Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Announces .new Domain Availability

whats.new

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 166 posts

Re: Google Announces .new Domain Availability

#71

Post by nefitty »

CydeWeys wrote: post #61
Cogito wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Other way around: repo.new would redirect to github.com/repositories/new. Look at that!, it does redirect to github.com/new/ I guess that will be useful for some people? It feels a little bit like mystery meat though; how do I discover these super useful shortcuts? If I am someone who would benefit from learning a quick-to-type shortcut for performing an action, say because I create these things all the time, what…

You know how, when you've just recently pushed a new branch to master, and then you go to GitHub, it'll auto-suggest creation of a new pull request with the correct source and destination repos/branches automatically selected, and all you have to do is confirm to send it? That's what I think pr.new should do. I'd definitely use that one a lot.

Yes, this one sounds like a perfect use case.

I use docs.new and sheets.new several times a day. It saved me a couple of clicks per action, but subjectively it made so much smoother to stay within Google's ecosystem.

Re: Google Announces .new Domain Availability

#72

Post by scrollaway »

profmonocle wrote: post #60
waiseristy wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is an exception in the reqs "An exception is provided for services that require a user to be logged in, navigation to a .new domain may bring a logged-out user to a sign up or sign in page"

bit.ly does not require you to be logged in to create a new short link, so they don't seem to be in compliance.

mail.new seems broken as well, it hard-requires an @google.com login.

Re: Google Announces .new Domain Availability

#73

Post by DrKabab »

CydeWeys wrote: post #62
profmonocle wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not keen on legally mandating the use of a particular domain extension, unless that extension is managed by a non-profit. Some of the newly-added TLDs have exorbitant annual fees, and if businesses were legally required to use them they could charge whatever they pleased. Plus, you'd have a collision problem. What if one company has foobar.com and another has foobar.net, and they both collect data? (Imagine they'…

You'd have to create the real TLDs as SLDs on .delete, and then the way to make a .delete domain would simply be to append .delete to the existing FQDN. So you'd thus have foobar.com.delete and foobar.net.delete, no collisions. Not saying it's great, but it'd work.

Instead you could just have delete.foobar.com and delete.foobar.net instead, wouldn't need buying a new pricy domain name...

Re: Google Announces .new Domain Availability

#74

Post by C14L »

profmonocle wrote: post #56
appleshore wrote: post #30

The only super useful version of this idea is a privacy law that requires services that collect data to offer a “facebook.delete” link to temporarily and permanently remove personal data.

I'm not keen on legally mandating the use of a particular domain extension, unless that extension is managed by a non-profit. Some of the newly-added TLDs have exorbitant annual fees, and if businesses were legally required to use them they could charge whatever they pleased. Plus, you'd have a collision problem. What if one company has foobar.com and another has foobar.net, and they both collect data? (Imagine they'…

Or simply standardize a mandatory "example.com/delete-all-my-data" path on the same domain.

Re: Google Announces .new Domain Availability

#75

Post by nullify88 »

AdrienLemaire wrote: post #42

I'm a bit confused. Are these domains only usable as web redirects? Or is it just that the examples shown are used as such, but we can use the domain as any other one? I wonder how having multiple entries to the same page will affect page ranking. Looking up gist.new, I wonder why there are 2 requests done: 307 Internal Redirect 301 Moved Permanently Before getting the 200 request to https://gist.github.com/ .

Due to HSTS (It maybe preloaded in your browser), the browser internally redirects http://gist.new to https://gist.new. And then receives a 301 from the web server (which is cacheable) to redirect you to your final destination.

Edit: It is (https://hstspreload.org/?domain=gist.new)

Re: Google Announces .new Domain Availability

#76

Post by pluma »

p1necone wrote: post #46
ChrisGranger wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please, please, please let this become a thing. I hate how many sites force you to jump through hoops to remove your data and/or close your account.

A lot of those hoops are an important security measure though. Imagine if someone else could quickly and easily delete your account if they managed to steal your password.

No, a lot of hoops are barely even legal.

Many services don't even allow you to delete your account, just to disable it and have it hang around in their database as long as they want. That's a blatant violation of privacy.

Re: Google Announces .new Domain Availability

#77

Post by g105b »

Since when is an arbitrary cross-origin domain name a valid user interface choice?

From a security standpoint, using the _path_ of a trusted domain is still a thousand times more secure and convenient, rather than navigating to another arbitrary domain name with no validation of whether it is affiliated with the domain where you've come from.

If Google push this sort of mechanism, it's opening up a whole load of fraud capabilities! If I'm on gmail and receive a phishing attack email, tricking me into navigating to "gmail.new" which asks for my google password, should I type it into the box? There is a green padlock in the URL so it must be fine.

Re: Google Announces .new Domain Availability

#78

Post by ownagefool »

kristiandupont wrote: post #32

I use a .io domain and I get why .com isn't sufficient, but I really fail to see the value that this, along with most of the other cute new tld's, bring to the world. More than anything, I fear that it will teach my parents that domains can look like anything, so that link in the email is probably fine.

It's pretty much a fix for squatting.

You get a fair bit of defense for it around here, but ultimatly it's just rent seeking. Keeping younger generations out from having decent name just because you arrived earlier doesn't really promote a healthy web, nor provide real economic value.

Of course, most squatters would respond "I was planning on using that domain", so it's easier politically to just flood us with new ones.

My company name is squatted on several tlds ( by different people, obviously no intention to use them ). The .com owner wanted to charge me $40,000 or $1000 p/m. Fuck that. I used an alt tld.

Re: Google Announces .new Domain Availability

#79

Post by laurent123456 »

> That means that all .new domains registrations must: ...

I don't get why anyone would want this over a regular domain with which they can do whatever they want with no restrictions.

It's just another way for Google to control and have a say over other people's businesses. For sure we'll see again posts about people having had their product destroyed because Google cut them off with no way to appeal.

Post reply on HN