cap | thecap.eth
5.6K posts
@TheCapHimself
chief ninja @namespace_eth | ENS service provider + delegate | venting at https://t.co/BH2x2LwJ5E
Naming on the internet is changing. But the rules governing it haven’t caught up. ENS Labs just submitted a public comment to ICANN on “name collisions,” and it highlights a deeper issue with how naming is still being approached. Here’s why it matters. ↓
@Sohrab @nicksdjohnson IMO .ens should just be interchangeable with .eth No second namespace - they just map 1:1 You can send money to caveman.ens in metamask, or caveman.eth - it will send to the same person - same set of records - no duplication - no competition - no split Clean.
My semi-hot take on ENS and TLDs is this: ENS should apply for a TLD string that clearly communicates "identity" (think .id), enable registrations across all blockchains, and expand beyond the Ethereum ecosystem. (I know .id is taken - using it as an example in this post). ENS can become an 'Everything' Name Service with .eth as a premium domain/identifier for Ethereum-aligned ecosystems, and another TLD (.id) for everyone else, while the protocol remains the same. This is what we wanted to do with @namespace_eth, but unfortunately, we had to give up on the idea for a number of reasons - mainly too much overhead for a small team with a limited budget.. and raising external funding would push us toward a purely profit-driven path, which would compromise the work we do for ENS right now. However, I still believe that operating TLDs through ENS as the core Web3 (domain) naming infrastructure is how we solve the biggest problem - universal resolution! This is how we move from “what’s your address?” to “what’s your username?”, where that username holds *all* your crypto addresses across *all* chains. This is a huge barrier to global mass adoption. Most teams today are solving this UX challenge through chain abstraction, PayFi apps tie wallets to phone numbers, or siloed usernames stored in databases - while ENS-powered domain/username could be universally used, applied, and accepted on every chain, wallet, and app. And the greatest part is - all these TLDs would still use ENS protocol as the underlying 'identity/profile' standard that everyone plugs into and abides by. With or without our own TLD, there should be an active and dedicated effort to collaborate with existing TLD owners in the blockchain space (and beyond) to communicate the value proposition ENS could bring, and invite them to claim their TLD's ownership in ENS and build on top of it. Their domains would inherit everything .eth has today - all properties, functionality, all ENSIPs for programmability, 1,000+ partnerships and integration support that ENS has, and continuous innovation we do (like the fact that ENS domains are becoming AI agent identities, etc.), and most importantly, we solve the universal resolution standard. The alternative would be - they start from scratch? There are many blockchain companies applying to run their own TLDs, which I generally think is a good thing. However, they'll soon realize that operating a universally accepted naming service is a lot harder than it looks... without a dedicated team, ecosystem builders, and without further fragmenting the space and creating more walled gardens (even if ICANN-compliant). ENS has far too strong network effects; it can be the distribution layer for TLDs entering Web3 rather than a competitor, offering access to its 1,000+ integrations network to tap into and helping solve the cold start problem. One domain (any TLD) → resolves everywhere. Universal naming/identity layer. But anyway, this post makes me extremely happy. It hits all the right points. Kudos to @aurbelis and the ENS Labs team. Excellent work!
prompt → agent → ENS resolution → onchain transfer. something's cooking... ⏳⌛
Just use ENS
