Slashdot Mirror
ICANN Approves Two More Top-Level Domains
Cpyder writes "ICANN has decided to go forward with the implementation of two new top level domains, namely .mobi (for mobile use, sponsored by Nokia and T-Mobile) and .jobs (for job sites).
The ICANN Board meetings regarding the approval are available. It is not yet known when these domains will be available for registration, as this decision merely starts the technical and business negotiations for terms under which these domains will be registered. Normally the domains should become active somewhere next year.
Several other new TLDs are still up for discussion. These include .asia, .mail, .tel and .xxx.
Last October, ICANN approved .travel and .post. More on these new TLDs at PCWorld and Google News."
ICANN can give .* extensions and one day people are going to abandon that idea and start using AOL keywords type of scheme.
y - An example of how the ICANN just makes up new dot names to generate more revenue as a businesses don't want customers to confuse extensions with a competing web squatter.
Now we'll have whitehouse.gov - the real one, whitehouse.com - the sexy one, whitehouse.mobi - while Clinton was sleeping on the couch, whitehouse.sux - advocate site for the Whitehouse, whitehouse.net - no not Watergate, whitehouse.letsmakeanewdotextentiontomakemoremone
Have you noticed that people have already ceased using www. on most advertisements? At least my domain the www is optional, as most other websites have adopted this too.
steve.jobs I say no more!
Martin
It seems that the i on the end of the domain looks a tad silly and won't do anything for assisting keypad typers who want to have to enter as little as possible! .mob looks much better than .mobi, and seeing as "i" is the third character under the number 4 that's an extra two keypresses per domain.
before someone registers www.steve.jobs?
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
".mobi," in reference to the Mobius Strip, representing the eternal stream of pop-up ads that will assault the cell users that try to access those sites.
What is the point of these extra sites? Well .mobi makes since so mobile devices can talk to each other without filling up valuable .com domains or forcing calling a static IP Address. But for .jobs and the others. Nobody when they are looking for a job will try jobs.job they will still go to .com The only ways this can work properly is force people to use the correct Top-Level Domains. All Commercial Enterprise must use .com All Educational must use.EDU all job sites must use .jobs and not use .COM/.ORG That is the only way to get these to be useful, is to force proper use of top level domains. .COM is the standard for everything and that is what people will try.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Honestly, I steer completely clear of the "new" TLDs as they are mostly just redirects to the "standard" TLDs (.net/.com/.org) or they are blatant trash sites.
To me this seems like nothing more than an attempt to make money revenue for all parties involved.
That thinks ICANN is getting rediculous and frivilous in approving these new names?
...But why .jobs? That makes no sense as job sites are just commerce sites.
Who are you? The new #2 Who is #1? You are #617565. I am not a number, I am a free man! Muhahaha.
Subjects says it all
.mobi isn't a terrible idea. .jobs, though? I don't think that'll be used a lot. "Monster.jobs" doesn't have the same ring to it. There aren't zillions of job sites out there.
________________________________________________
suwain_2
"www.blow.jobs"
I mean... c'mon... can we please get a *.movie (or *.mov) extension? This is ridiculous.
Damn, there goes my precious karma!! And fith.post just doesn't have the same prestige... not a good way to start my day!
I guess they thought .mob just didn't have a friendly ring to it.
And why are they getting longer? I tell you, in two years time, we'll be seeing .internetwebsite and .ecommerce. Idjits...
Hades, PoD: Official Advocate
[9:30am] .jobs TLD is established.
[9:31am] blo, blow, bhlo, bl.oh, blough are all registered.
I still dont think any companies are going to be giving up the .com website. It just has so much marketing built into it.
.biz or some other imitiation. I am aware that this is just a subjective opinion, but I doubt I am the only one who feels this way, and I still think .com will never be touched as far as the most popular suffix.
I still lose credability for a site if it is
i have the feeling that this will flop just like the .tv and the .biz. does anybody remeber them?
Seriously. They should approve a .porn domain.
"Physics is to math as sex is to masturbation." -R. Feynman
I plan to buy steve.jobs and sell it back to him for millions.
(Ok, in reality it'll probably just come up with a search the web website when you type it in, or he'll sue me)
Nothing costs nothing
It's for the bjs on the dl.
Call me, Ishmael, using our new cell phone service, on the web at www.dick.mobi.
Alright all you web dev's, time to go in and add two more possible TLD's for validating email address ;)
500 dollar reward for tip(s) leading to the arrest of the person(s) who stole my sig.
can you imagine how incredible rich one can become by selling this domain to the pr0n industrie?
See pictures of tits
The whole idea of TLDs worked really well over the past few years, but I think its time for a fundamental change in internet addressing. If ICANN just keeps adding new TLDs, they'll accomplish nothing other than to confuse most consumers. Remembering .com/.net/.info/.biz/.mobi/.mail/... probably won't be an issue to most /. users, but I think the vast majority of internet users are going to start getting very confused, very fast.
Maybe we can solicit an "Ask Slashdot" question about alternatives to the TLD problem? What alternatives do you see as being feasible, practicable, and easy on the average end user?
Our network admin has already blocked .jobs sites at work:-)
O this learning! What a thing it is - William Shakespeare
Wait, do you mean light years?
--- Ban humanity.
I don't understand why xxx hasn't been approved yet. Followed by a mandate that pornographic sites must use it. Include a method for current sites playboy.com to have first dibs on playboy.xxx so as to avoid squatting.
