diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'memos/WM-052.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | memos/WM-052.txt | 89 |
1 files changed, 89 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/memos/WM-052.txt b/memos/WM-052.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..543cb03 --- /dev/null +++ b/memos/WM-052.txt @@ -0,0 +1,89 @@ + + + + + + + +Document: WM-052 P. Webb +Category: Handshake 2021.08.05 + + Four years to prove ourselves + +Abstract + + What an incredible opportunity + +Body + + The ICA (Internet Commerce Association) recently hosted a free + webinar where they discussed the second round of gTLD applications + via ICANN. For reference, the year is 2021 at this time of writing. + The first and last round of gTLD applications happened in the anagram + for this year: 2012; nearly a **decade** ago. As noted by one of the + panel experts (Jeff Neuman, Jothan Frakes, Phil Buckingham, and + Christa Taylor were in attendance), the world was MUCH different + then. A notable example of such change was the mention of .crypto. + Apparently, it was considered but seeing as how the crypto space was + still in its infancy, ICANN brushed it off. Depending on who you + speak to today, crypto is EVERYWHERE; much to the chagrin of one of + my security buddies. "Crypto" as shorthand used to mean + "cryptography" but now it's been co-opted by cryptocurrency. + + The panelists think there will be even more interest in the next + batch of applications, especially if ICANN reduces the cost of + admission. Some suggstions they discussed: + + - knocking off $70,000…of the $185,000 entry price + - application fee floor + - eventual refunds from failed bids + + These are decent changes but ICANN is plagued by bueracracy and the + snail-like pace that typically commands. An oft-repeated refrain was, + "Yes, they (ICANN) can move faster and implement what the community + wants…but WILL they?" According to someone in the chat: + + > ICANN doesn't have significant numbers of registrars in underserved + > regions. They keep putting obstacles in the way for registrars in + > those regions. + + And, another notable quote: + + > ICANN working with community (members) requires a change + > in philosophy. + + ICANN's current way of making decisions is obviously long and drawn + out and away from the public eye, until they've decided something. + + As I was listening to the discussion, I couldn't help but feel that + Handshake handled a lot of the problems the panelists discussed. + Namely (hah), rolling applications and not letting other applicants + aware of which names you intend to bid on. When Handshake was + revealed to the public, a handful of names were released over the + course of several weeks. Also, the way you bid on names is via a + Vickrey-style auction. In short, Vickrey-style auctions are anonymous + and the amounts bid can be a mixture of a true bid and a blind bid. + In short, it aims to make auctions feel more fair. + + The conservative estimate for the launch of the secound round of gTLD + applications is 2025. Four years from now. 13 years since the last + round. To me, this sounds a bit nutty. Insane even. + + The panelists suggested that anyone looking to get their own TLD via + ICANN should keep their expectations in check and be realistic. It + takes a war chest of funds to keep going back and forth with ICANN to + approve your application. With that also comes an immense time + commitment. They expect any name to take between 4-5 years to + develop, but gave .music as an example that took nearly 10 years + to finalize. + + I see opportunity here. + + If you're an HNS maximalist/shill like myself, pro ENS, or a + combination of the two, we have four years to kick ass and develop + our ecosystems. Crypto took a decade to get big, we can *easily* do + it in half the time. We are in a unique position to not only discover + brilliant use cases unheard of on the legacy ‘Net, but to also bring + these experiences to the masses and gain that sweet traction. + + Four years to show and prove. Let's get it. 🕸 |