Slashdot Mirror
XXX Top Level Domain May Still See Use
eldavojohn writes "The contract between ICANN & ICM Registry has just been revised for procedures on using the .XXX TLD. ICM is saying that the domain should be readily available for registration as early as this summer. This means that parents will most likely have an easier time protecting their children from these sites and these sites will be more tightly regulated and easier to scrutinize by authorities. ICM also mentioned the collaboration with International Foundation for Online Responsibility."
playboy.xxx
penhouse.xxx
sex.xxx
movie.xxx
and of course
whitehouse.xxx
Seriously, talk about a gold rush. A legimate porn tld would have users practically driven to it. I wonder if what they are going to do about the 'land grab'. At $60 a pop for every word in the dictionary, they stand to make some serious money right off the bat.
The force that blew the Big Bang continues to accelerate.
ICM created IFFOR with the sole intention of having the regulation of porn sites run by a community rather than a company. The name is impressive but the goals of it seem rather specific. You can look at this two ways, ICM really wants porn regulated and easily blocked because they're thinking of the children. The other angle is that ICM wants domain registration moneys. Both can be correct and most likely are.
My work here is dung.
Seems unlikely that existing porn sites will voluntarily move from .com to .xxx domains.
"Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
Instead of opening it up like that, anyone who has a .com should be allowed to register the .xxx version at the same price as their .com address.
.com, .org and .net are all registered to different people and they would all want the .xxx version. In that case, I'd recommend a simple lottery.
.us etc.
There, no "gold rush". Even though it probably means giving up some profit, it's the right thing to do.
There may be some cases where
But all of this is stupid anyway. The Internet is more international now. We should be dropping new 3 letter TLD names and sticking with
Anyone else worried about this?
. XXXandLinks.htm
Authorities and officials requiring all "questionable"
material be required to don the XXX TLD? again at brief
glance it looks like a good idea, but in the long run it
could be hazardous for free speech in a whole..
Reading material:
http://www.freespeechcoalition.com/BriefHistoryof
Capitalism trumps puritanism on this one, I think. These things are guaranteed income. Who wouldn't pay a premium price for the rights to the www.sex.xxx domain?
:(){
. .xxx domains onto their established .com domains. There has to be some way to force porn off the .com TLD. Probably the only thing to do that will be an army of faeries riding in armor mounted on flying unicorns. ( for those lacking a sarcasm detector, it means it's never going to happen )
All the porn sites are going to do is redirect the
ICM somehow got the .xxx franchise, based on WHAT? I'd like to see the truth there.
Anyway, it's a dead asset, unless they can cash in on the monopoly money!
ICANN will do the right thing as they always have.
Creating a new TLD will do nothing except enrich the franchisee, and make a bunch of flat-earthers in Flyover Country yowl a lot.
that's all this boils down to, is religous creeps attempting to push their views on the world. they think if you enjoy sex, god will hate you. oh please please god forgive me for using my penis!
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
To protect the children, we must enable every cable and satellite company to provide xxx content on channel 69!
Ummm...Are we going to restrict other channels from carrying pornographic content?
No. It's technically difficult and would be expensive and violate the first amendment.
Doesn't this just give the porn companies more porn channels while doing nothing to censor kids (which is unethical anyways)?
------ Take away the right to say fuck and you take away the right to say fuck the government.
If xxx becomes a top level domain, I can see a great moral push to force any content deemed "obscene" by local communities into the xxx tld. An attempt to whitewashing the internet so that only xxx contains content that is considered "foul, repulsive, or detestable" by every local community across the world would be very unfortunate for the notion of free speech.
If porn is only allowed on xxx domains this would make established sites worthless. Could you even link from your old site to your new site? Effectively it would be eminent domain, except I doubt domain owners would be compensated. Domains like freep0rn.com would be worthless overnight. Not to mention the free speech issues. Perhaps Government Criticism should be limited to .gc domains.
they would then REQUIRE any and all illicit sexual content on the web to use .xxx
and ENFORCE it...school administrator's jobs of content filtering would get a thousand times easier...
"Just Smile and Nod." --Huck
penhouse.xxx??
I don't know buddy. Think you've got a few winners with the others but I am not so sure about penhouse.xxx. Some how I don't see a house of Pen's being very erotic.
Isn't the underlying problem of this really the centralized nature of DNS?
"All you have to do is be fragile and grateful. So stay the underdog." Chuck Palahniuk, Choke
It's a typo, should have been "penisland.xxx"
sic transit gloria mundi
Who gets how many dollars per registration?
This is bullshit. How does creating a NEW domain for porn protect anyone? Only if at the same time porn is made illegal everywhere else, something that is not publicly advocated by the sponsors of .xxx. Though it's suspected that's an objective. However, no one has been able to clean porn out of any TLD and this remains impossible to do except as a symbolic and empty "We're protecting children from porn" statement. The only benefit of this new domain is the registrars who will collect $60 per year for all those existing porn sites who will be blackmailed into buying a corresponding .xxx domain to protect their brand from typosquatters. No one will set up a site solely on .xxx, a formula to be blocked by default from many users; they'll all just redirect to .coms or CC TLDs. No one will be "protected" from porn at all.
