Slashdot Mirror
Care to Register Your Own TLD?
luap writes: "MSNBC is running this article about a Top Level Domain proposal by the Consumer Project for Technology to add the TLDs ".sucks," ".unions," ".consumers," ".complaints," ".ecology," ".isnotgreen," ".isnotfair," ".shareholder," ".taxpayer" and ".unite." Where are ".rules," ".isaloser," etc..?"
More TDLs are certainly overdue -- but ".isnotfair" and ".isnotgreen"? How about ".fam" for family? What new TDLs would make most sense? Would officializing ".sucks" do anything besides lead to companies buying additional domain names to sit on? These questions will do nothing but hover until ICANN acts on this or other TLD-loosening proposals, which so far it has been reluctant to do.
So.does.assuming.the.world.speaks.english
Because the .com name space has turned into one long flat plane as far as the eye can see. Other than the social aspectes of the TLDs, at some point we're going to run into some "physical" limitations. Another 20 years from now and that zone.com file is going to about as heavy as collapsed star matter.
Something that I really don't understand though, is how the ICANN et al, seem to still view everything in a compleatly US-centric light. "Well there is the US, and then some other intl. domain stuff." Personally I find it somewhat irritating that in Australia for example they use ".com.au" but in England it's ".co.uk". They're just perpetuating this sort of sillyness with suggestions of "fairfax.va.bla", how are earth is that supposed to scale to a global level!?!
I have another problem with this; the assumtion that any other TLD other than com|org|net|gov|edu is meaningless. What the fuck is .fr supposed mean anyway?
1st
Let's see the .com's try to buy up every potential combination of that.
Wouldn't that be cool if they had .rocks as a TLD. You could have domains like linux.rocks, opensource.rocks (and of course, we can't leave out the ihavebig.rocks :)
Got a thing for Texas governors, have you?
I mean, one more TLD won't hurt...
i demand a .grits domain be added for all the people who enjoy pouring bowls of hot grits down their pants. thank you.
But the principle is a good one generally, easier for consumers (what's the point of the .com if everything ends in it [kinda like the http://www. which most companies don't bother mentioning]? - it's redundant), and avoids that awful domain-holding stuff.
In other words: If A == A (so far so good . .
Rand had some problems with the map/territory dichotomy. I wish I remember who it was who said "some people will walk into a restaurant and eat the menu". It's such a perfect description
The SuperRoot Consortium has existed for several years now. It provides an extended DNS root which adds additional TLDs to the IANA/ICANN root. In order to get into the root you have toplay nice and work within the community attempting to introduce new TLDs. Only undisputed TLDs are included. Donations and support are welcome. http://www.superroot.net/
Yes .cc is for real. It is the TLD for the Cocos Islands. Anyone can register .cc domain names at http://www.nic.cc/ if for instance your ".com" name is already taken.
The topic first was: "Care to register www.gates.sucks?"
What the fuck is .fr supposed mean anyway?
France, dipshit.
Well, I tried registering some interesting .cc names, but they are already taken:
gee.cc (geek)
ble.cc (blech)
ya.cc (yak)
fu.cc (yeah, you know it)
etc. Bastards took all the good ones, or reserved them for future use.
When the government wants to "bend" the first amendment and ban it all, they know exactly where to find it. If people distributing "porn" are forced into the .xxx domain, who determines what "porn" is? Same issues come up which are raised by CDA-ish legislation.
So how about changing it. Rather than .ecology we could have .eco
.tax
.sucks we could have .sux
.com now seems to mean anything you want.
Rather than taxpayer we could have
Rather than
The question is why bother?
Its a shame sux.com and sucks.com are taken
li.nux
windows.me
windows-mini.me (for the WinCE replacement)
free.bsd
slash.dot
And, to get Stallman's panties in a snit:
linux-is-not.gnu
I'll get rich off of everybody!
Here in NZ there are ethnic domains. Like .tribe.nz (i'm not kidding)... i'm sure there'd be a few ethnic identities getting left out.
<p>And we can't have that... oppress people - but not because of their race.. that's just wrong!
Very good point. Unfortunately "normal" people have trouble understanding DNS heirarchy for some reason. They want everything simplified into their own little world like a Mac interface.
That the first TLD Ralph Nader and his fellow socialists would want it
Now, me and my fellow objectivists are well aware that irrational ideas can only be seriously held by small children or the mentally retarded. Ayn Rand, the greatest philosopher and economist of all time, said the capitalism is the `unknown ideal', and it is people such as Nader who would subvert that idea in favor of eco-kooks and greedy welfare mothers. Remember what the last country ruled by a `National Socialist Party' was? Germany in the 1940's. Do we want that? Think about that before casting your vote for the so-called `green' party. Not only does he support myths such as the greenhouse effect and global warming, but he supports tighter regulations of the market! How many people does the FDA kill each year by withholding medications? Do we want to continue this barbaric practice?
Modern socialism is the dreamworld of a few East-coast pseudo-intellectuals, many of whom come from liberal elite institutions such as Harvard, where affirmative-action is *openly* practiced! Can you believe it?
Fortunatly, we can lock these academics in their ivory towers for good. Hopefully, that will bring about reforms that we have wanted for years: repeals on public smoking bans, repeals on legal drinking ages, repeals on federal regulation of consumer goods. In the end, the market must decide what is good for it. The Ayn Rand Institute told me so, and as an upper-middle class white guy, I need some way to feel oppressed, and this is it.
I'm jumping on the bandwagon and making sure all you people know what domains I'm planning on registering (really! no i mean it!)
- www.mybutt.isnotgreen
- www.life.isnotfair (this one is for my dad)
- www.fuckthe.shareholder
- www.fuckthe.consumer
- www.bananasoftheworld.unite
- www.myvacuum.sucks
- www.icantthinkofanythingfunnytosayabout.ecology
georgeWBush.atemyballs? I'm there.
I'd suggest a microsoft. toplevel.
