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

ICANN Allows .COM Price Increases, Gets More Money

namecheap.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 132 posts

Re: ICANN Allows .COM Price Increases, Gets More Money

#121

Post by aiCeivi9 »

ohazi wrote: post #57

This is not going to end. ICANN has revealed their hand -- they are corrupt. But we don't actually need them. What we do need is a "Let's Encrypt" style initiative to replace the DNS roots in their entirety, run by competent, principled people. It would be difficult, but the people who are pissed off about this have clout at Google, Microsoft, and Mozilla (the web browser gatekeepers) and might actually be able to pu…

> Google

They are trying to kill URL, with AMP and hiding parts of address in Chrome bar. The perfect google customer never types any URL and uses search engine instead.

Re: ICANN Allows .COM Price Increases, Gets More Money

#122

Post by kodablah »

bad_user wrote: post #114
kodablah wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Separate the issues and it'll make your conscience clearer. I too have issues w/ how NameCheap presents things (sale prices for other TLDs don't clearly state renewal rates for example), but that is orthogonal to their position here.

Actually they do clearly state renewal prices and I can't remember a time in which they didn't: https://www.dropbox.com/s/5fpqtji40aprg1w/IMG_4790.jpg?dl=0 Note that I'm not even a native English speaker, so you'd think that such misunderstandings would happen more to people like me.

That says retail not renewal. Often during sales of products companies will put full price so you know your savings, not often is it really the full price you'll pay later. One might think "sale for x/yr" would be different than "sale for x/1yr".

Re: ICANN Allows .COM Price Increases, Gets More Money

#123

Post by dwild »

thiht wrote: post #118
gowld wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Write to your government, not ICANNN. ICANN is accountable to no one, except the US government where their offices sit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICANN#Democratic_input

ICANN is actually independent from the US government since 2016

Their structure may be independent from the US government, their office are still there, thus has to respect the US laws and is still accountable to the US government.

Re: ICANN Allows .COM Price Increases, Gets More Money

#124

Post by dwild »

deepsun wrote: post #53
Avamander wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the poor or nonprofits having a valuable domain would have to give them up, terrible idea.

I'm thinking, is that really any different from real estate property tax? Imagine there was some poor non-profit owning like 15 acres on Manhattan, would it be better to tax them the same a in the middle of Nevada?

> I'm thinking, is that really any different from real estate property tax?

Property taxes goes toward the city budget which is spend for the city.

Domains taxes goes toward... a bigger boat for the CEO?

Re: ICANN Allows .COM Price Increases, Gets More Money

#125

Post by ohashi »

nojvek wrote: post #104
ohazi wrote: post #57

This is not going to end. ICANN has revealed their hand -- they are corrupt. But we don't actually need them. What we do need is a "Let's Encrypt" style initiative to replace the DNS roots in their entirety, run by competent, principled people. It would be difficult, but the people who are pissed off about this have clout at Google, Microsoft, and Mozilla (the web browser gatekeepers) and might actually be able to pu…

I agree with this. The power really lies with Browser holders. The browser is the most used app in the world. If browser folks + name registry folks like namecheap, godaddy, cloudflare etc got together to another .com resolution method and gave ICANN and Verizon a middle finger, this could really work. Right now, as is, ICANN is a corrupt and profit at any cost motivated org. This will most surely not turn out well f…

VeriSign

Re: ICANN Allows .COM Price Increases, Gets More Money

#126

Post by ohashi »

thorwasdfasdf wrote: post #80
ohazi wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we can accomplish a lot by demonstrating that we're serious about routing around bad behavior. If people start seriously talking about migrating away from today's ICANN, I suspect that one of two things are likely to happen: 1. ICANN might see this as an existential threat, realize that they can't act with impunity, and will start to change their behavior. I am pretty pessimistic about ICANN's current leaders…

Either that, or they'll try to get Congress to pass laws that force everyone to use ICANN, in the name of security or some other.

If Google, Mozilla, Apple and Microsoft decided to split the root using browsers, I think the US government would be happier having them under their control. Why do they need to play ICANN's game if US companies control the new DNS.

Fuck ICANN, why would US government want to continue to support a corrupt international organization trying to avoid US government oversight?

Re: ICANN Allows .COM Price Increases, Gets More Money

#127

Post by ohashi »

IceWreck wrote: post #100
mdorazio wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for saying this. I think a lot of people probably haven't felt the pain of actually acquiring a trademark and branded domain these days. My personal opinion is that .com domains should be a minimum $100 per year. At this price point the number of available domains would skyrocket effectively overnight as it became untenable for squatters to hold on to them. If you can't afford $100/year for a domain to be u…

Youre thinking about yourself. Students etc who have .com domains cant afford $100 a year for their domain? Should they be forced to give up their domains because people like you couldnt get their chosen domains from squatters/

Also ignoring poorer countries in the world. Not everyone makes high western developer salaries. Why should .com domain names suddenly be gate kept and all the profits going into a monopoly and a corrupt oversight organization?

Re: ICANN Allows .COM Price Increases, Gets More Money

#128

Post by ohashi »

ObsoleteNerd wrote: post #47

Is there a TLD/gTLD that isn't run by people intent on profiteering and corruption? Even if everyone were to abandon .com/net/etc, and moved to .whatever, you're still supporting ICANN through IANA, no? So basically we have no choice but to support them, or revert to sharing IP addresses?

Why people are so mad about .ORG, it was supposed to be that special place, focused not on profiteering and corruption. Thanks Internet Society for fucking that up.

Re: ICANN Allows .COM Price Increases, Gets More Money

#129

Post by ohashi »

x__x wrote: post #33
NikkiA wrote: post #16

I have mixed feelings about this, the increase by ICANN is outrageous, but at the same time NameCheap are positioning themselves as heros here, and I've been burnt multiple times by the byzantine way their renewal system tries to fool you into paying for the wrong thing (put 'registration period as 10 years? suuure, we won't tell you you're paying for 10 years of privacy guard over 1 year of domain registration thoug…

> NameCheap are positioning themselves as heros here They have a history of jumping on various issues for marketing purposes. They got a lot of there core users by going against the founder of GD and spamming reddit with anti GD comments. If you want a good registrar with free whois privacy (that is easier to manage than NameCheaps) and better prices, go with NameSilo

I don't think it's simply marketing purposes. They actually try to make a different and impact. On .ORG they filed an official complaint with ICANN because they could as a registrar. Their CEO has been in the domain industry I think over two decades now and actually cares about it. What's good for consumers buying domains is good for NameCheap I'm sure.

Re: ICANN Allows .COM Price Increases, Gets More Money

#130

Post by pmart123 »

anfilt wrote: post #99
pmart123 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From a technical standpoint, what would the risk be if Verisign screwed up? If they could only afford low rate engineers, would the risk go up significantly?

That depends on the failure. Plus what recovery methods, redundancy, and backups they have. However, even at current prices verasign should have no problem paying decent engineers. Especially considering the number of registrations. However, the distributed nature dns does protect against a lot blunders unless they persist for long enough for caches to invalidate. The largest concern would be bad backups of registrat…

Interesting. Thanks. Verisign's revenue per employee is definitely off the charts as is its operating margins. I remember reading this article though:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/feb/28/seven-peo...

In some ways, it seems like the potential risks warrant Verisign to have a strong financial incentive given the problems we've seen at PG&E (if Verisign can also be considered a utility). Also, it does serve as a north star in regards to properly compensating companies or individuals who provide important protocols, infrastructure layers, and FOSS projects. How much that should be though is an interesting question.

Post reply on HN