So that it won't turn into a "gold rush" with lots of "squatters" fighting over it. If someone has already gone to the effort to develop whitehouse.com as a porn site, then why not make it easier for everyone and give them first shot at whitehouse.xxx?
Adding a new TLD will also move "a bunch of cash" to the "new registrar". The only question is who will provide that cash.
And it does "expand the name space". It is a new TLD. Go ahead and register slashdot.xxx if you want to. But I'd still prefer to give CmdrTaco first shot at it.
What you probably meant is that it won't add any new porn sites. That is probably correct. But it really does not matter. Anyone who wants to set up a porn site right now can do so.
All this will do is allow the legitimate porn sites to redirect their sites to the
It won't solve the whole problem, but it will allow the legitimate porn sites to "protect the children" without subjecting them to squatters trying to drive up the price.
Although I still believe that this would be better served as *.xxx.us instead.
Sure, i want to sign up for that deal.. no thanks.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
NO IT DOESN'T. Please at least pretend you've read RFC 3675.
http://outcampaign.org/
RFC 3675
http://outcampaign.org/
What's all this silly talk about .xxx making it harder to get porn.
.xxx will make it easier to find and get porn (as if it's not easy enough already).
.xxx TLD though. I personally think ICANN sucks, but looking at the other alternatives it seems like anyone who's likely to take over from ICANN would suck even more.
:).
Anyone thinking straight will know that
Note: I'm not arguing against the
You all should just let me take over from ICANN
MISUSE OF MODERATION ABOVE - valid opinion, substantiated by the evidence and general cultural activity, mis-moderated as flamebait.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Wouldn't it be better to have a .kid domain name. And only give that to sites are are deemed suitable to be viewed by kids?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
To protect the children, we must enable every cable and satellite company to provide xxx content on channel 69!
Heh.
Back in the day before digital cable, CableVision used to have the Playboy channel on ch69 here in CT.
I have to return some videotapes...
"This means that parents will most likely have an easier time protecting their children..."
.xxx domain.
.xxx domains.
.xxx blocked PCs unable to make the redirect - it does cut down on the number of ways a kid can stumble across porn and thus, even if not perfect, it does make it easier for parents to limit access.
.xxx as a tool for limiting porn access.
One porn site moves to the
A parent blocks
That's one more site than would be blocked otherwise. Thus, by definition, easier. Not perfect but better than not at all.
Most porn sites really don't want kids hitting them up - they just suck bandwidth and don't have credit cards to convert in to paying subscribers anyway. If sites like playboy.com then become simple redirects over - with
Seatbelts don't prevent car accidents. They don't even save all lives in cars that have accidents. But they do still make surviving "easier". Just because something's not perfect doesn't mean it's not an improvement. The same holds true for
God Be Gone
Why would any profitable porn website voluntarily move to a new domain? If you were, say, cnn.com, and a new .news TLD opened up, would you move to cnn.news? Hell no. Even if cnn.com simply redirected to cnn.news, you're losing years and millions of dollars worth of branding and recognition. How often do you go back to Google when looking for porn? I doubt very often, you probably go to some indexing website catered to adult websites instead -- that's big-time branding and worth big-time cash.
.xxx access with your cable modem? That's another $15/month."
Also, dividing what some in society see a deviance is just asking for problems down the road related to censorship and restricted access. "Oh, you wanted
So, how much does ICM Registry pay you?
For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
As far as I can tell, they're exactly like the tobacco industry in this repect. Sure, they play the law-abiding game, but so does the tobacco industry. Some tobacco companies have even run campains to persuade kids to not smoke. To them it's the cost of doing business. Of course, both of them will do as little as possible to stop minors from getting hooked on their content.
Now you might say that pornography isn't harmful as tobacco (and you might be right). But that's beside the point. The fact is that they would love to have little kids staring at their stuff, but breaking the law is a bit expensive. The tobacco compaines are the same way and they have cleaned up their act alot in the past few decades as the law has put clamped down on their malarky.
P.S. I'm talking about tobacco companies in North America. Tobacco companies in South-East Asia are quite different. I'm not sure about the rest of the world.
I think you're underestimating the importance of branding. One of the reasons Coke and Pepsi throw so much into branding is not so that you'll recognize their names, but so that, when you go to the local supermarket, you WON'T recognize the names of their competition.
.com can be "cleaned up" for safe mass consumption. Not that I like that idea on a philosophical level, but this is pragmatics we're talking about.
Also, who wouldn't want to upgrade their porn site domain from "www.ihavethebestboobsontheinternet.com" to "www.boobs.xxx"? I think that opportunity for a more recognizable brand would open up the market a whole lot. Playboy would fork out a lot of money to make sure that nobody else gets Playboy.xxx, and conversely, somebody who's been sitting on the fringe of the porn industry has a chance to jump right into the middle of it with a better domain name.