Like http://i.hate.microsoft
it's mine, all mine!
I'm gatheric 10 billion VC to offer ".bork.bork.bork" to the masses.
Wouldn't that be cool: john.doe.bork.bork.bork? Just think how street credible you would be!
This message brought to you by Stun Microsystems - We're the bork.bork.bork in the dot bork dot bork dot bork.
coollinuxstuff.first
buy-this-domain-for-20000-dollars.first
slutty-sex-dolls.first
...and so on.
This could lead to some interesting "dialogue."
--
dinner: it's what's for beer
.pants
-----
".sig,
Correct, nobody DOES care about the guidelines. Which is why I'd like to bring up my proposal, which is the complete deregulation of TLDs. Keep the current system so that .edu, .gov, .mil and the country codes remain avaliable only to the organizations they were designed for, but allow everyone else to register anything as a TLD. I could own chameleon.chameleon, whereas someone else could own linux.chameleon. The only possible restriction would be the length of the TLD, but that's a minor issue. I don't see any reason why this proposal couldn't go ahead immediately.
-- Chris Dunham
http://www.chamdex.com
... your C server would be a lot busier (serving .com) than your Z server. :-)
Yes, and? I think you're assuming that all 36 servers would be the exact same and have the same bandwidth capacity. That wouldn't be a terribly great idea, because of the problems you cited. So, what do you do? How about making the busier servers faster and increasing their capacity?
-- Chris Dunham
http://www.chamdex.com
Amen. I see no reason whatsoever why this should not and COULD not be done. Sure, it couldn't happen overnight, but it could happen very quickly. Even NSI has no reason to oppose this. (Weird, eh?)
-- Chris Dunham
http://www.chamdex.com
With ideas like the above one the concept of toplevel-domains is driven to a state which is meaningless. .com means commercial, .org means non-comercial and so on. That type of difference is the only one wich matters for a user. I mean that for a user hondasucks.org does not differ to honda.sucks in any meaningful way.
.c (for commercial), .o (for REAL non-commercial), .p (for a real person, must not be an organisation, company or whatsoever non-personal entity), .i (for international governement-like organisations like UN which cannot be under a country-domain).
.c but ONLY in a non-commercial purpose and action.
:-)
What is the REAL difference now between domains and toplevel-domains ? I mean that once upon a time
I have another suggestion: There should be only four (plus country-domains) toplevel-domains:
.c could be a person, a company, an organisation or whatever which is in a commercial purpose.
.o could be whatever as for
.p must NOT be anything than a real person but could be used for whatever commercial or non-commercial purpose as long as all communication to and responsibility for that domain is connected to this person. The name of this domain should be the real name of the person, or else NOT a name of some other person.
.i must not be responsible to, or under the law of a specifik country.
The rest of the domains could be archived..
Thomas Berg
Mundus Vult Decipi
.sux and .kewl
echo Surprise! | mail me@foo
just so happens to try to send to a host named "foo." first, then appends the system's notion of my local domain name. I guess that's why they force all host name registrations to contain two levels, otherwise there would be software chaos...
-- I avoid spam by accepting only OpenPGP encrypted or signed email at this address. Clear-signed, RFC2015, heck, even
com.sucks
amazon.com.sucks
etc.
---
Joseph Foley
Akamai Technologies
Regarding .sucks & Co: aren't the vast majority of these more suitable as .orgs? (And hey, if you allow me to get a tad revolutionary, wouldn't the world be a better place if three-letter TLDs were reserved for sites international in nature, with more regional companies instead being in the .us domain. :)
Not that it is possible now, but perhaps in the next revision of the internet.
Perhaps the powers-that-be should revisit that now. :)
.orgs are not supposed to be profit-making entities. Anyone *know* for sure?
/. is OWNED by a profit making entity, and displays advertisements (for a fee)... Well, it's only right to play by the rules of the community that one seeks to represent/cater to.
I don't know if it's a rule, or a 'guideline', but
Now that
-- What you do today will cost you a day of your life.
Nothing fundamental would change. The first domains to be registered under .sucks would of course be she.sucks, teen.sucks, goat.sucks, pamela.sucks, and the new fantasy site, tux.sucks.
Yeah, but McDonalds can afford expensive lawyers to do the suing. Who'd bring the case against McDonalds? Or, in an easy loophole, mcdonalds.sucks could easily be registered to the CEO of McDonalds, or his wife or brother-in-law or however far away you'd legally need to get while still being effectively under the control of the company. I generally support most of what Nader says, but this idea is just plain stupid. Why not just have one website www.evil-cos.org and offer free space to advocacy groups, so you could have www.evil-cos.org/mcdonalds/ and www.evil-cos.org/kathielee/ and whatever else.
What the web needs is an influx of TLDs, true, but not ones this long.
.taxpayer? Yeah that's what I'd like behind my domain. .sucks will get used, but I can't see anyone registering with .isnotfair or .isnotgreen
Besides that, what's up with
StylishPants.Org - Home of everything that's interesting, and nothing that's not.
Buying up names is the WRONG way to defend company names. However it is cheap sence there are so few domain names to buy up.
All you have to do is buy up *.com *.org and *.net and you are relitivly safe... You may need to buy one in each nation for compleate protection but thats not a big deal.
The correct tactic is to sue... Yes a lot of stupid lawsutes exist by any company who thinks it can bully someone around or anyone looking for a quick buck.
But with lawsutes there is still a matter or right and wrong. You don't automaticly win.. you have to prove your case. The other side has a chance to challange you. So say a spoof site at www.microsoft.org... not gona happen as Microsoft probably owns it allready...
With buying up domains you make sure NO ONE has it. There is no judge... no judgement... you have the domain...
