Slashdot Mirror


Why the .XXX Domain is a Bad Idea That Won't Die

Reader tqft tipped us to an opinion piece on the UK site The Guardian, which lays out the reasons why article writer Seth Finkelstein feels the .XXX domain is a terrible idea. You may recall that last year (being an election year and all), the concept of a triple-X ghetto was revived, considered, and then quashed all in the space of a few months. We also recently discussed the fact that the idea just won't die, as the company ICM Registry pushes ICANN to allow them to pass out the names by Summer. Finkelstein primarily argues that the new domain is a bad idea from a business point of view. Ignoring for a moment the issue that much of this content is already labeled, he sees this as primarily a means for ICM Registry to gain a monopoly on what is sure to be a hot-selling product. Speculators, pornographers, and above-board companies will all jump on the namespace in an effort to ensure that their domain is represented ... or not, as the case may be. Where do you fall on this issue? Would a .XXX domain be helpful for parents, or just a political salve/moneymaking scam?

10 of 322 comments (clear)

  1. Heh... by Fnkmaster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ignoring for a moment the issue that much of this content is already labeled

    Yeah, it's labeled all right. About the time you see a writhing vulva on your screen, and a mega-penis thrusting repeatedly into it using the latest in animated gif technology, you may notice a small blurb of text that says "Please proceed only if you are 18 years of age or older".

  2. I'm for it. I think. by Spacejock · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I help to run web filtering at a small primary school, and while I realise a TLD like this won't shift all the crud into an easily-blocked area of the net, it's a good start. Of course, the downside is that nanny-state governments can then instruct ISPs to block the TLD, thus protecting their good citizens. Protecting primary school kids is one thing, but 'protecting' adults is a whole different ball game.

    I guess I just argued for both sides of the equation. I think I'm getting fence splinters.

    1. Re:I'm for it. I think. by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Protecting primary school kids is one thing, but 'protecting' adults is a whole different ball game.
      Fuck the Children.

      If they come across a porn site "by accident" amid their travel, I considering it part of a process called "growing up". Anyone with anecdotal evidence of some random teenager's life being "consumed" by porn is hearby and forever adviced to move to Saudi Arabia. They love you there.
      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
  3. Re:Why not? by Harmonious+Botch · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because the implied assumption is that the whole net except .XXX must be protected, that it all must be made child-safe. This eventually results in treating all adults like children. It is far better to give children their own ( such as .kid or .chd ) and retain the assumption that we adults are capable of making decisions for ourselves.

  4. I have an idea for a solution by JPriest · · Score: 5, Interesting
    The reality of the matter is that even if a .xxx domain is created it

    A) makes porn easier to find
    B) Does not solve the problem of being able to filter it with parental control software because nobody is going to shut down the porn.com's.

    The porn sites have a right to exist, who are we to force them over to .xxx domains? Forcing them all to register with some central DB so they can be black listed would also be impossible becasue there is no realistic way to keep the DB updated. My solution for addressing the filtering software problem is very simple. We amend robots.txt to include a section for Adult content. A simple addition on porn sites of a line like this would solve the problem.

    User-agent: * Disallow: /forums/
    Disallow: /members/
    Disallow: /downloads/
    Adult: /

    Sites not interested in adding the field to robots.txt are not required to by law, but many websites would be willing to accommodate something like this to assist Net Nanny etc., but would fight having to leave porn.net behind for pornforyou12341.xxx tooth and nail. On the internet your company name and your domain name are often the same. Moving them to another TLD would equate to making them shut down and start over under a new name.

    This would also greatly assist Google etc. in blocking some of these sites where "safe search" is turned on thus prevent people form going to a jenny.com by mistake and finding porn.

    I have made this suggestion a number of time in the past. Maybe I should look into what it would take to get it drafted into an RFC?

    --
    Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
  5. No, .XXX is bad by JPriest · · Score: 5, Interesting
    It isn't the porn industry that wants the change. Creating a red light district would arguably make porn easier to find for children, and at the same time if you don't force them all off the .coms's you have not really solved the problem of filtering. Who has the right to say porn is not welcome on the rest of the Internet anyway? The United States? George Bush?


    In some countries it is considered wrong for women to lift their veils so other men can see their faces, and in some women walk around with no shits on like men. Sure there are obvious cases, but who has the final word on what is and isn't sexually explicit content? Who is going to pay to enforce these new morals and who's morals?

    Do the American tax payers launch a multi billion dollar crusade to purge the internet of porn and bring our Christian morals to the internationally based Internet?

    Early proposals for .xx were to mandate that all porn sites use some form of age verification (ie credit card). With all the fraud on the internet do you honestly believe entering your credit card number and personal into on every porn site you see is a good idea? What age constitutes a "minor" anyway? 18 y/o like in the US? How many people here have never seen any porn before the age of 18? How did you turn out?

    To me this only sounds like a pathway for rampant fraud. I don't want to complain without offering up my own solution, so I think if anything is to be done then appending robots.txt to include a line for "Adult: /" where the webmaster of the site sees fit is a much better idea. I posted more on this suggestion here

    --
    Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
  6. Per the proposal they are _required_ to move by JPriest · · Score: 5, Informative
    From here. It says that the domains would be required to move.


    Here is the direct quote:
    "Any commercial Internet site or online service that "has as its principal or primary business the making available of material that is harmful to minors" would be required to move its site to that domain. Failure to comply with those requirements would result in civil penalties as determined by the Commerce Department."

    Please do not blindly support the bill without first understanding just what exactly it proposes.
    I had another post covering why I think this is bad here and proposed an alternate solution here

    --
    Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
    1. Re:Per the proposal they are _required_ to move by IWannaBeAnAC · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Hmm, I doubt the rest of the world would appreciate the ISA Department of Commerce dictating to them what is, and is not, porn. Especially considering how puritanical the USA is compared with Europe, and similarly how puritanical the Middle East is compared with everyone else.

      The Europeans will be saying breasts, even full-frontal nakedness, isn't necessarily porn,

      The Americans can't tell the difference between even partial nakedness and sex, so will force half of .eu to be under .xxx instead

      The Muslims will continue to he shocked at all the women not wearing Burkhas.

  7. Re:Why not? by iamacat · · Score: 5, Funny

    If you can't come up with a more imaginative description of people exchanging zygote's, this domain is not for you.

  8. Re:Why not? by Ralph+Yarro · · Score: 5, Funny

    What does a TLD have to do with finding porn, or anything else? Are you gong to make a list of words, append .xxx, and type them into your address bar: aardvark.xxx,.... zygote.xxx?
    Greetings, I have come back in time from the year 2007 with exciting news. In my time we no longer have to type in random words to find domains under a particular tld, instead we have a powerful and strange technology called "Google".

    For example, to get a list of .org domains we can just enter the following into our web browser:

    http://www.google.co.uk/search?as_sitesearch=.org

    to get a list of .museum domains:

    http://www.google.co.uk/search?as_sitesearch=.muse um

    To get a list of .xxx domains this would be:

    http://www.google.co.uk/search?as_sitesearch=.xxx

    "But", you say, "of what use is a mssive list of all domains? You could never click them all!" The truth is that we can go EVEN FURTHER and search for key words within sites in those domains, but I fear the culture shock from showing you this would be too much for you to bear.

    This may all sound like science fiction in your primitive era but one day this technology will seem almost common place.
    --

    The real Ralph Yarro posts as Anonymous Coward. Anyone else is an impostor.