solving that problem results in a system that is far less complicated and resource efficient. Some times the better solution is to rely on social/political/judicial systems instead of protecting against hypothetical malicious actors.

[qweqwerwerwerwr]

- they are nowhere nearly good enough. the current system satisfies only one criteria of the 'security, user-chosen names, and decentralization' trifecta, and even that just barely.

- all the good dotcoms have been squatted on since the 90s (that's why half the startups have gibberish names). particularly desirable domains are being squatted on even on all the random dotbullshit nu-tlds.

- the social/political/judicial systems are the very reason why there are so many attempts to build an alternative to registrars and DNS

I will readily agree that so far all attempts have failed though, being either too complex/clunky, or tainted with a crypto grift - I'm actually happy that namecoin/ens/handshake/etc got virtually no adoption. but it has to be done eventually. the entire industry is a scam and rent-seeking with unlimited profit margins