The most commen argument is really stupid anyway... You can ignore a cybersquater... He wants to sell you your name for what?? $2,000? $2,000,000? Dosn't matter... he dosn't own the name... If you can afford the domain you can afford a lawyer to send off one of those famous "polite letters" that basicly say "Cut it out or your TOAST"
I'm all for this... the whole idea of buying up domains is repugnet to me anyway.. it encurages cybersquatting... says it's lagit.. when it's not. While companys who are not yet on-line get there domains bought up.... www.NotYetOnTheNet.com comes on and finds the domain for sale for insain amounts of money... they can fork it over or sue... The more companys that sue the fewer people will attempt this scam...
I don't actually exist.
I wish I could remember who said this a while ago, but the best solution I heard about the DNS lookup was for the root servers to each handle one letter, the first letter of the TLD. Under such a system, all traffic for .com, .cool, .ca, and so on, would be directed to the "C" server for resolution.
--
how about a TLD for jane citizen who isn't part of the network infrastructure, a governmental agency, commercial entity, educational institution, non-profit organization, or a branch of the military? I'd like to see someithing like .pri or .pub for private individuals.
Well there's already georgewbushsucks.com and the likes :)
"Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
The problem is namespace collision. Now, while adding new TLDs can be said to make the namespace larger, riddle me this: when was the last time you saw a startup register just a .com, and not a .net or an .org? Furthermore, how many alternative TLD vendors (such as .to and .cx) stress wordmark-defense in their online promotional material? They all have literature that says "You've got the .com, .net and .org, but do you have the .blah domain under your control? If you don't, you're just asking for it, buddy!"
.web for entities that desire mainly a web presence, .nom for private citizens (perhaps with an arbitration/playing-nice policy to keep smith.nom from being dominated by one person) and .tm for domain names that are registered trademarks--domains to be claimed only by the holder of the trademark, of course!
.us domain opened to general use, with .com.us, .net.us and .org.us available. I would happily switch all my domains to .us in the name of uniform global DNS conventions.
With that kind of attitude, adding TLDs simply isn't going to help--the same company who registered foo.com is going to register foo.web. And if someone else gets it first, it's still going to do nothing but cause confusion. Do I want to visit newcars.com, newcars.web or newcars.sex? If I can hardly remember the name 'newcars' when I see it on the TV screen, how am I, Joe Q. Consumer, supposed to remember the TLD as well?
I do advocate the addition of a few new TLDs:
Aside from that, I would be delighted to see the
kirby.sucks
:)
hoover.sucks
filter-queen.sucks
and, of course:
electrolux.sucks
...because we all know, nothing sucks like an Electrolux!
On a different note, why not register really.sucks, then sell subdomains?
http://www.guug.de/
http://yahoo.ca/
Since these are both valid domain names, I suspect that even if the above scheme was ever postulated, it was treated with the neglect that it deserves.
I've always thought that the domain for pr0n should be more accurately named ".cum"... ^_^
And while I'm at it... how about...
Okay, I'll quit rambling now...
np: Two Lone Swordsmen - It Hits (A Virus With Shoes)
As always under permanent deconstruction.
"I'm not anti-anything, I'm anti-everything, it fits better." - Sole
Now I can register that all important domain that everyone who watches Saturday Night Live on a regular basis needs to have:
clownpenis.fart
I came up with this years ago, and it's up and running (though not on many ISPs)...
Here's the info
The registration page
This alternate TLD stuff has been around for a long time
.sux is already in practice.
.sux domain. Then we figured there's already a word for that, extortion, so we dropped the idea. We kept the TLD though, and domains can be registered here
It was originally a joke just as above. It was originally going to be a 'fsck the man' sort of thing where individuals could register for low $$ and corporations would have to pay big $$ for their
It's still mostly a joke
Is it just me, or did they change the title too? I though it was something like "Who wants to register www.gates.sucks" After I submitted my first comment, I saw the new article title.
Bring the US into line with just about everywhere else by giving it its own TLD. It opens up a host of possibilities in the .co.us etc. domains, and leaves .com etc. for international organisations.
++ Say to Elrond "Hello.".
Elrond says "No.". Elrond gives you some lunch.
This proposal shows a certain mindset. Mr. Love didn't suggest any .love or .like, nor .support, .repair, or .meeting. There's also no .heaven or .limbo, much less .karma. Also no .facts, .analysis, .news, and .truth. (I can see uses for all those TLDs, as well as the multiple meanings in my phrasing)
Useful for mp3 search engines.
These domains are available now at Name.Space Go ahead and register them.
-- The Funk, The Whole Funk, And Nothing But The Funk
It wouldn't break any spec. There has, in fact, been a .ARPA for inverse domain resolution for as long as there has been DNS. Nowhere is there any such restriction on TLD length... The only restriction is that the whole name has to be 255.
-- The Funk, The Whole Funk, And Nothing But The Funk
".dot"
-- "Words are lame and words are crap" - Bouncing Souls
why not let everyone register their own GTLD (.bla) instead of bla.com.. well..
.open/.free.
that would only worsen the problem(even if it were sooooooo much cooler): all 1-3 letter GTLDs would be taken within days.
makes me remember an old idea of myself:
we could start an alternic like project.. but without having the participating nameservers use our ns's as forwarders, but instead let them include our domain (.open/.free?) by forwarding round-robin to a lot of root nameservers dedicated to the free domain space..
im aware that dns causes a lot of traffic.. but when the traffic grows we could simply add more root nameservers for
as for the security issue with having a lot of "not 100% trusted" nameservers: it's not thought for companies that may lose money when their dns entries are modified, but for people/npprojects that want a free domain.
the concept has flaws, but with a good policy for giving out domain names for free and for adding new root servers, updates of the root server list etc.. it actually may work..
hmm.. what do you think?
Why on earth to people submit things such as ".consumers" and ".unions" rather than ".consumer" and ".union". The extra "s" on the end is a complete waste of time typing. Is there really going to be a difference between ".union" and ".unions"? No. Think of how many people will type on extra "s" and how many times they will type it in their lifetime. It's ridiculous. Get rid of the plurals, people!