.mobi gets in but .xxx or .porn or .masturbate are still in limbo.
.xxx instead of .com
I remember this coming up years ago as a way to help with filtering and I can't believe
Plus it'd have the added benefit of allowing you to set a rule where a mash of the keyboard with one hand would default to adding
Easier access to porn here I come!
asbceok.xxx is my favorite
-- i am jack's amusing sig file
Someone stole my Steve joke...(sigh) so www.loseyour.jobs
It's funny how I make sense to others and not myself...
And in keeping with the "terribly useless overly specific domains that nobody needs", the next domains ICANN'T will be announcing are: /. readership's homepage
.linkfarm
For Googlewhacking
.lefty
For left-handed people's web pages
.cheese
For cheese-related sites
.bob for people named Bob .troll For 99% of the
www.eFax.com are spammers
I can think of dice.jobs, guru.jobs, and hot.jobs and not a whole lot else. What does that do to effectively partition the .com uber-TLD?
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Spyware provider, internet annoyance, and alternate TLD provider new.net already sells names such as .travel, viewable on computers which have their spyware and via ISPs such as earthlink which they have paid to make their DNS authoritive. This will be interesting... when many already purchased names stop working as soon as ICANN defines them for real. If they're smart, they'll attempt to automatically register for free all previously registered domains with the new registrar... and give full refunds to all which they can't.
www.Joe.jobs
Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
There was time when TLD meant something. You knew a .com was a company, a .org was a non-profit, a .net was service provider etc. Now a .org or .net can be any old profit-driven site selling anything. All these new TLDs are just pointless. .mobi?
And they're not domains anymore. They're vanity plates. A domain used to mean a bunch of computers that were connected and administered as a group. Now, it's a website.
I'm afraid it's just going to get more confusing.
.stfu and .stuff and .crap & .junk and soon all we will have is trendy focused tld advertising. Of course, we wouldn't need any of it if we did away with DNS :) . Try remembering the ip of your favorite pr0n site.
Never! The .but extension will never die!
http://mediagoblin.org/
so when will we start seeing links to http://goatse.xxx?
PCB32
free ipod and free gmail!
This is crazy. What we need for mobile domains is something that's easy to type on a standard mobile phone keypad... About the only thing that WAP got right was that it's easy to type - one mobile keypress per character (927). Why not .WAP, or .MPA (mobile phone access)
It will be explained soon here.
Yeah, I'm off topic, but any story about ICANN's nonsense is a good place to post a link to OpenNIC.
May we live long and die out
I was thinking of registering 'blow'
ok, so mobi i can kind of see, you can consilidate any mobile device web services under one nice little TLD
but are there really that many job sites? travel sites? seriously now.
...and that's all there is to it.
They are confusing the crap out of everyone. Now no one will now the real, true web address for anything. Phishers are in hog.heaven.
We need a .spam domain, and it needs to be illegal to send an unsolicited email via any domain but this one, I don't think it should be illegal to send spam, there should just be an electronic readable disclaimer on it, .spam would serve this purpose nicely!
I tried for 5 years to come up with a clever sig...only to realize that I am not clever.
Does DNS technically support null-string domains?
.mobi
Just wondering if they'd just let someone specific register
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
Well, what's the answer? I'm lazy.
.sex
Oh, fine, make me use my own brain.
xkcd.com - a webcomic of mathematics, love, and language.
... to register hand. and blow.?
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
As a physicist, I acccept the existence of entities that have no size, but they do have mass, also have no angular velocity but do have angular momentum (e-), also that two particles that were once in contact can be separated by an arbitrarily large distance and still "know" what happens to the other one (EPR), that I'll never know what time it is on the sun when it is 4 pm here on earth, and that if I place two prisms in between me and a light source in the order A B, I see no light, but if I do it in the order B A light gets through (polarised light and two plain polarisors)
I don't find believing in God that difficult actually.
PS Don't tell me about the electromagnetic radius of the electron, it's only an effective size: leptons are point-like to all current experiments.
With that argument, then the .spam domain should be created, but noone will admit that they are doing bussiness in the .spam domain.
What's wrong with .mobile instead of .mobi I wonder? (Assuming we need such a TLD at all.) Reminds me of old DOS 8.3 days when you couldn't say filename.text without the OS falling down dead!
.mobi is almost as juvenile as .biz , a TLD that no self-respecting business with any class would dream of using. (It is very useful in SPAM-filters, tho, along with .info and .ws ...)
blow.jobs should be fun though.
The internet should be moving towards ensuring access to any site by any device, not segmenting certains parts for certain devices. ".mobi" sends a message to developers that they should build separate sites for cell phones instead of figuring out how to provide the same content regardless of the user's platform.
XML, semantic web, etc. are all about presenting the data to the user as the user wants it. RSS has helped popularize these concepts, and now ICANN is snubbing this progress and promoting a backwards-looking solution.
Tim Berners-Lee himself is on the record as being opposed to .mobi because it is in direct opposition to the principles of semantic web.
Maybe ICANN should seize ".ie" from Ireland and hand it over to sites that look great in IE and look like crap (or don't load at all) in every other browser.
Very disappointing development.
The bulk of userspace never knew what .com, .net, and .org meant and still don't. All they ever knew was that the web site address wasn't complete unless it ended in one of those names, and usually just .com (kind of like they had to start with www. as well). The average user doesn't know what the new TLDs are and doesn't care, since nothing's leaving the big three.
