Slashdot Mirror


New .XXX Top Level Domain

Jigabug writes "There's a story over at Yahoo! News mentioning yesterday's approval by ICANN on a new .xxx TLD. Domains are currently planned to be offered at 60.00 each for registration. The .xxx joins the recently approved .jobs and .travel." From the article: "Adult-oriented sites, a $12 billion industry, probably could begin buying xxx addresses as early as fall or winter depending on ICM's plans, ICANN spokesman Kieran Baker said. The new pornography suffix was among 10 under consideration by the regulatory group..." CNN and the BBC have commentary as well.

54 of 543 comments (clear)

  1. Hmmmm... by Seoulstriker · · Score: 4, Funny

    Why not .orgy ?

    --
    I am defenseless. Use your button. Mod me down with all of your hatred.
    1. Re:Hmmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny
      The .xxx joins the recently approved .jobs and .travel.


      Why using .xxx or .orgy when you can do things like www.blow.jobs, www.group.jobs or even www.talk.jobs (all due credit to Miller's Sin City)
    2. Re:Hmmmm... by JuliusRV · · Score: 2, Funny

      Why not .orgy ?

      What about .cum?

    3. Re:Hmmmm... by ABaumann · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hello!

      What about .sex?

    4. Re:Hmmmm... by ajs318 · · Score: 4, Funny

      The dole office on Normanton Road used to have the words "JOBS JOBS JOBS" plastered across the downstairs windows. The upstairs suite was vacant. I wanted to rent the upstairs rooms just so I could have "BLOW BLOW BLOW" written across the windows. And, of course, while I was there, I could sell a bit of blow as well .....

      --
      Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
    5. Re:Hmmmm... by Conanymous+Award · · Score: 2, Funny

      Not to mention www.steve.jobs

    6. Re:Hmmmm... by plover · · Score: 4, Funny

      Because it's easier to type .xxx with one hand?

      --
      John
    7. Re:Hmmmm... by sharp-bang · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Agreed. If they wanted to protect kids they should have created a .kids TLD for content specifically for children's use, making it quick-n-easy to whitelist the domain for kids to browse from ome/school/library networks, and making it easy to identify abusers of the TLD.

      --
      #!
    8. Re:Hmmmm... by loqi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hello; "XXX" is a euphemism. Just use ".sex" and there isn't any confusion.

      Unless you don't speak English, of course. Given that we don't have language-specific namespaces for these things, XXX is a pretty reasonable choice.

      --
      If other reasons we do lack, we swear no one will die when we attack
  2. Well great! by DHalcyon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    More TLDs noone is going to use because ".com" just sounds cooler.

    1. Re:Well great! by linuxci · · Score: 5, Funny
      Sure .jobs and .travel are going to take a long time to get used properly.


      And the porn industry will be quick to register blow.jobs a lot sooner than they register one of these .xxx tlds

    2. Re:Well great! by smittyoneeach · · Score: 2, Funny

      There may also be pressure from some who feel "We must prick holes in the stiff fronts erected by the opposition at every turn"[1] to the idea of putting all pornography in one easily filtered location.

      [1] George Carlin, though my quote may not be exact.

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    3. Re:Well great! by Ignominious+Cow+Herd · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Our thrust is to prick holes in the stiff front erected by the smut dealers. We must keep mounting an offensive to penetrate any crack in his defenses, so we can lay to rest his dominate position. We want him hung and we want stiff action. Let's get on him. Let's ram through a stiff bail law so it'll be hard for him to get it up. We've got to come together so we can whip this thing into submission. It'll be hard on us but we can't lick it by being soft."

      G.C.

      --
      Lump lingered last in line for brains, and the ones she got were sorta rotten and insane.
    4. Re:Well great! by Ruphuz · · Score: 2, Informative
      .cat is the domain for the Catalan culture. (Not limited to the boundaries of the nation within Spain)

      That was a necessary precision, thanks.

      .cat for the culture, .ct for the country.

      http://www.add-ct.info/ for more.

      --
      My other post is a First.
  3. Obligitary by tonywestonuk · · Score: 4, Funny

    Goatse.XXX

  4. this could lead to a new breed of bad jokes... by PrivateDonut · · Score: 3, Funny

    eg. "your mummas house has a .xxx address!"