Never mind that this domain might come into existence anyway so that the
Besides, what sounds better? "Playboy dot com?" or "Playboy dot triple-x"? The latter actually sounds like what it is.
The porn industry is not a stupid and corrupt as it might appear. They don't want little kids staring at this anymore then parents do. They are not the tobacco industry. They want to protect their interests which means not showing it to kids which is against the law.
.COM or CC TLDs, namely by rating your site appropriately. The problem is, most people are so techno-retarded that they don't realize that there are ratings controls built into their web browser that will allow them to block a significant part of not only porn, but drug, gambling, and violence-related sites. Barring that, you can still buy software to do the filtering. But again, most parents would rather push the responsibility for filtering their kids' Internet access onto someone else.
.XXX TLD and then change their .COM or CC domain names to simply redirect to the .XXX site, thereby giving you one-stop blocking. The reality is, not everybody will do so. Because of the international and decentralized nature of the Internet, many site operators will ignore .XXX altogether. In some areas you'll probably have parents lobbying ISPs to block all access to .XXX in order to "protect the children", rather than parents taking responsibility for it themselves (same as today). So if you are a porn site operator and you stand a substantial chance of reducing your paying audience by moving from .COM to .XXX, then why would you? And then of course there is the thorny issue of things that aren't blatant porn, but can be construed as sexual. Where is that allowed to live? What about sites like Yahoo and YouTube that have the majority of their content that is not objectionable, but has a small percentage of their content that is adult in nature? Do they have to split their sites? If not, then you can't filter those by just blocking the .XXX.
.XXX will review and then take away the domain name if they do not stop.
.COM sites), or by people installing software that they shouldn't install. Trying to tie any of that to a TLD is absolutely ridiculous.
.XXX TLD an even bigger failure than it is already destined to be is by charging people 100 times the going rate of a domain name for a .XXX domain name (i.e., $1000). Think about it for a second, if you already have a .COM or CC name you have very little incentive to also register a .XXX name to go with it, especially if that .XXX name is likely to have a narrower appeal than the .COM name. But if you have to pay a fortune to get it, there's no way you're going to waste the money on registering for a .XXX.
This part is true, but there are a number of ways that a porn site operator can achieve this with the
Now, in an ideal world, all of the porn site operators will also register their site in the
Say I get some malware after visiting one of the sites. A repersentative from
You obviously have no idea how domain registration works. What you do with the domain is your business. Why the domain registrar should have anything to do with investigating claims of malware and suspending the name is beyond me. In reality, these days the vast majority of malware is delivered either by email, by worm, by ads (which primarily come from
I'd say make them pay $1000 dollars for the domain name. With yearly fees. People will pay it if there is money, and the consumer will pay for fast downloads and good security.
The further that I get into your post the more obvious it becomes that you really don't understand how the Internet works. The TLD that you use to register a domain name has nothing to do with download speed or good security. And about the only way that you could make a
Not only that, there are a fair number of adu
This is WAAAAYYYYYYY too late to make a difference helping parents.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
I find this hard to believe as the number of porn sites that use terms like: Pokemon, nintendo, yugiyo, etc. is growing rapidly. Not to mention the videos available to download entitled things like : Harry Potter, Spiderman etc.. which just turn out to be porn movies. So you are right the industry isn't stupid, its rather intellegent. Get the kids hooked while there young and you'll have a customer for 70 years.
You Sodomites will burn in Hell
Looking at some Google results, it does actually look like there is pokemon, yugiyo, mario porn in the first place.
Perhaps the problem is that some adults are getting sexual fetishes for children's stuff?
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
As far as I can tell, they're exactly like the tobacco industry in this repect. Sure, they play the law-abiding game, but so does the tobacco industry. Some tobacco companies have even run campains to persuade kids to not smoke. To them it's the cost of doing business. Of course, both of them will do as little as possible to stop minors from getting hooked on their content.
That's not even close to accurate. With tobacco the industry has to actually get someone hooked (aka, addicted) to their product by exposing them to it repeatedly until their brain craves it. But when it comes to the sex industry we are already pre-wired to crave it. Sex is simply a necessary part of life, much as eating or sleeping is a part of life.
The tobacco industry has to actually create a false perception of need to get you to try tobacco, then create the addictive need for their product (via nicotine). The sex industry simply takes advantage of what already exists in human instinct.
The tobacco industry is slowing killing their customers (along with many innocent bystanders) and must work hard to constantly get new customers. The sex industry doesn't kill their customers, and if anything they probably spur a certain amount of human reproduction which results in more customers for them down the line.
The tobacco industry has a parasitic relationship with people, while the sex industry has a more symbiotic relationship. The tobacco industry is far more insidious and evil than the sex industry could ever possibly dream of being.
Forgive me if someone has already made this point, but wouldn't the .xxx TLD, designed to be blocked by uptight people, be the last place a porn site would want to live?