The intended purpose of expanding the namespace by adding new TLDs is both not necessary with the death of squatting and speculating as well as testy trademark holders lining up to register their names in any possible new TLDs, thus creating a scarcity in "good" 2nd level domain names in any new general purpose TLDs anyway.
And its not like there are a bunch of organizations suddenly willing to abandon 2LD in "the big three" for a new TLD in something nobody knows or understands; at best they might register their existing 2LD in the new TLD if it was 100% spot-on accurate (eg, monster.jobs, for example).
Nor are there a bunch of organizations saying "Gee, we have TLD that kind of matches our organization, maybe it's time to get on the intranets."
The only reason I can see ICANN releasing new TLDs is to raise money by selling the "management rights" to a bunch of Verisign wannabees, who if they have any brains, will just sell out to Verisign's monopoly as soon as they can.
But this strategy will only work a few more times for ICANN, because soon Verisign won't be interested in buying complete control of TLDs by proxy once the market is diluted enough.
Which is just a lead-in for the quietly planned
This attempt to "classify" website types more precisely using the TLD is a big mistake, because all classification schemes are fundamentally flawed. Whatever taxonomy you try to come up with, there will always be other ways to look at it, exceptions and other things that just don't "fit". For example, what if I have a website that has some jobs on it, and other classifieds, but isn't dedicated to jobs? Do I get the .com or the .jobs? Oh, I get it, I am supposed to just buy all the applicable domains (and, presumably, confuse my customers with a multitude of possible web addresses).
Having the top level domain suffix be so specific is just a horribly simplistic way of trying to classify websites. Also, why can't they realize that the website owners themselves don't really want it. It just multiplies the number of domains you have to register in order to prevent confusion and squatters.
If they want to fix something real, then how about the problem of all those domain names out there that have been registered simply to display a stupid "search page", with a message saying "this domain is for sale". I seem to remember in the early 1990's that if you didn't use a domain for a "valid purpose" then it simply got returned to the pool. It irritates me no end to think of a domain and check its availability, only to find some asshat registered it for no purpose but to sit on it and hope to squeeze some money out of someone who really wants to use it.
If we were to free up all THOSE domains then that would be a helluva lot more useful to the internet than new TLDs. And isn't ICAAN sposed to be looking after the interests of the internet, rather than simply representing business interests?
.xxx is a great idea. Finally porn comes to the internet. Maybe .spam toplevel should be also considered. All spammers could moved there, so they'll be easy to filter.
839*929
That'll just be a referrer to the real site.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
I run a site for myself. I don't have a company, so it's not .com, I'm not a non-profit so it's not .org, and it's not talking about a network of computers, so it's not .net. Under the orignal definitions of the domains, there isn't anything for individual users.
Personally, I'm fine with a free-for-all on most TLDs. The only ones that seem to have been enforced, and thus seem worth keeping, are edu and mil.
The original mainstream porn. You're talking about hardcore porn which is graphic intercourse. Softcore is porn without the beaver shots.
You'd say .erot would be the most sensible tld. The adult industry
would approve of this and pay for it. Eventually most adult content
would move and it would make both searching and blocking pr0n a
easier.
Then again, the puritans in the US government would probably get involved with BS like "Tax money shouldn't be used to support an immoral system".
I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
Yay, even more redundancy. Just what the domain name system needed... for even more confusion and costs for those who wish to register, and work for domain nappers.
.com should be controlled to only allow international commercial sites, .net for networks, and so on. What's the point if they're all uncontrolled? They could just as well just have TLD's like .1, .2, .3 and so on as it is now. It's not like they mean anything, it's just for extra address space.
Is there any research being done to replace this mess with something better, maybe a 1:1 system for domain names, which would make things tidy again? Some other domain "format" / system?
With the system of today, IMHO even
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
..so everybody should have some!
There you are, staring at me again.
Next I will go visit http://whack.jobs and see if my picture has made it to the contributor-of-the-month spot!
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
first.post!
" sponsored by Nokia and T-Mobile"
.xxx , and deprioritize lookups for penthouse.xxx . At least Larry's got a sense of humor, and tasty perks - these telcos are just about the cold, hard cash.
What the hell is ICANN doing endorsing two private companies in the root domain servers? Is the control of mobile devices now to be defined by these two partnering competitors in the vastly important mobile communications industry, on behalf of the global public supposedly served by ICANN? Now we see why it takes ICANN so long to approve domains: telcos take time to complete their bribe negotiations with such a distributed organization of crooks as ICANN. Maybe I can bootstrap a deal with Larry Flynt to buy control of
--
make install -not war
Will there really be any incentive for companies to do this? Most corporate home pages have an easy to find 'jobs' or 'careers' link on them. Who needs another domain?
.
A separate domain for mobile device access is directly contrary of what the W3C is working towards with web standards.
Says Tim Berners-Lee.
This is simply a make work program for all those in the domain registration business. I don't think it will make life any easier for users. Everyone who has already spent money buying the all the tlds for their tradename to sit in front of will just have to go and buy a few more. Domain names are just cheap enough and trademarks are valuable enough that most tradename owners will pay this tax.
If you must moderate, please moderate as irrelevent, not something bad, because I'm sure someone will find this interest
.stupid would be great, the we wouldn't need all these other extra domains. The entire .biz nameset could be ported to .stupid... of course, nobody would notice.
