TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Zooko's Triangle

153 点作者 dedalus大约 4 年前

7 条评论

olah_1大约 4 年前
It’s clear to me that human-meaningful is the one to drop.<p>Status messenger has a nice naming solution. They give everyone a three-random-word name when they join (an Ethereum pub key is under that of course). Then (1) your friends can assign to you their own nickname for you, or (2) you can buy an ENS name that is globally findable.<p>I think of this basically like car license plates. You can optionally get a vanity plate.<p>Another project that I love is BrightID. It really embodies the idea that we don’t actually need a global registry of names for most use cases. Most of the time we just want to know if someone is legit or not. A web of independent Rolodexes is enough to determine that.
评论 #26169227 未加载
评论 #26170672 未加载
评论 #26168666 未加载
评论 #26167593 未加载
评论 #26174145 未加载
fsflover大约 4 年前
&gt; Several platforms implement refutations of Zooko&#x27;s conjecture, including: Twister (which use the later Aaron Swartz system with a bitcoin-like system), Blockstack (separate blockchain), Namecoin (separate blockchain),Monero OpenAlias[5] and Ethereum Name Service.<p>Another implementation is the I2P Address Book, <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;geti2p.net&#x2F;en&#x2F;faq" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;geti2p.net&#x2F;en&#x2F;faq</a>.
评论 #26166853 未加载
评论 #26169623 未加载
evbots大约 4 年前
There are a few blockchain based solutions to this problem.<p>- Handshake<p>- ENS<p>- Namecoin<p>My favorite so far is Handshake - a fork of the bitcoin protocol with added support for covenants, which is how arbitrary names can be registered and associated with some 512 bytes of data. Example: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;hnsnetwork.com&#x2F;names&#x2F;proofofconcept" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;hnsnetwork.com&#x2F;names&#x2F;proofofconcept</a> which shows TXT and other records. ENS was previously my favorite, but the root protocol is secured by only a 7 person multisig. Namecoin is old and poorly designed in my opinion.
评论 #26175758 未加载
flemhans大约 4 年前
What is the generic name for these triangles where you can &quot;select any two&quot; but never have all three?
评论 #26167056 未加载
评论 #26166963 未加载
genpfault大约 4 年前
&gt; .onion addresses and bitcoin addresses are secure and decentralized but not human-meaningful<p>I thought that&#x27;s why you burned some CPU hunting for &#x27;vanity&#x27; addresses[1]?<p>[1]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;opensource.com&#x2F;article&#x2F;19&#x2F;8&#x2F;how-create-vanity-tor-onion-address" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;opensource.com&#x2F;article&#x2F;19&#x2F;8&#x2F;how-create-vanity-tor-on...</a>
评论 #26167285 未加载
PeterWhittaker大约 4 年前
Well, we don&#x27;t have human-meaningful names even now, at least not for most humans - for us technology types, sure, but if the names were truly human-meaningful, we&#x27;d have far less ...ibm.com.cn style of phishing, e.g.<p>A few commenters make the point about phone numbers and IP addresses being somewhere between analogous and homologous. I think that&#x27;s true for IPv4, but definitely not for IPv6.<p>But that misses an unexpected benefit of the DNS: Traffic management based on geolocation. Even without human-meaningful names, nickname to address translation would have benefit for that reason alone.<p>As others have pointed out, we don&#x27;t so much need a name service, we want a reputation service.<p>After all, most people get to web sites, e.g., via a bookmark or embedded URL or a search result.<p>If we got rid of the DNS and had to enter IP(v4, not v6) addresses by hand, a lot of us would still get there via bookmarks or embedded URLs or search results. Little&#x2F;nothing would change.<p>I&#x27;m not suggesting redesigning the Internet with a dedicated search engine layer in our not-7-layer stack, but I do think the differences between current use and design intent are significant enough, even if sometimes subtle and unforeseen, that a rethink could take us to interesting places.<p>(My favourite part of the article are the counter-examples. So the triangle is itself wrong, generally, and only correct, more or less, for specific technical approaches.)
samdung大约 4 年前
Human-meaningful. Secure. Decentralized. Choose any TWO.