Property is theft.
US politicians are happy to have free speech when it comes to accepting large bribes.. ahem lobbyist donations, yet seem to forget about it when it comes to simple things like allowing the internet to self-regulate without huge messy bureaucratic nonsense with little social, ethical or technical merit. The responsibility is on parents to protect their kids, not some worldwide standards organization.
Seeing as how the word "kid" has multiple mutually exclusive meanings even in english.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
The problem isn't with the true .xxx folks, who probably don't really care and figure their market will find them.
The problem is with people who have content that is ambiguous and only "arguably" covered by this.
The problem is there is no .PG, .PG-13, .R, .X before .XXX ... which means there will suddenly be a binary division between
"good" and "bad". The world is not so black and white.
The real problem is that there is "middle ground", and there must be at minimum three systems, not too: Things unambiguously acceptable, things unambiguously outrageous, and things in between (i.e., hybrid). By making only two groups, you necessarily merge the hybrid with either the protectedthe outrageous. To say that anything not for highly protected people is outrageous is ridiculous and a sudden huge shift to the conservative that seems unlikely to succeed, though it would be a stretch to say that nothing like that would ever be tried--consider Prohibition.
Also, since it's defined in a way that makes it sound like you're in with scum, anyone who voluntarily enters is practically signing a confession that they think their ambiguous content to be depraved. I think that's the saddest of all: That someone who is just worried they might offend someone is basically forced to stand in the street and wave a sign saying "kick me" as their reward for being nice.
It would actually be an infinitely saner thing to create a .G or .KIDS domain where people could move to who want to live in a bubble.
There would then be no confusion about who belonged there: anyone who wanted to live by a lot of rules and wanted to be around others of like kind. And there would be very little motivation to cheat, since people who like that kind of thing would rush to it. There's no stigma, after all.
Nor are the standards for what must be in this domain clear in a way that makes sense globally. It seems to me something that will not be meaningfully able to be administered globally, since some countries that think nothing of certain controversial issues will not require .XXX, and it will just end up a casual tax on those who do choose to use it.
Or else it will be be the Internet version of McCarthyism, and the .XXX will gradually expand to be the list of everyone... until it breaks down and you can't watch a PG movie without it being .XXX and people say "why is this closet so crowded?" and demand to be let out.
None of the present plan makes any sense, really. So why are they doing it? The unspoken truth, of course, is that this is not about Net safety. It is about dictating morality. And why is that? Perhaps because they're being unable to sell the same morality voluntarily.
The strange thing to me is that this is all about sex. What about violence? Will there be a .MURDER TLD for people who think killing others is bad?
Will the evening news go there? What about unpopular wars? Or just people who are trying to save young women from unscrupulous coathanger-wielding men in alleys or trying to save the world from overpopulation?
Kent M Pitman
Philosopher, Technologist, Writer
About .xxx, are you really having so much trouble finding porn in the Internet that you need .xxx? ;-) .xxx is more justifiable than .biz or .info, but that really means that we should get rid of those two, and not create .xxx.
.here, I think your proposal is a nice idea in principle, but not very practical.
.xxx guys, yours is for good, theirs is for evil, but it is the exact mistake.
WRT
First, you need to know which DNS is local to your location. That means you need to know at least something about the network, which means a chat with the local admin or getting some parameters via DHCP. In both cases you get to know the local domain (DHCP sends that too, usually).
Then, your solution is too www-centric. Let's assume it is possible to do what you're saying (in fact, you can emulate that behaviour with dns as it is right now). So, you want to check what's here. You type http://here/ and it takes you to the "local webserver" (whatever that means). Great. Now, you want to read news. You enter "here" as an nntp server and you go to the local webserver, not the NNTP server. DNS does not care about ports, only addresses (DOH!).
Now, how do you apply your solution to SSH? You don't because it is not reasonable to do so. Same for lots of other protocols. Basically, you are adding additional semantics to the ones defined in DNS (the rfcs specify what the db entries mean, and there's nothing about "here"). Whatever you do, you must consider that older clients and servers are still around, and will be for years. Backwards compatibility is a must.
It is also a problem, unless everyone has a dns server in every home. Let's say you have the typical Joe Sixpack setup: broadband, with dns, mail, etc provided by yur ISP, what would "airconditioner.here" mean? My house? Your house? The isp's datacenter? You could make it change depending the source ip, but it would complicate matters considerably.
You might have entities that don't have www servers, like my home. http://here/ would mean nothing useful (unless you count my linksys box as the "local webserver", not very reasonable).
You're assuming that Internet is just www servers, which it isn't. You're making exactly the same mistake as the
Anyway, you could easily do as you want (on your domains of course), just by appending the local domain by default (you could send that via dhcp). That's what the "localdomain" domain is commonly used for. So, you could easily end with "http://airconditioner/set?temp=25c" or even set a "here" fake top level zone in your local dns server. When in doubt, try the "localdomain" domain. Me, I just use the domain I got from dyndns as a local domain and that works pretty well.