SpyDock: Scientific Python in a Docker container
Odd.jobs
As I've posted below, the point is that every .com can have one so if you want to work for Microsoft you go to www.microsoft.jobs.
...that we need a top-level domain just for job sites is a little discouraging.
I don't see forcing a .xxx or .pron^H^H^Horn extension as any worse than those brown paper covers. Of course it would need to be on a federal level and I'm assuming the covers are on a state level(IANAL).
The perversity of the Universe tends towards a maximum. - O'Toole's Corollary
The dog is on fire?
What do they need .asia for? What about the other parts of the world? There's .eu, but that's for the European Union, a political entity.
My exception safety is -fno-exceptions.
A totally useless and gratitous pair of new domains. Not entirely unlike the previous recent additions.
.mobi fully implies content for mobile phones only, which is the *wrong* way to go.
.zoo for zoos, .mov for the DVD renters, .book for on-line booksellers - it's ridiculous.
The whole point of the web is that it is device independent. Having
Ditto having an entire top level domain for the tiny subset of job carrying sites. Why not
ICANN must go. It's entirely compromised by commercial interest - the original purpose of properly managing the net has gone right out the window.
--
Toby
It's just an idea, but what if I wanted to get a job at, say, IBM. So I go to IBM.jobs, and they have their resume-submittal criteria, or whatever, for people who are interested in gaining employment.
.sec (for investor relations) .classaction (for facilitating lawsuits), and .money (for the commercial aspects - oh, wait...
Not that I think this justifies the extra TLD, but just recognizing that there could be some benefit to this, at least for large, well-known companies (who else are we supposed to have benefit, after all?)
Of course, the big (public) companies ought to be making plans for
whack.jobs
nut.jobs
outsourcing.jobs
rim.jobs
www.eFax.com are spammers
after asking the god of the internet why he is doing this... he said because ICANN. This is yet another sad example of ICANN simply trying to make more money and not really trying to do whats right for the internet. I am sick of them. The original TLD's aren't even used properly in the first place. complicating the system with new ones wont fix anything. I do like the idea of having one available for those sites who plan to provide mobile phone content. As it is you never know what sites will load on your phone until you try. I end up using google as a proxy for all my mobile phone browsing to avoid the endless string of error messages. I just feel that the .jobs thing is dumber than dumb. there are only a few sites out there that would really benefit from this and most of them will stick to their .com addies anyhow.
Obama is a twitter sock puppet
Perhaps I'm just dense, but does it strike anyone else as strange that domains are becoming almost exclusively anglicised (meaning, based on English language)?
It's easy to speculate that English is the international language, but what happens when the time comes that it *isn't*?
This wasn't just plain terrible, this was fancy terrible. This was terrible with raisins in it. - Dorothy Parker
...for the blow.jobs and hand.jobs domains.
Then we can just have ISPs drop all packets from the relevant IPs and the rest of us can go on without having stupid anti-terror laws dragged over our heads.
Any sufficiently advanced libertarian utopia is indistinguishable from government.
What's wrong with "jobs.ibm.com"?
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Then would the domain ELLIPSES.COM resolve/redirect to:
http://dot.dot ?
--- Das einzige, das wir zu fürchten haben, ist die Furcht selbst.
See .biz
Why?
Is it such a pain to type ibm.com/jobs? And what about situations where there is a .com and a .org with the same name but are different companies? Then who gets (name).jobs? It's just stupid.
I think .mobi may actually be the first "useful" domain I've heard so far. If you're on your cell phone and want to be sure that the web site you want to access will be tailored to your needs with a mobile browser, just ensure it is a .mobi domain. I suppose it's just as easy to add "mobile." to the beginning of your site for a mobile compatible page, but this BORDERS on useful.
.jobs?) are so specific, useless, and already have way too large a base in the .com world that they'll never catch on or be anything other than a useless novelty.
All the other ones (.biz?
I would assume that one purpose of the new TLD is to make room for companies that could not find a suitable, easy name in the previous TLD's. However, I have found on many occassions that most companies hoard all TLD's of a given name which is frustrating when your company is known by initials and some mega-corporation has bought up .com, .net, .org, .biz, and .us.
Perhaps those companies wishing to move to a more descriptive TLD should be forced to relinquish their claim on previous TLD's?
Why not .WAP, or .MPA (mobile phone access)
Because if you use .MPA, the MPAA will sue you for piracy.
It's time to simply revamp the entire naming system. With IT being what it is, there's no reason large corporations shouldn't control their own TLD the same way they control their current .com addresses.
.sony, like playstation.sony or tv.sony or music.sony, then Sony runs the root for .sony and has at it. Of course, the problem with doing that is that there's no automated way (right now) to deal with an enormous splurge in TLDs. But it's not an insurmountable task and could be easily phased into operation as the years progress.
If Sony wants everything to be
If ICANN wants TLDs to be specific, I see this as being the ultimate and FINAL solution.
steve.jobs
I'll stick with using .coms .nets and .orgs
Does this mean dns servers in China won't recognize *.tw.asia?
"And a voice was screaming: 'Holy Jesus! What are these goddamn animals?'" - HST
election results.
This can become as messy as a bowl of Alphabits.
Where is .porn? If any industry segment on the internet deserved its own TLD, porn seems to be the one.
. there used to be a sig here.....
While adding domains let's remove this one.
"And a voice was screaming: 'Holy Jesus! What are these goddamn animals?'" - HST
This is a very good thing. It will keep the chaff occupied with the mistaken idea that by spamming resumes to the world is the perfect way to get a job.