  5. S'more... by Seoulstriker · · Score: 2, Funny

    .jiz ?

    --
    I am defenseless. Use your button. Mod me down with all of your hatred.
    1. Re:S'more... by __aahlyu4518 · · Score: 5, Funny

      or .cum

    2. Re:S'more... by zrk · · Score: 3, Funny

      Because, as much as you'd like to believe, .jiz doesn't cover everything.

      Everything related to the content, that is.

  6. blow.jobs by October_30th · · Score: 2, Funny
    The .xxx joins the recently approved .jobs

    I'm pretty sure there's a blow.jobs-joke somewhere in there.

    --
    The owls are not what they seem
  7. I can't wait. by analog_line · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I look forward to the 20-year running gag that will be the legal battle over "sex.xxx".

  8. Wow, they did something right! by BandwidthHog · · Score: 4, Funny

    I think this is the first actually useful TLD to be introduced in years. Congrats ICANN, you actually did something worthwhile and managed to justify about two weeks of this year's operating budget.

    Now of course, we'll see who actually moves from COM to XXX voluntarily.

    *sound of crickets chirping*

    --

    Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
    1. Re:Wow, they did something right! by garett_spencley · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This is NOT good news.

      1) ISPs can and many will undoubtedly block .xxx

      2) If any country decides to introduce legislation mandating the use of .xxx for adult sites it will SEVERELY hurt the adult industry as many people who own hundreds of domains would have to pay much greater amount than they currently do for .xxx equivalents ... and you can bet that domain squatters are going to do whatever they can to make a fortune off of registering .xxx equivalents of popular adult sites.

      It's already known that $10 off of each domain sale is designated to go to IFFOR to "contribute to issues facing the adult online industry" .. however, most savvy webmasters pay less than $10 / domain as it is right now... and any adult organization supporting the new .xxx is undoubtedly only in it for personal financial gain .. as the overwhelming disapproval of adopting the TLD by the adult industry as a whole has been seen time and time again.

  9. New Google Site by Ironsides · · Score: 2, Funny
    --
    Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
  10. Re:Yeah, like they're going to voluntarily do this by Shaper_pmp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Even better, from TFA:

    "ICM contends the "xxx" Web addresses, which it plans to sell for $60 a year, will protect children from online smut if adult sites voluntarily adopt the suffix so filtering software used by families can more effectively block access to those sites. The $60 price is roughly ten times higher than prices other companies charge for dot-com names."

    So... what? The .xxx top-level domain only exists to help filter pr0n (blithely assuming parents all use filtering software)? And it costs ten times what a .com address does? And because it's new and non-standard people are less likely to recognise/remember/use it?

    Wow, sounds like they're really stacking up those reasons to change to a .xxx address, eh?

    --
    Everything in moderation, including moderation itself
  11. It might save my eyes by Nytewynd · · Score: 4, Funny

    Next time I need some sporting equipment and go to Dicks.com I won't be unpleasantly surprised.

    Adding the .xxx might help normal domains register what they want. There are so many porn sites, there is a chance that your domain might be taken and filled with horse on midget porn. It might be a bad decision to use BiteMyNipples.com for a business anyway, but as long as you stay away from the .xxx your customers might not get tricked.

    This only matters if porn decides to use the .xxx anyway though, and there really isn't any reason for them to start. Old sites probably won't convert. New sites might choose either or both. I guess it is just one more chance for a site to get the URL they want.

    --
    /. ++
  12. Which is the top reason they *won't* move by Kjella · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If we can start moving all the pornography on to .xxx sites then we could make it far easier for people who dislike pornography to block it out .

    Which is the top reason they *won't* move. Porn sites are fully aware that many people are infact paying for porn while pretending not to like it. People have subpoenaed adult channel subscription to disprove "community standards" and found that lots of people that supposedly don't like porn are subscribing to porn.

    It is the same reason telemarketers would love to call people that have reserved themselves against telemarketing, and the reason the show pop-ups to people with pop-up blockers. Many people are weak and have installed those in "self-defense". So you stay on .com, and get all the people that have blocked .xxx but will, if you just tempt them properly, subscribe to your site. Result: Profit!