GPG 0x1B479C78
it just takes a bunch of cash from existing companies and gives it to the new registrar.
I see you're catching on.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
The porn isn't all going onto .xxx; nor should it. The idea that .xxx should exist to make it easier to filter is ridiculous. Do we have .museum and .pro so I can more easily protect my kids from museums and professionals? Nonsense. Many museums and professionals are in .com, .net, and elsewhere. The exact same thing will happen for .xxx. .xxx won't ghettoize the porn, it will just give it a neighborhood to live in for those companies that chose to. The only way .xxx will be useful for filtering if it's illegal to put porn anywhere but in .xxx. But then, what's porn? Photographs of naked people? Photographs of topless women? Shall it henceforce be nationalgeographic.xxx? Perhaps photographs of women showing anything other than their eyes; that's considered sexual in some cultures. How about lingerie photographs? Will it become victoriassecret.xxx? Ultimately you can't draw the line in a useful way. The line will be too strict, in which case it violates the First Amendment in a way no one can ignore. Or the line will be too loose, and while people may ignore the First Amendment issues, those who want to ghettoize porn will be frustrated that things they consider porn aren't regulated.
Let's leave .xxx to the same situation .museum, .aero, .pro, and the like are in: it's branding, new names, and marginally useful tool for locating things you want. As a filtering tool it's basically useless.
On the subject of ghettoizing it:
So, the domain rules make it illegal to... do things that are already illegal. How useful. Well, maybe it makes it easier to "prosecute" since you can cancel the domain registration more easily than getting a criminal conviction. Thank God there isn't anywhere else people can put up child porn and fraud. Well, except .net, .com, .org, .tv, .cx, and dozens more. Useless, useless regulations. Clue to those reponsible: the bad guys are already on the net. Perversely you're trying to make .xxx safer than the rest of the net. Seems a bit odd.
Search 2010 Gen Con events
In real life we create zoning laws...
Please direct me to the Unified World Zoning Laws, please.
Oh, wait; you mean there aren't any? Well, it's sort of hard to compare a local zoning ordnance to a global ".xxx" TLD, then. I don't think anyone is suggesting that there is a problem with creating adult domains under CC TLDs. If country FU wants to create ".adult.fu", then they should go right ahead. And if region BR of country FU wants to create ".adult.br.fu", they should go right ahead as well. They are also free to mandate that all porn sites within their jurisdiction use those domains. Heck, they're free to block all traffic not originating from their own TLD, if that's what their residents want (I'd argue that they're insane, and shooting themselves in the foot, but hey, it's their country/region/whatever). If residents of those areas decide to go to some other area's TLD, perhaps an area that doesn't restrict it to 'adult' zones, well that's just like driving from Provo to Reno. Not everyone wants to live the same way; when you're on somebody else's turf (or nobody's turf at all, in the case of non-country-specific TLDs), you'd best shut up and deal, and go back to your own area if you don't like it.
Adult sites and content are a local and regional issue, because that's where you're going to have a shot at getting some consensus as to what content belongs where. That's the level on which ".kids" and ".xxx" domains should be created, not at the root level.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
Of all the things I could pretend to have done (gone to the moon, won a Super Bowl, poured hot grits on Natalie Portman), you want me to pretend that I've read an RFC? No dice!
Why bother? who cares if they're unused, i'd prefer it to be open slather on tlds, then we could stop arguing about this crap and i could have mail@firstname.lastname or mebee even firstname@lastname as an email
This is a joke. I am joking. Joke joke joke.
It seems to me, the root of the problem is the original design of the domain naming system. When DNS was first created, they had a handful of TLDs - net for network infrastructure, org for non-profits, edu for educational, gov, edu, mil, etc. This was way before the potential of the internet was even beginning to be understood - particularly its commercial potential. With those initial segregations they've got a relative handful of government sites spread over gov, mil, edu, etc, and everyone else crammed into .com. Of course, then the problem was that this segregation was not enforced - .orgs are not necessarily non-profits, .coms are not necessarily commercial sites, etc.
Here in Australia, one of the nice things is that the TLDs are fairly well controlled. You need an ABN (Australian Business Number) to register a .com.au domain. You need to be a registered non-profit to register a .org.au. So these TLDs actually retain a useful meaning, unlike .com, .net and .org in the US. I think it would be useful to have the .com namespace segregated a bit more - including into an "adult material" domain. But the opportunity for that has passed. Refusing to let someone register a domain is much easier than forcing them to change domains later, and public awareness has already settled on .com as the only real TLD.
The problem was that they tried to amalgamate the concepts of a unique identifier and a descriptive taxonomy. Due to the lack of foresight setting up the taxonomy (which they can't really be blamed for - nobody forsaw the way the internet grew), the internet outgrew the taxonomy, and it became useless. So now we have a system that is only really used for unique identification, saddled with the remnants of a defunct taxonomy.