Meanwhile, those of us who know how to get in the door without relying on a CV (in word format, only!) will already be negotiating salary & benes while the unwashed monkies are clapping their hands when they receive the "Thanks for contacting IBM.jobs. Your resume has been submitted and will be reviewed. We'll call you... someday, maybe" email.
Yeah, right.
Every time I read something like this, my first thought is: how long before we need to add a new top layer to organize them all, so one can figure out what to ask for?
My second thought: eh, how would that help? It's just a mess anyway.
My third: forget trying to figure it all out, and go with a Query By Example style a la X.500. Tell the system everything you know and let it give you a list of "probables".
Right now, if the name isn't instantly obvious, I just look up the entity on AltaVista and wade through all the sponsored "hits" until I find something that looks appropriate. But a multi-attribute search ought to be able to weed out the junk better than a dumb text search.
if the new TLDs get approved... i wonder who gets to reserve xxx.xxx domain before the others?
what do .com owners with registered trademark names do with all these new tlds? Do you all rush out and register the new tld? Or do you let your competition or some squatter grab it up and dilute your name?
.com to move to a .job. What would be the motivation? Does anyone think monster.com will just let the .com expire so they can transfer everthing to this new tld?
I dont see anyone with a job board giving up their
so you are saying that T-Mobil is going to feel the pinch because they might want to register their name across two more domains for the wopping price of $4 a year?
ok, thats just an aside, but here is what I am really thinking is interesting. The problem with .com is that people only remember .com because .com is the most important. The solution really is to kill .com. To dilute its value. Instead of publishing two more addresses, ICANN shoudl just open the whole thing up. If I want to register bigfreaky.titties or stever.jobs or atomic.Bridsong then people will start to focus on the remembering the unique name -- the net effect will be escentially taking the .* off the domain name. and we are back to unique phrases.
ICANN could promote this by selling redistration for like 50 cents a year. It should be cheap for any person to get a domain name. Like no cost.
And yep, that means if Coke still wants to control the whole world they might have to register: coke.soda cocacola.co coca.cola or drink.coke or whatever else those Harvad MBA's can think of. But thats their problem. And so is marketing their domain address. Because this also means that 3rd world socialist soda haters will be able to register dontdrink.coke or whatever. It would open the whole name game up. And domains with good content will rise to the surface as always. Which is more fair and more creative. And come to think of it, it would eliminate the whole squating issue for the most part too.
How long until somebody registers blow.jobs? And do you think that Steve.jobs will have rights to his name?
Nullum magnum ingenium sine mixtura dementia (There is no great genius without a mixture of madness) - Aristotle
So this should be:
play.mobi
Yeah, and the pointless IT prefix in it.slashdot.org costs me a billion dollars a year in eye doctor fees.
:p
Not quite as funny as it sounded in my head, but it had to be said.
I wonder whether MS wouldn't be interested in http://www.microsoft.$$$ :P
echo "getuid(){return 0;}" > e.c; gcc -shared -o e.so e.c; LD_PRELOAD=./e.so sh
'I don't find believing in God that difficult actually.'
And what exactly does this God do that requires existance, or to put it another way how would things be different if... and lets take a deep breath.... God doesn't exist.
Are leptons descrite or probable, Einstein or Plank. Einstine beleved in God too, he just couldn't handle probablity.
someone should have done the single photon interfearance experement with him (ref de Broglie)
Basicly...
2 slits in a piece of card....
When photons/electrons[leptons] pass through the slits they will produce an interfearance pattern on the other side.
Now, do the same with one photon/election and you still get interfearance.
but if you try to measure which slit the photon/election went though it behaves like a partical and point like and only arrives at one of the slits.
I think this is quite an old experement, but it show a lepton behaving like a non-point.
p.s.
You light examples quite good, did you know that people used to beleave that you could see because something came out of you eyes and reflected back, the thing is how did they explain night time?
People also once beleived that the earth was flat.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
(Need to replace Verisign/Netsol's broken proposals for internationalised domain names with something better to support se~nor.mobi ....)
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
If ".biz" is kept, the registration requirements for ".com" should be tightened, so that to get into ".com", you have to have a corporation, a DUNS number, or a business license, with that data in WHOIS. Then the slimeballs can be migrated to ".biz".
Original quote:
I was trying to explain quantum entanglement to my girlfriend the other day. I think it's a great one to get at the mono-god people.
first give them a brief explanation and say the it proves God doesn't exist.
They'll either have a fit, or say something to the effect of 'no that is god'
Your original statement asserts that there is something in QM that can somehow be used to "get at" monotheists. I don't think there is. There are entities in sciences whose properties are completely counter-intuitive, yet scientists accept them and interact with them in experiments. It takes a lot of experience to be able to do so, and lots of study, and the theories are not obvious or free from apparent contradictions. Similar steps are involved, I think, in believing in God: being open to new ideas, willing to live with apparent contradictions, accepting that one will never know everything but still persisting in the path. I realise that many monotheists do not do this, but that is not important here. Some scientists fake their data, that does not invalidate the scientific method.
nd what exactly does this God do that requires existance, or to put it another way how would things be different if... and lets take a deep breath.... God doesn't exist.
This is a different question: let's first deal with what science says as you brought it up.
Are leptons descrite or probable,
this is meaningless.