Got HTML? Want LaTeX? Try html2latex
I thought that one has been needed for quite a while. Seems like every movie that comes out now has its own .com address. The .movie TLD would take away so much of that.
+-- (Score:-1, Moderator on Power Trip)
Yes, clear chanel has used their money to buy their own TLD. Go to spot.cc for information/to register.
ahh ha ha...
=1000101
And here I thought it was supposed to be a new iMac colour.
The thing that really makes this look like a joke is the inclusion of the .iSnotGreen domain.
Man, now wouldnt that be great... A TLD named .XXX or .porn. You could get Squid to drop all connections from .porn sites !!! No more crummy banners or spam.
With the recent talk about filters in libraries , the idea struck me that a new TLD would make it very easy to filter this stuff out, as the article also mentions. This would elliminate the problem of wrongly blocked sites because unless you are selling porn, then nobody would ever want a URL that ends in .sex.
There would still be many sites that wouldn't comply, but that will always be the case no matter what laws or policies are implemented. Consider your local video store: it sells Wallace and Gromit and other childrens videos but there is also a room in the back that sells the porn flicks. Libraries and schools could simply block *.sex. This wouldn't keep out all "offensive material" but a great deal of it. I would be happy then also because innocent sites wouldn't be blocked. I think this is a reasonable compromise.
I'm sure it's supposed to be read as .IsNotGreen
Just think about it, how can you increase the amount of money people spend to register domain names?
.com, .net & .org, they'll feel the corporate need to get .sucks, .blows, .xxx, .sex, .etc! Suddenly, there's a *lot* more domains that these people will be buying just for preventative purposes, etc.
:)
You could increase the cost of a domain name but there's now competition so prices should stay as low as possible to remain competitive.
The other would be to increase the number of domain names a person would want to buy.
Now, instead of MS needing to buy up
Now if that isn't a get rich quick scheme...
-Vel
P.S. Sorry for all the FUD.
I think the "sucks" term needs to be rethought. It is high time we stopped denigrating those persons and things that suck. Anyone who has been the benificiary of such an activity will know it is a Good Thing(tm).
Carpe diem!
Good in theory.. but "force" is the wrong word to use. Most porn sites would not refuse to do so.(I am assuming....)
Synopsist
let's let the public have a go at all the DNS servers and name tables (or start new ones) and create them... well, ok, even i don't want a part of that chaos. since DNS is almost fully arbitrary anyway, i imagine established sites getting the boot; never mind then. but what about .pub? what's wrong with that? why can't all nakedness and porn domains get .xxx?
.net/org/com requirement easy enough on their request form and make gobs of cash in $70 chunks. i'm rambling, tired and late for work.
having mentioned the arbitrary point, i find it reasonable to have NSI or someone approve a name (and charge $, i guess) for anything. a governing body could take a 1 minute application for something like micro.soft or ski.nny and there would be an impossibly large number of names available. no more griping about profit dealers holding names because you could more likely come up with something not too bad yourself. slash.dot and www.slash.dot would have to be handled seperately with the NS organization, but NS information is already done this way for any level of name service. in other words, each name would be it's own domain and not allow other levels. if you need more than one level on your domain, you're big enough for the $small most likely. with your application, you can still check the education box if that applied to you. there are very few technical problems with it. NSI or whoever could remove the
neopets.com
They used to tout their website as '101kgb.com', but now they're always saying '101kgb.cc'. Both work
The San Diego radio station 101KGB is owned by Clear Channel. They used to tout their website as '101kgb.com', but now they're always saying '101kgb.cc'. Both work
just thought I'd correct that.
-------- This space intentionally left blank --------
TLDs.with.more.than.three.letters.sux
:)
etc.
The whole idea of TLD:s will vanish if we get too many of them. Keep them short, few and carefully selected!
but what about profanity and vulgarity? Think of the children! OH, WHY won't anyone PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?! Ooh!
"As many of you know, I was very instrumental in the founding of the Internet" --Al Gore to Katie Couric 3/99
Perhaps you are thinking of TINC, The Internet Namespace Cooperative. (Forgive me if that title is wrong...)
.mnet. TLD within the TINC.
It is located at http://www.tinc-org.com/
I own the
I'm going to run out and pre-register u.nix so I can make lots of money!!! I can just imagine the bidding wars between the pro-unix and anti-unix folks for that domain. I'm gonna be rich!
:-D
Constitutionally Correct
all the bad spellers out there. Add another TLD called .untie, as in, "Bad spellers of the world, untie!" -unknown
I would have said it a little differently, but the content and context would have been virtually identical. Add the .XXX TLD first. Get the porn in its own TLD. Then don't visit it. It would make life on the net a lot easier for parents, system administrators, and the casual browser. Good job Ian.
Check out http://www.nic.cc
Hope that helps!
"I always wanted to be a procrastinator,
surely it would have to be .cum?
I bet some fucknut wanted people to be able to have anything.they.want as a URL, and this is a result of him finally compromising his ideas after having DNS explained to him a thousand times.
That all the porn sites should be on .sex .sex TLD, and it wouldn't be infringing on anyone else's rights to view porn, in fact it would enhance it, since you would be able to type in anything.sex and get what you were looking for.
That way, if parents really wanted to keep their kids out of porn sites, all they would have to do would be block the
Plus, it's conveniently 3 letters.
If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving is not for you.
If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving is not for you.
I really think they should have a .xxx for all the porn sites. Not only would it be easy to block these sites a whole if you so desired but its what the porn distributers on the net want. Why all the warning before you enter a porn site, because they are pooping in thier pants over the fear of lawsuits. If they had a "redlight district" on the net, they could simply say in court, "Our site was in the .xxx domain, Billy should have known better".
:)
Plus it would put those stinking Net censor (I mean filter) companies out.
(Woo-hoo I got my first Karma Point!!!)
--My name is Ian and I am responisble for this comment.
