<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>JacobAldridge</author><text>At the risk of hijacking yet another cryptocurrency thread, this is an opportunity to note how valuable I believe HN to be when it highlights primary sources.&lt;p&gt;Secondary sources - whether it&amp;#x27;s lazy journalism, blog-jacking, or Wikipedia, engages us here in a discussion already framed through another person&amp;#x27;s or group of people&amp;#x27;s editorial eyes. Is there no better overview of Namecoin than its Wikipedia page?</text><parent_chain></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Namecoin</title><url>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namecoin</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>Sanddancer</author><text>I like the idea of namecoin -- uncensorability is pretty cool from a technological standpoint -- however the other flaws of bitcoin make me wary of basing any sort of serious DNS replacement on it. Given that there&amp;#x27;s no plans to increase the number of namecoins in circulation, and that creating a domain by its very definition destroys namecoins, that 50nmc cost to buy a domain becomes increasingly expensive over time as people buy namecoins, peoples&amp;#x27; wallets get lost, fraud occurs, etc. I&amp;#x27;d be more interested if they did something like dogecoin and reated some sort of inflationary method to counteract this, so that we don&amp;#x27;t end up with the same mess DNS is in, only with slightly different bad actors.</text><parent_chain></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Namecoin</title><url>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namecoin</url></story>