In the name of freedom
Neutral money like Bitcoin protects economic freedom. It respects individual freedom. It quietly defends property rights. It gives individuals and businesses full control over production, investment and consumption decisions without the threat of censorship, confiscation or devaluation. It promotes self-reliance and contributes to social harmony without government involvement. In other words, Bitcoin is essential to maintaining a free, prosperous and fair society. The same can be said about naming. If there is anything as important to society as money, it is naming. Names are necessary for almost everything, and individuals and businesses should be able to own their own names without being under the control of a centralized third party.
Both names and money have historically relied on trust for their validity, but just as Bitcoin as money ushered in an era of trustlessness, the same must be achieved for names.
Centralized naming providers are dinosaurs
People need to realize, if they haven’t already, that what’s theirs is not theirs. Your social media usernames are always available with just one click To avoid the confiscation of their property, or what should be their property.
The security risks of relying on a centralized naming system are especially true for individuals and businesses building on Bitcoin: if you rely on a centralized naming service, it is only a matter of time before you are compromised. Squarespace DNS hijacking last month.
Governments often silence political opponents by censoring their names. For example, Pantocatis a private Catalan non-profit organization whose mission is to promote all activities related to the creation, management and control of the top-level domain name .cat, and to promote the Catalan language and culture in general. They were investigated by the Spanish police during a politically turbulent period, and were forced to block several websites critical of the Spanish government due to legal pressure from Madrid. Their IT director was arrested on sedition charges.
In addition, the Institute for Internet Names and Numbers (ICANN), which is responsible for managing the global domain name system, has faced numerous controversies over the years regarding centralization, transparency, and accountability. ICANN’s practices and policies are opaque, Called People like Ralph Nader have been accused of violating consumer rights. Electronic Frontier Foundation In other words, excessive deference to the interests of major trademark and copyright holders clearly makes you vulnerable to capture.
The point is, without success in decentralizing naming, there will always be a risk of censorship, property confiscation, and other rights being attacked.
As Bitcoin continues to evolve alongside adjacent technology protocols such as NOSTR, names alone will become increasingly important: Names act as identifiers for different components within these systems, facilitating communication between different parties, improving ease of use, protocol interoperability, and freedom of speech.
Don’t call it a comeback
Previous attempts to decentralize naming have included efforts such as the separation of DNS root servers in 1997 and new top-level domains (TLDs) such as .bit and .name. In the cryptocurrency space, projects such as Namecoin, BitDNS, and blockchain-based name services from companies such as Namecoin, Blockstack, and Stacks have also sought to decentralize naming systems. Despite these efforts, limited adoption, scalability issues, distribution problems, and other technical complexities have led many of these efforts to fall short, with centralized naming systems dominating both the traditional Internet and cryptocurrency.
Earlier this year, Matt Corallo proposes BIP To use DNS to reconcile Bitcoin payments. Matt is right not to rely on another blockchain (e.g. Ethereum’s ENS), but acknowledges that relying on traditional centralized DNS is risky and is only a “best option”. There is an organization between you and your name, and every website that uses HTTPS to encrypt traffic relies on a third party to ensure security. So, literally, you don’t hold your own keys. Neither do you hold your name.
What is needed is a truly decentralized, permissionless naming system that is free from third-party certificate authorities, built on Bitcoin, and gives users control and privacy over their online identities. And in contrast to previous attempts, naming should be done in a cypherpunk-centric way, without new blockchains or modifications to Bitcoin itself, new tokens, foundations, or pre-mining. Users should have full control over how their names are registered, managed, and transferred.
The future of naming is cypherpunk
Once envisioned as a democratizing force for free expression and global communication, the Internet now faces threats from government censorship, corporate influence, and technological vulnerabilities. Decentralized naming, built on Bitcoin’s robust and secure foundation, offers a future where individuals and businesses have more control over their identities, ideas, and information. By leveraging Bitcoin’s immutability, transparency, and censorship-resistance, a decentralized naming system can provide a more robust, democratic alternative for managing identity. With Bitcoin as the backbone, we can ensure that decentralized naming is not only inevitable, but truly successful in building a global, open, and free Internet: an Internet where everyone has an equal say in shaping the global conversation, without fear of censorship or control. A cypherpunk Internet.
This is a guest post by Mike Carson. The opinions expressed here are entirely his own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.
