111–120 of 171 posts
I might want to include that IMHO all new TLDs are trick. Brand proprietors are compelled to enroll their name in a large portion of them.
I consider any "non standard" tld as crap. If you have a weird tld i wont go to your website.
This is why people should move to things like OpenNIC or to a DNS-less address scheme like the ones used in namecoin/tor/i2p. The ICANN scammers should be stopped.
A site that provides uncensored free speech aimed at companies is considered a huge scam? It looks like the comments are not manipulated, and I appreciate that authenticity more than practices happening around Google, YouTube, Facebook etc.
Could the major browser providers start just blacklisting these kinds of TLD's? Or grey listing with huge warnings?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I consider any "non standard" tld as crap. If you have a weird tld i wont go to your website.
Where do you draw the line on this? I can understand that unknown companies running on some obscure GTLD might raise suspicion, but what about a personal blog or someone's side project?
.info is the furthest I'd go. At a push. I'll also still click on ".google" and other reputable corp vanity domains if the content appears on HN and looks interesting enough.
A site that provides uncensored free speech aimed at companies is considered a huge scam? It looks like the comments are not manipulated, and I appreciate that authenticity more than practices happening around Google, YouTube, Facebook etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You should only be concerned about people who know enough to tell that `google.com.feedba.ck` is probably not owned by google, but don't know enough to tell the same about `google.feedback`. I really don't think this covers a lot of people.
Two points: - I do think they are concerned about google.com.feedba.ck, those lawyers need to fill up their day. - google.com.feedba.ck is far more sketchy looking than google.feedback. It's far easier to fool someone with the latter, and therefore far more of a thread.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You should only be concerned about people who know enough to tell that `google.com.feedba.ck` is probably not owned by google, but don't know enough to tell the same about `google.feedback`. I really don't think this covers a lot of people.
Two points: - I do think they are concerned about google.com.feedba.ck, those lawyers need to fill up their day. - google.com.feedba.ck is far more sketchy looking than google.feedback. It's far easier to fool someone with the latter, and therefore far more of a thread.