An ideal solution (IMO) would be some sort of authenticated tagging mechanism, where certain agencies had the authority to tag websites, keeping that system totally divorced from the system used to uniquely tie IP addresses to human-readable names. Even if the tagging system was managed by an industry body (e.g. the XXX tag administered by the adult industry), I imagine many porn sites would tag themselves voluntarily - having that sort of tag would likely help boost the search engine rankings for porn-related searches, which I'm sure they'd be more worried about than their accessibility to minors (most of whom wouldn't have credit cards to pay them, anyway).
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
Excuse me but... why filter porn sites in the first place?
T3h 1nt3rn3t 1s f0r pr0n!
Do we honestly think microsoft.xxx is going to be used to contain pornography? Do we honestly think porn.com isn't?
qntm.org
You know what's really, really sad. I took you seriously and was in the middle of posting a response before I saw that you were modded Funny and smacked myself.
I apologize, it is late at night.
Evidently, the key to understanding recursion is to begin by understanding recursion. The rest is easy.
I can't believe they're still trying to push this through. It'll be about as effective as asking all the phishing sites to use a .crime TLD.
I guess some consultants are making money off this, otherwise it would have disappeared off the radar a long time ago as Yet Another Bad Idea.
Insert
First of all, I don't see why so many people seem to think it would be so easy for every porn site to just move to .xxx. Moving your domain is not something people want to do if you have spent years branding and promoting your name.. .xxx or whatever, It would take a long time to get the majority of the audience to know where to go, especially since the general internet population types in .com automatically. Just look at the confusion between whitehouse.gov and whitehouse.com.
.xxx only exists as someone's crazy idea to try and regulate and control the internet.
If slashdot moved to www.slashdot.tv or
If it is completely voluntary, that is fine, but then it really serves no purpose. because it will not make the internet any easier to filter.
I always thought that a .xxx TLD was not the best name, it sounds a little childish. Wouldn't it be better .sex or .ero or even .porn?
This means that parents will most likely have an easier time protecting their children from these sites and these sites will be more tightly regulated and easier to scrutinize by authorities.
I can't even count the number of ways this statement is blatently false.
Well, here's a few:
OK... let's pretend for a sec that all of the above is solved... all a kid who wants access to a .XXX TLD has to do is discover the IP address of it via a WHOIS lookup or other means, then create a DynDNS domain name pointing at this new IP. You think this is too complicated fro a kid to do? I know kids in elementary who have their own DynDNS hosts. It's not rocket science.
Here's a newsflash - since the advent of photography, kids have had porn. Hell, even before then hey had nude sketches of women. Kids have ALWAYS had porn. What guy on here hadn't seen a playboy by the time they were 12?
our content filters detected a rate in excess of 95% of logic and good common sense in your post above. May we ask you what are you doing on /. ??
Anyway, thousands of kudos for you !!!!
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
Since control-enter adds "http://www." and ".com", the obvious keyboard shortcut to add "http://www." and ".xxx" is Control-6-9-enter... I forsee firefox plugins and MSIE 7.01. So proud I didn't make a joke about control and entering...
That statement is wrong on two accounts. First, pornography is not the same thing as sex. C.S. Lewis came up with a somewhat better analogy here:
The second problem is that even sex not the same as the other natural instincts. To quote Lewis again:
Why do people act like "porn" is this big single business and entity. It's not, there are big companies and little individual sites, people all over the world, some doing this in some sort of regulated "business" way, some doing as an expression of their individual tastes, and tons of people who just watch and distribute it on P2P because they want to. Obviously if you aren't aware of pornography as a young adult or kid, you might not be tempted to buy a Penthouse when you turn 18. But then again there are plenty of people who don't start smoking until their 18, too. I mean, i was also aware of driving before I turned 16. Just because it's existence is acknowledge does not mean that pornographers are actively enticing individuals under 18.
Strangely, the businesses on the up-and-up ("real" media companies based in the USA like Vivid Video, etc.) are definitely NOT interested in underage consumers or participants. They are actually fairly high profile and they can get fined or thrown in jail for breaking the law. The pornography industry in the USA knows that it exists because it follows the rules. They may make a parodic movie featuring something from contemporary culture or nostalgia, but they don't target kids by doing so. However, they can't when someone's kid uses their parents' credit cards to gain access to their site.
Then there are those individuals or small groups who have actually taken something like Pokemon or Spider-man or Disney films and have turned them into porn. These people really are interested in these characters in a sexual way (hey, if it floats your boat...). They do so outside the realm of a business model and regulation.
Then there are those who simply rename their porn movie files to confuse people who are engaging in illegal downloading. But that's downloading DVD rips and bootlegs, and it's quite obviously outside the bounds of any regulation (aside from, you know, copyright law!)
Those who are currently regulated, the first group I mentioned, are generally doing a good job. There are tons of pornography sites based outside the US, and they will not be affected by any legislation. And there are always those people working away from the mainstream that will also go unregulated. This will do nothing but make it harder for the reputable companies to do business.