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  13. Re:Would that be a problem? by MrWim · · Score: 2, Insightful

    you mean .org.us ?

  14. STUPID idea, and this is why by typical · · Score: 4, Insightful

    but why can't there be legislation that FORCES pornographic websites to use such a suffix from now on?

    Because the entire world uses DNS, and the entire world doesn't have a consistent standard for what is socially acceptable when it comes to sexuality.

    Some Islamic countries consider it socially unacceptable to show anything other than the eyes and hands of a woman.

    In the US, we'd consider the French and British tendancies to stick topless women on TV unacceptable.

    Japan has a real problem with showing genital hair, but no problem at all with representing underage characters.

    The problem is that it suddenly tries to stick a single moral standard on the entire world to make a few short-sighted people who are agitating for an "xxx" domain (because they're scared Junior *might* discover what a woman looks like before getting married, God forbid!)

    This promises to create an almost unlimited number of social problems. Why, why, *why* is ICANN letting this through? Okay, if we want to have a .xxx.us domain, we can make it, but there is zero reason aside from registrars pushing for more short-term money and a few short-sighted people pushing to "solve" the "Internet porn problem".

    It's possible to build a worldwide content-rating system, but tying it into DNS (at least using the current approach) is just plain stupid. You want websites to be rated, add a /rating.txt file that works like the robots.txt that indicates level of content, and have web browsers and proxies respect it. For Christ's sake. But don't do something goddamn stupid like add a .xxx TLD.

    --
    Any program relying on (nontrivial) preemptive multithreading will be buggy.
    1. Re:STUPID idea, and this is why by kihjin · · Score: 2, Funny

      In the US, we'd consider the French and British tendancies to stick topless women on TV unacceptable.

      We do?

      --
      This slashdot-related signature is a stub. You can help kihjin by expanding it.
  15. Re:Making parental controls easier by ylikone · · Score: 2, Insightful
    "What are the chances of voluntary compliance by the industry though?"

    ZERO!

    You will just end up with twice as many porn sites now.

    --
    Meh.
  16. Re:I figure... by ABaumann · · Score: 2, Funny

    Meh, the most porn I've seen resides at 127.0.0.1

  17. Re:Would that be a problem? by CastrTroy · · Score: 4, Funny

    But then Irish non-profit organizations would have to use .org.ie. Which I don't think they would really like to do.

    --

    Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  18. Re:I figure... by Intron · · Score: 2, Insightful

    and who decides what is porn and illegal on .com or .org now? If a bare nipple sets off a hellstorm [oops, heckstorm] then you better watch your ass [oops, behind] or your site will get banned. Fortunately, obscenity isn't allowed on /.

    --
    Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
  19. Why is this a bad idea? by jkgamer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I do not understand why the comments I've been reading suggest that this will be another avenue to censorship on the web. In reality, it is an opporunity to avoid censorship. I suppose it does provide an easy path for governments to ban access to the .xxx domains, however the purveyors of adult material would just continue to use the rest of the top-level domains to reach consumers. Instead this could be a great benefit to both the seller and consumer by providing a non-intrusive channel to such material. It would provide parents with a tool to prevent inappropriate material from reaching their children. And while most everyone has a general curiosity and interest, they don't especially welcome explicit images flashing across their computer screen simply because they mistyped a URL address. It is the extreme positions that state we either elimante or distribute to all that are madness. There is nothing bad about using a little common sense and responsability. (Unless, of course, you are a typical teenager with raging hormones. Then you can politely ignore this comment and continue your search for 'boobies')

  20. Just a price hike by nietsch · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Porn is one of the most profiting busineses on the internet. What if you just could bunch those profitable business together and force them to pay more? In TFA it suggest a price of 60$ which is about 10 times more then a normal domain. Why should it be this expensive? Are domains with the letter X that much harder to register than domains with the letter c?
    This is nothing more than a gamble that legisation will force adult content to .xxx. The registar hopes to cash in on that move. Since the expense of 60$ is just small change with profitable porn, they may just get away with it too. Maybe /. should ask a licence to print money from congress too?

    --
    This space is intentionally staring blankly at you
    1. Re:Just a price hike by jumpingfred · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Is porn really that profitable? Who pays for porn?

