the reds are so obstructed in their ability to think by this idea that any politician is not a tyrant hello! biden was a tyrant trump was and will be a tyrant politicians = tyrants they are empowered most fundamentally by byzantine systems of delegation of a democratic vote that does not place any stake upon the decisions assented to by the voters, or by their delegates (representatives), and these systems have been fundamentally coopted by media corporations with their government licenses and funded by the banks whose most fundamental power - to pick and choose economic winners, and thus punish those who oppose their interests... what they do understand, however, is that inventing technology is a key tool to breaking the injustice of an establishment that's why i'm here doing things on Nostr and why for my paid gig i work on federated database systems (aka shitcoin blockchains)

I love this article! Thanks to Bitcoin, anyone can be a Cobrador without asking for permission. We can ignore the fiat moats around the existing TollGates and just run our own TollGates. Lets go! https://npub1suw0zfxerywd4zku4gjsjde22zhzye9dl2hsll6s3z2qap75p78s66lkhp.nsite.orangesync.tech/

I think the final challenge is finding a way to make IANA perfectly replaceable just like the mining pools.

IPv6 will deprecate the IP address arbitrators. Handshake protocol will deprecate ICANN on the DNS names.

Most people are bad at memorizing npubs or IP addresses. Therefore most people tend to depend on naming systems like DNS. Yeah, with IPv6 you can have thousands or millions of addresses, just for you. You can have a public IP for every service, for every tweet, or whatever. So IANA cannot hide behind the narrative of the scarcity of IP addresses, as they do right now. And ISP's don't even give you a public IP anymore, you just get a NATted address in many countries. That's one of the reasons why DHT's don't work in internet scale, because holepunching is a pain in the ass. Even if they give you a public dynamic IP, you can't use it to run a service without a dyndns because it's dynamic. And peer to peer stuff depends on being able to reliably find each other.

it's a conspiracy but eventually there will be a route out i think technologies like tor and wireguard and others point the way... even nostr is a countermeasure against this constraint by introducing a universal middleman who can pass and cache messages

stamp approval?

Have a look at handshake protocol. There's no authority there. And it's quite an original approach. Petname systems are fine, they have their use, but when you want to make a billboard with your name, it's better to have a global unique resolution to that name, because you don't have control over everyone's web of trust. For someone with infinite fiat resources it's easy to register that name in thousands of other webs of trust, so you will be impersonated easily. And resolving a naming conflict - if both candidates want that name - inevitably comes with a need for authority (community leader) who decides who will get the name. But I'd be happy to hear what @Stuart Bowman thinks of it.

Sorry, I googled it myself and I didn't realize it's such difficult to find. So here it goes:

Handshake

Decentralized certificate authority and naming

The idea originated from Aaron Swartz:

Squaring the Triangle: Secure, Decentralized, Human-Readable Names (Aaron Swartz's Raw Thought)