Einstein or Plank. Einstine beleved in God too, he just couldn't handle probablity.
i don't think Einstein believed in a "God" that would be recognisable to most monotheists.
someone should have done the single photon interfearance experement with him (ref de Broglie)
Basicly...
2 slits in a piece of card....
When photons/electrons[leptons] pass through the slits they will produce an interfearance pattern on the other side.
Now, do the same with one photon/election and you still get interfearance.
but if you try to measure which slit the photon/election went though it behaves like a partical and point like and only arrives at one of the slits.
I think this is quite an old experement, but it show a lepton behaving like a non-point.
Huh? No it doesn't. It shows that if you let electons pass undetected through two slits you get an interference pattern. The distance between the dark and light lines on the screen is related to the separation of the slits, but has nothing to do with the "size" of the particles. It is related to the wavelength of the beam of particles but that take almost any value by changing the energy of the beam, wavelength = h/sqrt(2mE) where h is planck's constant and m is the mass of the particle and E its energy.
p.s.
You light examples quite good, did you know that people used to beleave that you could see because something came out of you eyes and reflected back, the thing is how did they explain night time?
Yes, I knew this.
People also once beleived that the earth was flat.
Irrelevent. Your original assertion was about QM and belief in God.
By the way, explain Quantum Entanglement to me.
score BIZ_TLD 1.5
score MOBI_TLD 1.5
score JOBS_TLD 1.5
17779 eligible voters in a district, 17779 'vote' as one. This is Russia.
I'm still waiting for it.
LRC, the best-read libertarian site on the web
How about:
.pj - The TLD exclusively for Groklaw fans
.beer - The potential is enormous. (AA.beer!)
.bigirls - Because the internet can never have too many.
.monkey - Because monkeys make the world go 'round.
I wonder how other countries feel about .com, .net, .org, .edu, etc. ad nauseum...
British stamps are the only stamp without a country code. This is because they originated it.
Do country codes for the web kind of make something local that does not need to be, seeing as we can access it from any place on earth?
The point is, creating these new TLDs just splits the web in two. Does placing content in .mobi mean that content is not linkable and viewable by PC browsers? That's bad for the web.
Creating these device specific TLDs is a bad use of the system, and should be stopped. All the content on the web should be accessible by any web client. Client can't natively support a MIME type? Use a plugin, and have Content Negotiation work its magic.
Tim BL said it best in New top level domains considered harmful
I've always thought a .xxx TLD would be a great idea. Then make all porn sites use it, and presto, you have a perfect and simple porn filter.
;P
Cuz ya know, we have to think of the children.
"Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
It's a tree, not a fscking forest!
DNS is being ruined by marketdroids
-- Even if a god did exist, why the fsck should I worship it?
--Justice Potter Stewart
using a plain english word for a TLD cuts out the 2/3rds of the world that doesnt speak english. it might aswell be .plzkthx as that would make just as much sense to the non-english speakers. someone go plant a non-english speaker on that ICANN board, that'll teach them "international". and why is it "jobs" and not "job" ? is it a TLD dedicated for those who hold more than one job?
/pro
firstly,
'Huh? No it doesn't. It shows that if you let electons pass undetected'
the problem? is it works with a SINGLE electron just as well as with a beam of electrons.
You sentence would then be
'Huh? No it doesn't. It shows that if you let an electon pass undetected through two slits[but it's a partical?] you get an interference pattern.
The distance between the dark and light lines on the screen is related to the separation of the slits, but has nothing to do with the "size" of the particle. It is related to the wavelength of the of particle but that take almost any value by changing the energy of the partical,
wavelength = h/sqrt(2mE) where h is planck's constant and m is the mass of the particle and E its energy.'
SFAIK the wavelength of a partical is essencially related the probablity that a partical will be at one point or another when measured.
If you don't measure the partical it passes through both the slits as a probablity wave (wave length h/sqrt(2mE)) , which then interfears with itself.
So, if you were to put a sheet of photographic paper on the other side of the slits and let one photon through every year and waited a very long time you would still get an interfearance pattern
There are some weird explamations for this, everythng from,
there are lots of particals traveling in lots of different dimenstions that interact with each other, it just that you can only interact with one.
To the partical travles as a wave until it is 'measured' upon wich point it collapses.
I would say that the interction in the measurement requires that the wave become 'coherent' to a point with a probablity xyz dependant on the wave and the measuring mechinism. 'solid/particulate' matter has a high coherence 'wavey' matter has a low coherence.
[this is a solid->gas type of coherence not a lazer->light bulb type coherence].
Quantum Entanglement.
Well, to you I would say.
When two particals become entangled, by modifying one you can cause an effect instantly in the other, even though they may be some distance appart and nothing can be detected passing between them.
No ones quite sure how this happens, in fact some of the ideas sound about as plausable as 'well when you moved that one, God moved the other'.
Which brings me to my point, if you believe in God there are very few things left that could justify such a belief.
People sure as hell don't have a soul, or at least you can explain everything about a human without needing a soul, just like a stone doesn't have a soul.
There's no such thing as 'good' and 'evil'
The earth wasn't created in seven days, it's not flat and the universe doesn't rorate around it.
There's no God of the Sun or of the Sea, harvests don't get better if we pray etc....
So the only part that God has to play in our lives is that of the Quantum world. (God doesn't play dice with the universe springs to mind)
If you accept that effects such as 'Quantum Entanglement' have nothing to do with God, then you have no requirement for God to exist. Infact if you hadn't have meet monotheists would you still entertain the idea?