    2. Re:Just a price hike by rho · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Sounds like classic discriminatory pricing to me. Of course, there's nothing wrong with that. I'll wager good money that you're also in favor of a progressive income tax. This is Slashdot, after all...

      Porn sites are ALL for-profit ventures. A lot of .com sites (and .net and .org) are financed out of the pocket of regular folks for numerous reasons. Moving adult sites into a "ghetto" would solve one of the Slashdot crowds' pet peeves--Internet filters that filter breast cancer sites. (Why Slashdot is so fascinated with breast cancer is a fat-geek joke just waiting to happen.)

      Put all the adult sites in .xxx! If you don't want porn, you block all .xxx sites! Simple! Effective! And no breast cancer sites will be harmed in the process! And now Slashdot is all up in arms about an adult "ghetto". Not that the adult sites would agree to do this to begin with--the industry is built on slowly whittling away the public's resistance to adult entertainment, and that's hard to do when you're relegated to an easily avoidable TLD.

      --
      Potato chips are a by-yourself food.
    3. Re:Just a price hike by a_nonamiss · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Decent idea

      But what is porn? Who decides what qualifies as porn? How about I open a lingerie shop that only sells panties. Then I put up a bunch of pictures of topless women. I am operating a legitimate business. So what if I get a bit of extra traffic. That's not my business. Should I have to move to a .xxx domain? On the opposite side, parents would have a legitimate complaint if they found their 8-year old looking at my panties-only site. But where is the line? Who decides what's "decent?" Sounds like more government oversight into our private lives.

      Another very real-world example: What about realdoll.com (intentionally not linked. Cut and paste, you pervert...) They sell a legitimate product, but you could still wank off to their website. Putting them on a .xxx domain could cripple their business, and they don't even have pictures of (real) naked people on their site.

      I'm just playing devil's advocate here to spur some discussion, but you have to be careful when you ask for government for oversight. It's like making a wish to the Devil. He's crafty enough to take your wish and end up distoring it to screw you over...

      --
      -Arthur
      Cave ne ante ullas catapultas ambules
    4. Re:Just a price hike by mormop · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Is porn really that profitable? Who pays for porn?"

      Teenagers whose parents leave their credit cards laying around.

      --
      Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
    5. Re:Just a price hike by NetSettler · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What if you just could bunch those profitable business together and force them to pay more? ... Why should it be this expensive?

      Indeed. It almost makes sense if you were thinking "well, it costs the community a great deal to cope with the problem of porn 'overflow'. But once you realize that the extra money will not go to any of the people who feel the pain, it looks like outright extortion.

      Also, it's not enough to keep any real porn company from doing business. What it's enough to do is to be a barrier to new entrants to the market--people who don't yet have a cash flow.

      But, of course, we don't really care about treating this industry fairly, right? I think it's a bit of judgmentalism about the industry that says "no one will dare complain", and if they do, we can probably just ignore them and expect no one to care if they get outraged. The business is either illegal or it's not. And if it's not illegal, then I don't see that it's fair to charge it a different amount. Is there no requirement of fairness in ICANN's charter? Does it not even occur to ICANN that this price might be unfair? Or does it just not matter to them?

      --

      Kent M Pitman
      Philosopher, Technologist, Writer

    6. Re:Just a price hike by no-karma-no-worries · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Are domains with the letter X that much harder to register than domains with the letter c?
      They must be using Scrabble for their administration...
  21. Re:i'm certain i'm not the first to think of this by Scutter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    but why can't there be legislation that FORCES pornographic websites to use such a suffix from now on?

    Who decides what constitutes "pornography"? You? Congress? What if Iran got to decide? They have internet access, too, remember.

    A simple litmus test could be that the obscenity rules that apply to broadcasters being the yardstick against which .xxx compulsory domain naming apply

    Yeah, the FCC has done such a great job of applying random, inconsistent rules to broadcasters. Skin is immoral and dangerous to our children, but extreme violence is perfectly fine? Also note that radio broadcasters have *much* more stringent rules than over-the-air television broadcasters do.

    it's a win-win situation according to me... what am i not getting?

    Government-mandated morality is not a good thing because it relies on one subset of the population's interpretation of "morals". This is not to say that the TLD is a bad idea, but it needs to be voluntary, not compulsory.