The problem with all the naysayers is that they assume that the majority of people want to block pornography. The majority of men on the planet with internet access masturbate to pornography on a regular basis. We the wankers are more powerful than the self-appointed morality police. It is unnatural to repress sexuality. They've tried many times and eventually failed. The information age has made it virtually impossible today. If the RIAA/MPAA can't block piracy and repressive regimes, like China, can't block dissent, what makes you think they can block pornography? Let's not forget that many powerful people wank, just like you and I. Mark Foley and Ted Haggard are just 2 that got caught. I'd be very surprised if 90% of your senators and representatives weren't accessing porn on a regular basis. They don't want to see their pornography banned any more than you and I.
.xxx makes it easier for those who don't want pornography to block it in their own homes and makes it easier for me to find what I'm looking for. I'm all for opening up the .xxx domain and cannot think of a single good reason not to have one.
So in conclusion, porn is popular (arguably the first "Killer App" of the internet, VCR, camera, etc), it is VERY difficult to censor material on the internet, and porn is enjoyed by the most powerful of society (both in government and industry). No one is going to ban your porn.
Moving porno to
So what does this do to the value of Sex.com, now that the forward thinking guy has finally won it back?
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Creating an .xxx TLD will result in a TLD where there is porn (by definition), but it is absolutely useless unless you are interested in porn, because the object of desire and the motivation for all the fuss is to have a place WITHOUT porn.
.noxxx TLD into which all of the worlds domains could be embedded/replicated, on the provision that they agree to be penalized with a hefty fine by the TLD registry if there is found any porn on their site. This could even be enforced through semiautomatic or fullautomatic AI robot means. All domains in the .noxxx are simply returning the result for the equivalent domain without .noxxx. Probably a better name would be .censored - but .noxxx was used above for clarity. There could even be a second-level domain below .censored, so you could get various levels of censorship.
The only SANE solution would be to create a
This way slashdot.org.censored could be just the same as slashdot.org except that whenever the goatse guy is posted, and then found by the registry-robot, it gets disabled, and Slashdot would have to pay a fine and reregister.
-Lasse
If there is an existing solution to this problem, or one emerges, I'd love to know about it, as well. This would be a great optional tool for any intranet.
Looks good for your age..
Reserving a name, or defining a standard behaviour might be a good idea, sure. It could act as a SHOULD clause (there's no way of enforcing a MUST here). That could be done just by taking ANY domain, declaring it private and forbidding it from being used in the public Internet. It could be any arbitrary domain (example.net is one of those, but it is not appropiate to use it, even in private networks).
The problem is the "local server" part. Who said there is ONE local server and not LOTS of them? If you had two physical machines, your idea would not work (pointing "here" to the NNTP server would break WWW requests). "here" will have to point to one machine at one time, you will have to set something that redirects traffic from one to another, a waste of resources.
"news.here" on the other hand, is a pretty reasonable way of doing things (news.here, www.here, etc). Then again, if you know the local domain, or have an appropiate search path, it is just as good to use "news", "www", etc.
Basically, the "here" suffix serves as a placeholder when someone does not know what the local domain is (works more like the local network (0.0.0.0) and local broadcast (255.255.255.255) addresses, instead of the private ones). If you want to make the equivalent of rfc 1918 addresses, it would still mean you need to know what the local domain is. In other words, you're mixing two things (local network/local broadcast and rfc 1918).
As for ssh and here, let's use my home network as an example. In this network we have the machines "grissom", "leonov", "gagarin" and "armstrong". What would "ssh.here" mean? I could define some criteria, making one of them more important, thus making it worthy of the "ssh.here" name. But it would be pretty useless, I should know where I'm going to when using ssh, and have defined "here" myself, and "public ssh service" is a very strange concept.
The fact that other proposals as complex and convoluted does not man that yours, just for being simpler, is better. DNS is NOT the right tool for what you want to do. You want some sort of discovery of local services, you should invent some simple discovery method and put it in the public domain, that would guarantee that there is no lock-in involved. Even a DHCP extension might be more appropiate. And DNS could be subverted and lock in created anyway, just look at how microsoft uses it.
DNS exists (ignoring records other than A) to answer just one question: "Could you give me the ip address of the machine that has this name?". You're trying to use A records for something else.
If you really need to find what the local resources are, why don't you read SRV records instead (if available)?
GPG 0x1B479C78
For those of you who see this as a goldrush, you have to consider:
.XXX domain, for relatively little extra value - How many domains are you going to go on a spree for with $75 reg fees?
.xxx, you must follow ICM's (not ICANN's) 'Best business practices' or else lose your .XXX - could this include selling them/parking them?
.XXX mandatory, meaning american run adult sites would not be allowed on .com/.net etc.
.tld spectrum, ranging from .com, to .co.uk to .jp - not all of these will switch, with international webmasters not bound by US rulings - this could create an unfair marketplace for US businesses
ICM wants to charge $75/year for a
By having a domain on
There are bills in congress to make
Their policy includes the right to 'Reserve geographic and religiously/culturally sensitive names', how far could this be expanded? - would someone really end up paying $75 per year for sex.xxx?