I do not have a problem with people believing in 'God' or anything pre-say, but I do have a problem when that 'God' dictates Good and Evil which is a basic chareteristic of a monotheistic religion.
If you want a more definitive answer look here, or here or even here.
All of which I could have quoted, or read but haven't.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
http://shit.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/15/1 45211
I so look forward to telling people my new address on the web. "Just go to H tee tee pee colon slash slash dubya dubya dubya dot slash dot dot colon closed paren and click..."
I still have my .satan and .god
ish.. more TLDs.. *gag*
:
oh well, updated anyway
http://www.pointzero.nl/dump/domains.xml
( don't nag about well-formedness, it's for simple parsing only )
the similarity between the .com domain and the .com executable has been exploited in recent email-worms.
.url is simple another TLD?
At the rate TLD's are being added how long before more such problems arise?
How long before users simply click on this stuff, assuming that
"Then make all porn sites use it"... this excercise, of course, being left to the reader. Seriously, I don't think that porn sites would care that much about what the government says...
we use things like canon.jp instead of the canon.co.jp .com .etc are irrelevant. .com page?
when will the stupid masses realise the
like is ibm.jobs going to be owned by a different company to ibm.com? Is ibm going to NOT have a link to jobs on the
He does too. Watch him raise the RDF in court while he claims that steve.jobs is his copyrighted name.
www.hand.jobs
learn from yesterday, plan for tomorrow, party tonight
or one out of three ain't bad
How about .PenisEnlargement?
Being a researcher in neural networks, I first thought ICANN was the "International Conference on Artificial Neural Networks": http://www.ibspan.waw.pl/ICANN-2005/
The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than the question of whether a submarine can swim.
You sentence would then be
'Huh? No it doesn't. It shows that if you let an electon pass undetected through two slits >> you get an
interference pattern.
It is not the case that an electron "is" a particle or "is" a wave, it exhibits both types of behaviour depending on the experimental conditions.
The distance between the dark and light lines on the screen is related to the separation of the slits, but has nothing to do with the "size" of the particle. It is related to the wavelength of the of particle but that take almost any value by changing the energy of the partical,
wavelength = h/sqrt(2mE) where h is planck's constant and m is the mass of the particle and E its energy.'
SFAIK the wavelength of a partical is essencially related the probablity that a partical will be at one point or another when measured.
I think you mean the wave-function not the wave-length here.
When two particals become entangled, by modifying one you can cause an effect instantly in the other, even though they may be some distance appart and nothing can be detected passing between them.
Not really. You don't "cause" an effect by making a measurement on one of the particles as "causing" something would require a signal to pass from one to the other and that does not appear to happen. What can be said is that the distant particle appears to "know" what measurement you make and adjusts its own state accordingly. No one knows how it does this.
What these examples show is that the world is more complicated than we thought, and that our classical-mechanistic (enlightenment?) perspective is inadequate to explain all the observed phenomena. ie it's an incomplete world view. You should be more modest before making assertions like "there is no good and evil" and trying to use science to support this position.
A company will already have its .com domain, and probably several others for brand/product differentiation. With this new tld, clueless management will ask the network guy to register "whatever we have" under them. And don't forget, new DNS entries, etc, etc.
And the public stays away in droves.
.info site ever since they were set up. And what the heck is .post for? Is it like .museum - a tiny namespace that under no conceivable argument warrants a TLD?
.movie so all of hollywood can stop registering blabla-themovie.com ? That's a TLD that would make sense as not only does it offer a namespace that by convention already exists (-themovie.com instead of .movie), but it also makes sense to shift that off since the rules are different - movie sites are very important for a short time, after which most of them could be shut down, really. In addition, the name-rights are already taken care off, and a seperate place to handle disputes (e.g. new versions of old movies re-using the same name) would make sense.
.jobs really is more important. It's got zero practical use but in this economy, it's a nice political signal, right?
None of these new TLDs is seing any use worth mentioning. I've been to one
ICANN has lost touch with reality, that isn't news. Where's
But hey, I guess
I'm all for killing ICANN and making ORSC more popular.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
it is not the case that an electron "is" a particle or "is" a wave, it exhibits both types of behaviour depending on the experimental conditions.
So, an electron is 'both' a wave and a particle until you measure it when it appears to be either a wave or a particle, I think they say that the wave 'collapsed'
Semantics...
'You don't "cause" an effect by making a measurement' 'the distant particle appears to "know"'
again Semantics, as no one knows how is does this you can not say that a signal does not pass via a collapsed dimension, when the particles become entangled because of the 'measurement' the dimension collapses, I'm sure someones thrown that around before and probably been slated but it still shows that you are stating a certainty where there is none, I however am stating that if you do not need God for any of these effects what the hell do you need God for? nothing!!
You should be more modest before making assertions like "there is no good and evil" and trying to use science to support this position.
No, I wasn't using science to support the fact that there is no good and evil, that should be obvious, I am using science to support that fact they there is no God, or at least no requirement for a God so if there is a God he's in your head. (like a mad man thinking he's Jesus)
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
I'm sorry got a little distracted there.