    --

    "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
  22. IAWTP by trezor · · Score: 3, Insightful

    they should be looking at the needs of other net users. .blog would be a good start.

    It would make it so much easier to filter. Google: "usefulstuff -site:.blog". I like it allready.

    --
    Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
  23. Re:Would that be a problem? by Lifewish · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I guess your beef is more with them actually legislating it, but that doesn't seem like such a big deal to me either.

    As a Brit, I'm not too keen on the American govt trying to claim legislative control over the internet. If I decide to put kinky pictures on my site (which, as you will note, is at a .org domain name), does that mean that I get sued by the American govt? If the plan is for the legislation to only apply to Americans, how is that going to be enforced without removing internet anonymity? How long til the world governments decide that, since the whole .xxx thing worked so well (or regardless of the fact that it didn't) they'd like to control more stuff thank you very much?

    How long til my favourite white-hat hacking sites go dark?

    --
    For the love of God, please learn to spell "ridiculous"!!!
  24. Just a money grab by ylikone · · Score: 2, Insightful
    The only one to benefit from .xxx are the registrars! I mean, porn sites will never give up their .com sites, they'll just buy the .xxx version of their .com site to make sure cyber-squatters don't get it. Then they'll just redirect it to their .com site.

    And to those of you that say to legislate or have some kind of ICANN check to see if your site is allowed to be a .com or not, I say it can't be enforced. What's to stop a porn site from setting up an innocent .com non-porn site, then after getting approved, switching content to porn. Who's going to police this?

    --
    Meh.
  25. Yeah, right. THAT would work by trezor · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's going to be about a year before Congress tries to find someway to outlaw all porn that isn't on a .xxx domain.

    Because the entire internet is in the US. (Not saying the morons won't try it)

    --
    Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
    1. Re:Yeah, right. THAT would work by imogthe · · Score: 3, Informative

      Might I suggest you have a look at http://www.root-servers.org/?
      I'm sure you will find that there is a world outside the U.S, and that the rest of the world does not rely exclusively on American root servers.
      Nice troll though:)

  26. Re:I figure... by Wizzo1138 · · Score: 2

    While .xxx will make these sites easier to find or filter, as someone mentioned above, the hard part is deciding which sites should get forced to have a .xxx domain.

    The government would probably suggest getting the FCC involved, and then slashdot.org would become slashdot.xxx because someone found a few goatse links...

    --
    Always go to other people's funerals, otherwise they won't come to yours.
  27. Re:Great news by Erik+Hensema · · Score: 2, Funny
    Yes, it's love too!

    (doesn't even attempt to maintain a straight face)

    --

    This is your sig. There are thousands more, but this one is yours.

  28. Not funny, 100% TRUE by EvilStein · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Blogs are cluttering up search engines faster than online poker spammers are. seriously. I would *love* to type in a search and eliminate all blogs from the results. Maybe if the blog wankers would come up with a tag that would allow us to skip blogs in Google searches this wouldn't be a problem, but no, that won't happen because bloggers love the page views.

  29. Re:I figure... by Trevahaha · · Score: 2

    Love how we all think the US should control the Internet.

  30. Re:Would that be a problem? by suwain_2 · · Score: 2, Funny

    You know you've been on Slashdot too long when your initial reaction is to think that the "IE" in the TLD was what you meant by the offensive part.

    --
    ________________________________________________
    suwain_2 :: quality slashdot p
  31. Re:I like it. by iamlucky13 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Well perhaps because as a general principle, it's immoral to charge different amount for different fields of endeavor. A domain should cost the same, regardless of the TLD in which it resides.
    Says who? I can think of lots of cases where different endeavors cost different amounts. Take parking. I can park right next to the Duncan Plaza for $8 for four hours. Or I can park in the garage 2 blocks away for $0.95/hour. One is closer to where I'm going. .xxx specifies more closely the content than .com, .net, or .org.

    It's also not without precedence. Check out the price of .jp, .cn, .tv, or quite a few other TLD's. Perhaps you would be better to consider the extra revenue as incentive to ICANN to create this additional service for its customers. Nobody is forcing them to buy it and nobody is forcing ICANN to create additional TLD's to administer.