There are now hundreds of thousands of adult websites across the
From this self-penned article about what is one of the worst ideas in recent years when it comes to TLDs.
Business Voyeur
First, pornography is not the same thing as sex.
.XXX TLD that they would want it used not only for sites that provide pornographic images, but sites that provide other sexually related materials (aka, shops selling sex toys, sex manuals, erotic writing, adverts for escorts or strip clubs, etc).
I never claimed that pornography was the same as sex. I referred to the sex industry, which pornography (or at least it's commercials aspects) are certainly a part. One would assume that if one wanted to set up a
Regarding the rest of your post, it's probably a wasted effort trying to talk sense (especially about sex and human nature) so someone who cites "god" in their post, but...
You can get a large audience together for a strip-tease act--that is, to watch a girl undress on the stage. Now suppose you come to a country where you could fill a theatre by simply bringing a covered plate on to the stage and then slowly lifting the cover so as to let every one see, just before the lights went out, that it contained a mutton chop or bit of bacon, would you not think that in the country something had gone wrong with the appetite for food? And would not anyone who had grown up in a different world think there was something equally queer about the state of the sex instinct among us?
In most societies, food is far more common, mundane, and freely available than sex (or strip teases). Furthermore, the drive for sex (or procreation if you're one of those "sex is only for procreation" types) is far, far stronger than simple hunger. Especially when you are being adequately fed. But if you've ever seen an episode of the TV show Survivor (I know, reality TV is probably not the best example) after several weeks of island life they usually have a competition where the contestants can win tasty, western style meals like pizza, burgers, etc instead of having to forage for bugs or eating the meat of captured rats (or whatever else they can manage to dig up). And wouldn't you know it, when they lift the cover of the dishes so that the contestants can see the meals every last one of them is going "oooh", "aaah", and smacking their lips in anticipation. Even the great prude C.S. Lewis himself would behave that way if he hadn't eaten for a week.
The biological purpose of sex is children, just as the biological purpose of eating is to repair the body.
Actually, the biological purpose of sex is sexual gratification. A common biological result of sex is children, but only someone pushing an agenda would claim it is the purpose. I don't know about you, but when I'm having sex the last thing that I'm usually thinking is "I hope that this produces children", and I have yet to meet anyone (with the exception of a couple of friends who had trouble conceiving after 2 years of trying) who ever claimed that such thoughts went through their mind. Even after sexual release we typically aren't concerned about conception. After having sex is someone more likely to ask "do you think that you're pregnant", or "was it good for you"?
Furthermore, the biological purpose of eating isn't to repair the body but to replenish the bodies energy stores. If someone is in perfect health they still eat even though their body is not in need of repair.
Now if we eat whenever we feel inclined and just as much as we want, it is quite true most of us will eat too much: but not terrifically too much. One man may eat enough for two, but he does not eat enough for ten. The appetite goes a little beyond its biological purpose, but not enormously. But if a healthy young man indulged his sexual appetite whenever he felt inclined, and if each act produced a baby, then in ten years he might easily populate a small village. This appetite is in ludicrous and preposterous excess of its function.
There's two reasons for that. Firstly, there is a finite limit to how much we can oblige our appetite for food. Eventually you will get full. If you keep eating you
- .travel? Check
- .museum? Check!
- .aero? Check!
- .coop? Check!
- .sucks? Coming soon!
Dangle enough money in front of icann and they'll make anything a tld.I for one think it is a good idea to perhaps force all porn domains into the xxx TLD. I think this should have been done long before. Not because I want them censored, but to make it easy for people who want to limit what can be viewed on certain computers to do so. When it comes to porn, the cat is out of the bag. No one is deluded enough to think that the government could wake up one morning and order people to stop making it. They would have a right riot on their hands. Government do not want to create a situation where their power would be shown to be limited. Why do you think they give in to protests. Because if people make themselves ungovernable, then government is toothless.
Any measure they take to be able to force porn sites to identify themselves as such is tantamount to censorship if you believe what you here on the dot. The domain registrar is probably not going to make much money off this. They will be closely watched to ensure that no underhand dealings go on. If anything, opportunistic slashdotters will rush out to buy domains and sell them on ebay long before the registrars milk their supposed client. And if $30 (an exaggerated example) is too much for a budding business, then you probably have no business trying to buy one of such domain.
There is not that much money in porn to sink billions in domain name registrations. Simple economics will keep the prices down.
As a parent, please let me assure you that a .xxx TLD does neither facilitate nor inhibit my ability to protect my children.
Also, please let me assure you that "seeing some naked human bodies" is very low on my priority list of things my children need to be protected from. Most kids become naturally curious about sexuality only when they are ready to be curious. Before then, it's "eww, gross! Make it go away!" I see no reason to either encourage or discourage this natural process.
They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock