Are Google "hijacking DNS to sabotage projects like Namecoin?" - No. I doubt the people working on this give any thought to Namecoin, the user-base overlap is approximately 0%. They're doing this because they think it will improve performance.
Whilst I can understand Google's desire to parallelise and accelerate DNS resolution, building their own browser-level resolver is a hairy way to do so.
Several projects have attempted to address this problem before ( C-ARES, and Polipo's internal resolver ) but never managed to achieve critical momentum. Might it not have been worth focusing effort there?
Plus, naturally, there's the temptation to use Google's own public DNS servers instead of adhering to the OS-specified resolution order.
"Hijacking" was poor word choice. I renamed the thread to "Google implementing its own DNS, implications for Namecoin?"
Questions remain though, as to why Google is doing this. The rationale they've provided just doesn't make much sense in light of alternatives that they know about.
I edited the post with the following comment (in bold at the bottom), as I did not notice the timestamp on the post, nor did anyone else bring it to my attention:
EDIT (December 22, 2013 1:24PM EST): Actually, I made a mistake in failing to notice the timestamp of the post. It crossed my news feed yesterday, and I mistakenly assumed that it was news. In March of 2012 Google could not have known about DNSNMC specifically, but they could have known about Namecoin and [other DNS projects](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6950592). Therefore, I take back my accusations against Google, apologize for them, and withhold judgement until I learn what their current-day plans are on this. If anyone knows off the top of their heads whether they are still planning on going in this direction, please comment below!
11 comments
[ 5.9 ms ] story [ 40.9 ms ] threadhttps://plus.google.com/+WilliamChanPanda/posts/FKot8mghkok
(Please keep the discussion to the merits of the points raised.)
Several projects have attempted to address this problem before ( C-ARES, and Polipo's internal resolver ) but never managed to achieve critical momentum. Might it not have been worth focusing effort there?
Plus, naturally, there's the temptation to use Google's own public DNS servers instead of adhering to the OS-specified resolution order.
Questions remain though, as to why Google is doing this. The rationale they've provided just doesn't make much sense in light of alternatives that they know about.
EDIT (December 22, 2013 1:24PM EST): Actually, I made a mistake in failing to notice the timestamp of the post. It crossed my news feed yesterday, and I mistakenly assumed that it was news. In March of 2012 Google could not have known about DNSNMC specifically, but they could have known about Namecoin and [other DNS projects](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6950592). Therefore, I take back my accusations against Google, apologize for them, and withhold judgement until I learn what their current-day plans are on this. If anyone knows off the top of their heads whether they are still planning on going in this direction, please comment below!