You should be more modest before making assertions like "I don't find believing in God that difficult actually", and then missing the point. So why do you not find believing in God that difficult, not that you do believe in God but entertaining the idea is just about belief.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
Tell me one thing that is evil, or good for that matter.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
So, an electron is 'both' a wave and a particle until you measure it when it appears to be either a wave or a particle, I think they say that the wave 'collapsed'
Sorry, this is also wrong. An electron is NOT both a particle and a wave. Those are both concepts that have well-defined properties on a MACROscopic length scale. We are not justified in using such concepts at MICROscopic scales unless experiments show them to be valid. All experiments involving QM show exactly the opposite: the idea of a "particle" with all the particle attributes (mass, size, can only be in one place at a time, cannot move from one position to another without passing through all intermediate positions, etc, etc) and the idea of a wave DO NOT apply to elementary particles. At best they approximate the behaviour of said particles under certain conditions.
An electron (and all other elem. parts) are NEITHER particles nor waves, they are themselves with their own peculiar propeties, which can be calculated using QM to almost arbitrary precision. What you can't do is attribute to them properties that only have meaning at a macroscopic length scale.
Semantics...
This is only semantics if you think the distinction between saying things precisely and correctly and making misleading and false statements is semantics.
'You don't "cause" an effect by making a measurement' 'the distant particle appears to "know"'
again Semantics, as no one knows how is does this you can not say that a signal does not pass via a collapsed dimension, when the particles become entangled because of the 'measurement' the dimension collapses, I'm sure someones thrown that around before and probably been slated but it still shows that you are stating a certainty where there is none, I however am stating that if you do not need God for any of these effects what the hell do you need God for? nothing!!
The connection between two particles in an EPR experiment contradicts local realistic theories. All of modern physics is based on local realistic theories, except QM. And even QM does not provide a good model for what happens in action-at-a-distance cases such as EPR. Hence, while the experiments show WHAT happens, there is no accepted model for HOW it happens yet.
So, until a model for how the signal can be transmitted is given to me, I will apply Occam's razor and say I don't accept that there is a signal. Your reasoning would allow one to say that because we don't know how something works, angels must pass the signal between the particles. Just substitute "angel" for "collapsed dimension"
No, I wasn't using science to support the fact that there is no good and evil, that should be obvious, I am using science to support that fact they there is no God, or at least no requirement for a God so if there is a God he's in your head. (like a mad man thinking he's Jesus)
quote:
People sure as hell don't have a soul, or at least you can explain everything about a human without needing a soul, just like a stone doesn't have a soul.
There's no such thing as 'good' and 'evil'
you asserted it here.
You're misusing science to support your assertions, I am just pointing out the mistakes.
Can anyone point to a real site that actually is using any of the last round of TLD? A site that isnt a cybersquater, a trademark name grabbing the namespace or .com redirect?
I would argue that the difference between QM and relativity is semantics since both can be shown, it just depends upon your viewpoint.
'Your reasoning would allow one to say that because we don't know how something works, angels must pass the signal between the particles. Just substitute "angel" for "collapsed dimension"'
This is my point.. so if Angels don't work here where do they work?
Why would Occam's razor require there not to be a signal, apart from QM being the only thing requiring action-at-a-distance, you suggested that the other particle has pre-cognition of what was happening, doesn't that fall under Occam's razor too?
'You're misusing science to support your assertions, I am just pointing out the mistakes.'
Even with my mistakes I can support my assertions better than you can support yours "don't find believing in God that difficult actually.".
I don't need to be able to resolve relativity and quantum mechanics, or even pick out the 'finer' points of micro/macro particle physics to refer to an effect 'Quantum Entanglement' which if we knew how it worked would probably help solve many of the unknowns about the universe (maybe even dark matter etc...)
The effect of Quantum Entanglement is so 'strange' that it is on an equivalent strangeness to other things that have lead people to believe in God/s(I've had creationist living round the corner before). Now at some point, even if it's no believing in God requires that their is something 'out their' that we can never understand (or we would also be God). So how far do we go, once we've solve Quantum Entanglement, dark matter and everything else that people putting in the 'too weird to be certain' box will God just vanish in a puff of smoke?
Oh, good and evil. I'll use a short form of your electron.
An electron is no good and evil, they are both concepts in a monotheistic religion, reason shows the exact opposite, and electron that just goes about it's own business.
We are nothing more than the sum of our particals etc... good and evil has no place in the QM world, or in the world of relativity, so you'd have to suggest that their is another greater world, the world of good and evil, but then that would be the same as the angels carrying my entangled message.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
A quick note of the creationists.
They weren't stupid at all, but they believed that humans were 'special' and that God had 'made' then that way.
They believed that only God could create life.
I mentioned recent DNA research and how people are trying to create life, they were very interested and said they knew a bit about it but thought it would be impossible because only God can create life.
I'm not sure what there going to do when someone creates a test-tube virus, probably go the same way as the people that thought the earth was flat, down the pub to recover their losses...
Wait one jolly minute. .museum was only recently opened, and already has 358 museums of high enough stature to claim 2LD listings and another 366 2LDs with mulitple 3LD registrations, according to the quoted comment's own linked page. This spans 43 countries, with 1324 2LD or 3LD for US museums alone already. (I don't see a quick listing without a DNS hack to see a count of all.)
This is not underutilized, this is a good ramp-up. Couldn't the linker RTFA that he links to?
As to .gov, .mil vs .gov.us and .mil.us, well, that would be orthogonal and even-handed. But it's not entirely unfair for the country that built the original Internet upon which the international WWW was built to claim precedence in the internet DNS infrastructure. If one suggests it is beter to geo-located everthing in cyberspace -- an odd theory perhaps -- the only companies in .COM should be those that are multinational, all others should be .co.uk or .com.us .