Do you ever feel like there are people watching you? You're not alone.
About 4 years ago there was a proposal for a .XXX top level domain, which would of course put Net Nany etc. out of biz.....
In Nearly All Paradigms, Shift Happens.
Hey, this is so funny that I'll ask them to post the article again... he who knows the future controls the past.. hehe :))
StarTrek.org Free Webmail
it seems that every month new TLD's are descussed, will it ever happen?
OK, so will all know it's got to happen but lets get the IP's all sorted out first.
sparkes
blog and junk
As much fun as some of these seem like they would be, I still can't help but think it's excessive. I'm already miffed that someone else has snugglemuffin.com, I would have bought all three if I could have. Really it's just a whole lot more confusion for the masses like my mother. She's still baffled by .net and .org so don't expect it to be anything the public will grasping any time soon, but hey, is that neccesarily a con? Still, I see how some of them could be useful. Quite honestly all the squawking "obscene material" types could easily be subdued if .sex was created. That should in theory make blocking access easier for parental types and fascists correct? Besides, if we scooted all the pr0n sites over to .sex that just might free up some good domain names. So long as people weren't charged for the migration I doubt they would be too miffed. I'm sure there are a million and one problems with all of this, but hell it's just an idea. Still, it is bordering on rediculous, those that exist are plenty even though dull. However, .dot would be kind of cute.
does anyone here ever keep up on dnso.org? they, like many organizations, have been proposing new gTLDs for quite some time now... however, they're also affiliated with ICANN, so their suggestions seem to be a bit more... possible.
all new gTLDs that have been proposed are mentioned along the lines of reference to ethnic groups, as in "countries without borders" (yes, geography class is all coming back to you now...)
i personally would love to see new domains introduced, but they will more than likely continue to fall under a dot3 or dot2 type of standard...
-barton
Just another way for the lawyers to get rich...
kwsNI
We could change www.tpu.org, to www.TeenProgrammers.unite!
Might be an interesting thought...
Eh...
Considering the number of common topics here, I propose a whole lot of new TLD's just for Slashdot.
.grits
.pants
.post
.portman
.IhateJonKatz
.DeCSS
.Troll
Isn't this sort of thing what the second level's for?
Internet domains have been restricted to three primary domains, known as "top level domains" (TLDs):
Maybe I missed something but when I hear the 3 primary TLDs I thought they were refering to .com, .org, and .net. .edu is in the top 3? .net go too? .gov and .mil are "restricted and not for general use" .... does that mean I can have Malkamite.edu?
Did I not read enough RFCs, how do they figure that
And where did
They do point out that
Malk-a-mite
Just a little AC who finally choose a nick.
I guess this prevents things like http://mars.nasa.gov, once they get their Internet-enabled probes up there. Some idiot would probably sue on the grounds that US gov't was laying claim to the planet in violation of the Outer Space Treaty. Of course, if you want to get rich, file the lawsuit based upon the American flags planted all over the moon. .Mars NOW!
blog |
What about:
dotsucks.sucks ?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Didn't this topic used to be called
"Care to register www.gates.sucks?"?
Was someone offended?
There is no central body controlling the Internet so anyone can basically create their own NIC and any top level domains they want.
For example so does .nu allow ISO8859-1 characters in the domain names so a domain like www.räksmörgås.nu can be used (If it look strange its because your screen cant show the three swedish characters 'å', 'ä' and 'ö'). .nu is common in sweden since 'nu' means 'now' in swedish and the nation 'se' top level domain has a fairly restrictive policy for issuing domains. Basically if you do not have a national company with the given name you can not register a domain with the name.
Just saying it like it are.
Even though it's been infused into practically everything we come into contact with, the word "sucks", like the words "cool" and "rules" and "rocks", are slang. And what happens to slang? It gets outdated. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon. Since TLDs are meant to be somewhat permanent and universal, it is especially stupid to make TLDs out of words that won't mean the same thing 5 years from now. Imagine if whoever thought up the original TLDs decided to throw in ".isfresh" and ".isasquare" or whatever. Though that would be kinda funny.
Anyway, point is that when people want to make fun of the way people talked back in the '90-00's, they'll over-use "sucks" and "cool", just like we overuse them today. I don't think we want our TLDs to be a testament to how much our slang sucks. Or maybe it blows. Either way, it's certainly not cool. Or hip. Or even peachy-keen.
"Aren't you going to get into costume?"
"I never get out of it."
"Aren't you going to get into costume?"
"I never get out of it."
-- Tom Stoppard (R&G Are Dead)
At least the romance languages have some similarities to many english words: commerce/commercia/comprar -- it all has to do with business, so the .com is pretty obvious, and when you think about just how much of the world has been exposed -- voluntarily or not -- to english, spanish, french and portuguese, it's not a big stretch to consider it universal. Edu=education, educacion. Gov is also similar.
Of course, this is all from a western european/american perspective -- I can't wait to see info from cyrillic, indo-chinese or japanese submissions.
The other thing I think would be important is to keep TLD's simple, ".com", ".org", ".gov" etc. are all easy to remember, how about ".sch" for Search Engine (Tell me if that stands for something else that I don't know about) or ".sc" for science, or similar ideas. Don't get me wrong, I am all for the idea of adding new TLD's, but I think they shouldn't be a joke.
---
What exactly are the commercial possiblilities of Ovine Aviation?
>>All this does is increase the number names companies will HAVE to buy, to protect their trademarks. Actually, the proposal is to make it so companies cannot buy their own name. It is designed to help people find both views on an issue/company quickly. Personally, I'm all for it, because the only way to make an informed decision on something is to learn about both views on the issue. Sounds like a great idea! Pee-Wee
Am I missing something here? I was always under the impression that TLDs meant something.. but I guess they're just "pretty domain endings" that have nothing to do with what goes under them...
"It's dark. You're likely to be eaten by a Grue."
They should force porn sites to use the .porn TLD. It would make filtering a lot easier, and you put options in to search engines to ignore them if you want. Just an idea...
CPT's letter to ICANN asking to create new Internet Top Level Domains is available at http://www.cptech.org/ecom/icann/tlds-march1-2000. html This letter contains explanations of each proposed TLD. Sincerely, Vergil Bushnell Consumer Project on Technology
Insects and Grafitti Photos
Oh well, I should probably go read the spec again if I can remember where I found... Anyone know where it is?
You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
What all these extra tlds (.sucks, .imafrog, etc) are really trying to do is impose an additional "directory" type of structure onto the DNS system, which in some fashion search engines already do. Since the idea of the DNS system is to a) provide human recognizable and memorizable names instead of hard-to-remember IP addresses and b) provide a level of indirection so that machines can change physical location (and hence IP address) without breaking every link to them, then the best way to create an additional structure that would organize things is to have a separate database/access method, in which sites are characterized according to topic (or keywords), pointing to the DNS name which localizes the machine by indirecting to the IP address.
I'm all in favor of adding a few new tlds, I suppose, like .xxx (although it's hard to argue that you didn't think www.hardcorepornsite.com was going to get you to a porn site, and it may be hard from a legal standpoint to require all sex sites to move to the .xxx tld - who defines what's obscene? what about nude artwork?), it seems to me that the creation of new tlds should be done for specific purposes like segregating of porn sites, or for a new country or whatever, and nut just to let people have cute names.
Wasn't the purpose of more TLDs to make things less complicated (ie. ".sex" and such) and not moreso? Sure, .sucks might be useful to a certain extent, but, as everyone has already noted, who the hell will use .isnotgreen? That's just plain silly and, yes, too long.
Oh yeah - did anyone else notice that they forgot to mention the .net TLD in the article? (Personally, I really like .net!)
I'm just waiting for a .geek so I can get me one of them domain name thingamabobs.
I hereby reserve the following domains:
- monicalewinsky.sucks
- webfilteringsoftware.sucks
- twopartypolitics.sucks
and, for the easy ransom booty as proved by history,
- georgewbush.sucks
- georgebush.sucks
- whinytexasgovernor.sucks
and of course, for my own peace of mind,
- theswindle.sucks
waiting to see the utterly absurd yet inevitable tidal wave of legal actions such a proposal, if implemented would cause, such as:
- microsoft.sucks
- celinedion.sucks
- kathieleegifford.sucks
So what, technically, is there preventing me from putting a DNS server on the internet, and encouraging others to add it to their list of DNS servers (after their regular servers, that way I'm not taking over any domains). I could add any TLD I like, and I could probably convince quite a crowd to add my server. I understand this has been tried before, did it die out because of lack of use?
Your plan would work except for the after their regular servers bit. If a resolver receives a "domain doesn't exist" response, it will not query any additional nameservers. What you can do, though, is to completely take over the root zone, and simply delegate the existing TLD's to their appropriate authorative servers.
--
bgphints - internet routing news, hints and ti
The .cc TLD doesn't appear to be anything to do with Clear Channel, though (funnily enough) the clearchannel.cc domain exists...
With this and the MS story, I think the leap-year problem turned out to maee people think yesterday that it's the 1st of April, not March.
What really should be done is not expand the top level domains, but contract them. The existing .com, .org, .gov, .mil, .net, and .edu domains should be moved under the .us domain. Then the domain rules become a matter for each country to decide.
.gov and .mil under .us, as they are clearly United States domains.
Even if we are keeping generic TLDs, we should at least move
Can't wait for the chance to register a domain in the .longtopleveldomainnameswillcausecarpaltunnelandth eniwillsuethatassholenader TLD.
-Shoeboy
the best solution I heard about the DNS lookup was for the root servers to each handle one letter, the first letter of the TLD. Under such a system, all traffic for .com, .cool, .ca, and so on, would be directed to the "C" server for resolution.
.com) than your Z server. Even if there were freeform TLDs, the names would not be evenly distributed over the alphabet.
If a separate root server was used for each letter of the alphabet, then your Z server would be a lot busier (serving
cpeterso
... your C server would be a lot busier (serving .com) than your Z server.
cpeterso
- There standards issues with these proposed TLD's (all others are either 3 or 2 letters.)
- They are way overly specific.
We all know that the domain namespace is artifically scarse and that new TLD's are needed, but let's start with proposals that create a more robust TLD.Additionaly, there is the social issue of their incredible arrogance. It galls me. James Love, the director of the CPT tells Christopher Ambler who has been trying to get .web TLD'ized for four years:
Oh, I see...you've got Ralph Presidential Candidate Nader on your side so your proposal should move to the top of the list despite being patently stupid? Can Nader alone part the seas of Red Tape that is the ICANN process? Get in line.Love and Nader...you're newbies in the worst way.
Congratulations. You have successfully proposed moving "www" from the front of the namespace to the end of it. What does this accomplish?
.net .com .org are starting to merge is due to the fact that no one paid attention to the guidlines. Plain and simple.
The fact that
We've had the .com landgrab. Now watch out for the TLD landgrab. Everybody will want to own their own TLD, especially if they can charge every megacorp $50 to prevent someone else setting up www.megacorp.sucks, .evil, .blows, .lousy, .stupid, .hateit, .dumb, .cretin, .broken, .costalot, .tacky, ... Paul.
You are lost in a twisty maze of little standards, all different.
Keep in mind that Russian is adopting English words at a furious pace in matters of business and technology, so having a bald English word wouldn't pose too much of a problem as people would just accept it and deal with it. And don't forget the incredible influence French had on the language before this century.
.COM maps well onto "kommercheskii", .ORG maps onto "organizatsia", and .MIL maps onto "militsia" (technically police, but it's close enough).
.GOV, since the root "gov" refers to speaking, not to anything related to government.
.ru domains, you'll see them use "www" and "sex" and and all the usual sorts of naming conventions.
With that in mind, some of the current tlds wouldn't pose much of a problem unmodified.
.NET is a problem, since "nyet" of course means "no". The word for network is "sjet'".
.EDU is hopeless. As is
But again, these problems are nonissues. If you check out some
"If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
I don't think that '.sucks' is a good idea. Using 'sucks' as the highest/lowest insult is juvenile, childish, vulgar and all the rest. I'm certainly guilty of using it myself, but as the old saying goes, "Profanity is the linguistic crutch of the inarticulate."
:)
.xxx, it would be easier to block for those who want to block it, and easier to find for those who *don't* want to block it.
:)
And ".isnotgreen" has its fullest impact only on those with particular political mindset. I'm sure someone would register Kermit the Frog under that
But there surely is a good reason for some new TLDs. For instance, the proposals (now aging in casks in France) to have a domain ".xxx" makes a lot of sense -- if sexually explicit content were categorized under
".fam" looks like a good idea to me, too -- and I bet it would to the (millions?) of families who use e-mail to keep in contact and the Web to send photos to the distant relatives. I'm in line for "lord.fam"
Just thoughts,
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
Sounds like you'd need to come up with a whole new name resolution paradigm - no easy task.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
Is it necessary? I don't know. I'm certainly sympathetic to the general idea, but I think restriciting domain squatting, multiple TLD registration, and trademark abuse would be the better solution.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
So what, technically, is there preventing me from putting a DNS server on the internet, and encouraging others to add it to their list of DNS servers (after their regular servers, that way I'm not taking over any domains). I could add any TLD I like, and I could probably convince quite a crowd to add my server. I understand this has been tried before, did it die out because of lack of use?
-Adam
Every vision has a provision for revision
I dont think language really should be a problem. only 1 change: give each country 3 TLDs. 1 commercial, 1 for non-profit orgs, 1 general (or maybe another division could be better. I wouldn't know about that) You want to cater for the whole world, thenb you either have an english page, or have your page in several languages. If you want to keep working on a national basis, get your own country's commercial TLD. I however don't think the purpose should necessarily be clear from the URL. It's just an address, there to make it easier to remember. If you need an URL, you look it up somewhere, usually a searchengine. It's exactly the same as a normal address. If you need to find a baker, do you blindly walk over to bakerstreet in hopes of finding one, or do you look in the phonebook/yellow pages/whatever? Finally.. yes, there is a reason for TLDs only being 3 characters: people are lazy. .sucks is still decently fast to type, .isnotfair is quite a bit longer. The shorter your name, the cooler.
//rdj
No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
--Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
The article seems to indicate that the creation of such TLDs would "facilitate free speech and criticism and enable consumers, workers and others to organize." First of all I'm not taking this very seriously, secondly even if it were to be done I'd have some concerns.
They don't seem to be planning to enforce that legitimate orgs are the ones buying domains with these TLDs, nor do I feel that they should. However I'm reminded of a news story I read a few years ago about how some large industrial companies had created funded small non profit organizations with names like "The Green Planet Alliance." Now this organization was actually chartered to work to reduce pollution and such noble ideas, however, since they were controlled by these other companies they mostly did lobbying for laws that favored the companies that had created them. These laws in most people's views either did not assist in reducing pollution or in fact left massive loopholes for the companies to pollute more. Sadly a few consumers got burned by this when the non profit organization actually started fund raising and they thought they were giving money to a legitimate organization.
I worry that such TLDs make it more likely that people wishing to participate in such organizations may simply go to techworker.union join up and pay their dues. Then only later that the company they work for is actually running that organization.
A couple weeks ago a friend of mine who works for a subsidiary of Clear Channel communications told me that they were getting their own TLD, ".cc" I was pretty skeptical. He said he didn't really know anything about it other than that was information passed on to him from someone else at the company.
.cc TLD for real, or just wishful thinking at this point?
I spoke to him earlier this morning, before seeing this article, and he said that he was told again that they intend to unveil their TLD. Clear Channel owns several tv stations, radio stations, and billboards. So is the
numb
The only thing I can think of using .sucks for is to provide satirists an easy way to be caught and busted to the full extent of the law for every copyrighted image and trademarked phrase/logo they use.
.sucks version of the URL every time you went to a place, you'd probably never buy anything at all...
With more and more top-level domains, companies will have to invest several grand just to be able to have a domain name that isn't the launching point for a million "these people suck" sites. Now, I think critical sites should still exist, but EVERY retailer on the net has something bad that can be said about them, if you started checking the
Which would lead to a torrent of libel and defamation lawsuits... oh this smells all bad
Esperandi
I think that whole issue is really stupid. I understand the need to protect trademarks, but come on! There are only so many words/phrases that make any sense without going over 25 characters - the point at which it starts getting too long to remember easily. I think there should be some enforcement about which domains you can take. Let Ford Motor Co. take ford.com, sure, but leave ford.net available for someone else that has a legitimate claim to the name, like Joe Ford who owns a networking company in Sandusky, OH.
I think buying up your 2LD across every available TLD namespace is just lame. Unless your organization spans the reasons for those namespaces, you should be restricted from using them.
Sorry, just had to rant a bit. It burns me when a good name is wasted by a squatter or someone that isn't using it.
Of course, then you have the headache of adjudicating fair use...
Constitutionally Correct
All domains in .com would be replicated in .www at no charge. Domains in .net and .org would be replicated in .www if not already taken. New registrations in .net, .com, and .org would no longer be accepted. In a few years, .net, .com, and .org would be phased out. Browsers would default to .www.
The effect would be to eliminate TLDs as a naming issue for most web sites. A web site name would be one word, with no dots. This would tend to reduce consumer confusion.
Of course, then there'd be confusion between these names, the RealNames mess, and AOL keywords. Maybe keeping .com is a good thing.
Nader and Co. may be facilitating this because of theeir beliefs etc, but the real driving force are the behind the scenes folks who will profit. Hmmm, don't know who, but I want to get on the Networksolutions.sucks bandwagon.
More race stuff in one place,
than any one place on the net.
... when amateurs and 'normal' people get hold of what was previously 'geek' technology. What a waste - imagine what this could do to most of the DNS servers - maybe we'll end up needing to implement IP-V6 just to cope with the extra demand.
Oh sure, Just because amazon.com can't own Amazon.sucks doesn't mean they won't find a way to lock it down. Either by having an employee, or a family member of an employee, or a stockholder, or a random guy on the street they paid 100 dollars to, etc. No matter how many rules you make about how this person or that person is not eligible to own the domain, the company or person that wants not to be criticized just goes one step further. .sucks equivalent of everything that's already registered in .com. They'll put up a page that says domain.com sucks on each one, so that they can even say they are using it for the intended purpose.
This doesn't even cover the inevitable attempts to squat the domain names. The day the registers open, you'll have a bunch of guys running scripts that basically buy up the
Maybe it would be possible to limit the # of domains a person could register in a day, but even that is highly impracticle, since any company could still get each employee to register their allottment each day and then transfer ownership, start dummy companies, pay temps to register more in their names, etc. Maybe you could do it as a lottery system, where someone tries to register a domain, but they don't get it for a specified period of time, while other people can try to register it. At the end, its randomly assigned to one of the people who tried to get it. I imagine you wouldn't tell people a name has been put into the system, or else, whenever any domain was locked in, every squatter on earth would put themselves in too, in hopes of selling it to the one guy who wants it. Just keep it a secret, and after a week, say "Registerer #598 gets it."
That would help at least control the initial rush for buissness.sucks, drugs.sucks, otherbigmoneydomain.sucks. Still, I imagine the vast majority of the attempted registers would be squatters.
Augh. Capitalism has destroyed the internet.
-Tony
---
"What is that sound its making?"
---
"What is that sound its making?"
"It thinks it has a virus, but its actually just linux."
Open the floodgates. Allow *anything* to be used as a TLD, HOWEVER.... and this is what's important: All domain registrations *must* still consist of two parts, domain+TLD. The TLD itself can be registered to no one nor belongs to anyone, thus insuring its availability to all.
This will accomplish the following:
(1) Campanies simply *cannot* "buy up" all the domains anymore as there will, for all practical purposes, be an infinite number of combinations for trademarkname.* as * can be now anything.
(2) Companies with similar or identical names, but doing different things now have plenty of elbow room to coexist (unlike now). Apple computers has apple.com. What is Apple Records to do? Why, apple.records, of course. A farmer could have apple.farms, the temp agency could have apple.employment, etc. since, emphasizing again, that the TLD itself (.apple) can't be registered to anyone, thus future companies and individuals can forever enjoy use and availibility of the .apple TLD. Even Mr. Joe Apple (joe.apple).
It'd be an end to squatting; an end to hoarding; an end to buying out of spite; an end to domain brokering. And how difficult would it be for servers to implement on a technical level? I see it as no worse than the .com subdomain is already being successfully handled (for now, inagine as *.com with the .com simply dropped).
Not too long ago, Jon Katz posted an article on cyber-nations. This is the level at which TLDs should be determined. Surely there are 'classes' of sites out there, and the surfer would benefit from having a better sense of the domains.
.com domain is over used. No surprise there. As I see the usage of .com, it breaks down into shopping sites, business presence sites, business 'hit-and-run' announcement and advert sites, and service providing sites - selling no tangible product (yahoo or slashdot). The boundaries get blurry sometimes, but for the most part, I think this is accurate.
.buy or .shop. Same for .corp or .inc or .biz; .ad/.advert; .priv or .fam, .serv (for places like here or pricewatch)
.xxx domain, they'd be both easier to find and to filter.
Mainly, the
Should we stick to the three-letter scheme? Is there an obligation to do so. Regardless, the purpose of the site should be shown in it's URL.
So, there should be a
Then again, there is the international consideration, where the domains OUGHT to be sensitive to the fact that no everyone speaks English. Any polyglots out there care to give this some thought?
And of course, if we can corral all the porn sites to the
-- What you do today will cost you a day of your life.
It really won't matter much if these TLD are available soon, or even now. Looking into my crystal ball, I see that it won't be too long before all servers physically located inside the USA borders are forced to adhere to strict laws regarding naming. It will soon be required to move from .edu, .com, .gov, .net and so over to .edu.us, .com.us, .gov.us, .net.us and so. After that, all domains with a .us name must adhere to rating laws. That way, you can have a government enforcable way to filter the internet.
.CA.US on all servers hosted in the sate, that can be done as well.
"but what about all non-us sites?" - They get filtered out by default on public terminals usable by minors.
"can that filtering be turned off for adults" - Of course it can, but will it? I dunno.
"Isn't that against freedom of speech" - No, it'll get shoehorned under federal regulation over international / interstate commerce.
"can the states require even more location specific names?" - Yep. If the state of california requires
"What about browsers, are they next?" - You betcha! After the feds shoehorn the TLD regulation under the guise of interstate / international commerce, and the states require state level domain naming, it's a brief interlude before browsers will be forced to identify what location it is in. That way, collecting taxes from internet purchases become easy to track and collect.
-Joe
All this does is increase the number names companies will HAVE to buy, to protect their trademarks.
TLDs.with.more.than.three.letters.sucks
...for TLDs, like .bus, .home. etc.
What we don't need are special-interest groups turning the TLDs from a value-neutral categorizing system into a lobby effort with crap like .isnotgreen.
Why, you ask? Well, it sets a really silly precedent. What about when someone lobbies for .isgay? Someone's gonne be up in arms about that.
If this 'Consumer' org gets their wish, I'll be pushing for .isatreehuggingbullshitorganization
Steve
ICQ: 49636524
snowphoton@mindspring.com
Got Rhinos?