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

Internet Society told to halt .org sale by its own advisory council

theregister.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 114 posts

Re: Internet Society told to halt .org sale by its own advisory council

#81

Post by alasdair_ »

JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #54
jerf wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I will say this about the TLD "debacle", when I recently went looking for a domain name made out of real words, but not in what you'd call the "A list" (i.e., not "drugs.com" or "money.com"), they have at least made it ineffectual now for squatters to squat on everything across all the useful TLDs. Someone wanted a couple $K for the .com variant but there were several other useful variants completely unregister…

Does anyone actually use or go to services on super-generic TLDs like that? I can't think of any billion-dollar businesses that exist at .com. I can't imagine they're as valuable as people make them out to be, because businesses have brands that aren't generic words like "money" or "drugs". There's "amazon" but the business has nothing do with rainforests, so it's not like they're benefitting from traffic from people…

I’m still waiting for the $45 million spent on color.com and colour.com to pay off...

Re: Internet Society told to halt .org sale by its own advisory council

#82

Post by kick »

JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #54
jerf wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I will say this about the TLD "debacle", when I recently went looking for a domain name made out of real words, but not in what you'd call the "A list" (i.e., not "drugs.com" or "money.com"), they have at least made it ineffectual now for squatters to squat on everything across all the useful TLDs. Someone wanted a couple $K for the .com variant but there were several other useful variants completely unregister…

Does anyone actually use or go to services on super-generic TLDs like that? I can't think of any billion-dollar businesses that exist at .com. I can't imagine they're as valuable as people make them out to be, because businesses have brands that aren't generic words like "money" or "drugs". There's "amazon" but the business has nothing do with rainforests, so it's not like they're benefitting from traffic from people…

pets.com

Re: Internet Society told to halt .org sale by its own advisory council

#83

Post by mxuribe »

blowski wrote: post #76
mxuribe wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard of handshake...but were you referring to something else? If so, please share, I'm genuinely curious.

Personally, I don’t know what the alternatives are. I barely understand DNS as it is. But I would be surprised if the whole of the tech world can only think of two possible ways of managing it.

I hope you're right about the tech world...Because we need valid options.

Re: Internet Society told to halt .org sale by its own advisory council

#84

Post by jude- »

rasengan wrote: post #66
jude- wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can tell that you really want me to believe that ICANN and the US government are the problem, and that Handshake is the solution. But you still have not addressed how Handshake solves the three main problems I have with the .org sale: * The .org owners should not be allowed to rent-seek, but instead continue to provide the same level of service and fees that we have come to expect. * The control and governance of T…

> The .org owners should not be allowed to rent-seek, but instead continue to provide the same level of service and fees that we have come to expect. When the centralized monopoly is all for raising prices, it becomes clear that market forces ceased to exist. In free markets, pricing is controlled by the markets themselves, not by any single actor. Handshake absolutely makes TLDs a free market. > The control and gove…

> When the centralized monopoly is all for raising prices, it becomes clear that market forces ceased to exist.

> In free markets, pricing is controlled by the markets themselves, not by any single actor.

I want .org name prices to remain capped at $10, and I want its stewards to take steps to ensure that there isn't a profit motive. That's a big part of what this uproar is -- lots of cash-strapped organizations whose Web presence depends on .org continuing to be operated as it was would harmed even if the prices of .org names were set by an idealized free market. This is not something Handshake addresses.

> I agree with this. Again, free markets control this. Consider the difference between the market for gum (market controlled) versus the market for patented drugs (single actor controlled).

The "free-ness" of the market is orthogonal to the problem at hand. The problem here is corruption and rent-seeking. Handshake not only fails to address this, but also arguably makes it more prone to happen.

> If the community collectively decides to fork, it can fork.

If the problem was as easily solved as setting up and running an alternative DNS root, we wouldn't need Handshake. We'd just run an alternative DNS root, but with a governing charter that is less prone to corruption. No need to introduce a blockchain to solve a fundamentally social problem.

This approach would also be highly disruptive and would hurt a lot of people over the course of its execution. Why are you so adamantly opposed to simply stopping the sale of .org to rent-seekers? Stopping the sale is, by far, the least painful and least disruptive solution.

> Thanks for pointing out these questions and allowing me to directly address how Handshake solves these problems, and please keep them coming as it helps us to better understand what information isn’t well explained, and explain it!

Except, you haven't addressed a single one of my problems.

Re: Internet Society told to halt .org sale by its own advisory council

#85

Post by jedieaston »

ukyrgf wrote: post #35
mxuribe wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My isp (Verizon) already"conveniently" provides a landing page whenever I typo a web address(or there us some dns miss, etc.)...so your concept is (sadly) here-and-now, and not a far off thing.

AT&T as well. I still need to put aside a Sunday to figure out how to passthrough their fiber modem/router combo and use my own equipment again.

Follow these steps to make your router the default host: https://www.att.com/support/smallbusiness/article/smb-intern...

And then plug all of your devices into your router. Easy peasy, albeit not as easy as Comcast’s big bridge mode switch on the modem control panel.

Re: Internet Society told to halt .org sale by its own advisory council

#86

Post by troquerre »

danShumway wrote: post #57
rasengan wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Registering a TLD in Handshake may end up being significantly more complicated and significantly more costly than buying a .org domain today It’s significantly easier than the process is today. It’s very hard to get a TLD from ICANN as the process consists of a non refundable application fee of 185k with no guarantees you’ll be approved. > There's no market information I can find about what a TLD will cost on avera…

> Rather than artificial set costs, the market will dictate this. But you're coming into this conversation claiming that Handshake is going to democratize TLDs, that anyone will be able to buy one. We don't really know that the average cost of a TLD won't spike up to a thousand dollars, right? We don't know that every fortune 500 company in the world and every government in the world won't step in and snatch up every…

People are already purchasing TLDs for affordable prices. .coin sold for 200k HNS ($50k at market price) but there’s have been dozens of other TLDs registered for less than $10. Any alphanumeric name less than 63 characters can be registered so you can almost always find a good name that is affordable https://namebase.io/domains

Re: Internet Society told to halt .org sale by its own advisory council

#87

Post by kick »

echelon wrote: post #51
packetlost wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

.dev is available for public registration... I have one.

"vanity" domains are $200/yr or more Including "{firstname}.dev" Nonsense. If Google's worried about domain squatters, it controls the TLD rules and can come up with a less moneygrab strategy. Perhaps require a Github account and limit to one domain per customer? FCFS is fairer than extortion.

require a GitHub account

You do know that there are devs that prefer other code hosting platforms, right? GitHub is a proprietary service that's generally terrible for developers.

Re: Internet Society told to halt .org sale by its own advisory council

#88

Post by troquerre »

mxuribe wrote: post #26
anoncake wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No we don't. There has to be a single DNS, otherwise names are ambiguous which defeats the point.

To clarify: I think we need something different __instead of__ the current centrally control system, and not something __in addition to__. We need change, and not addition.

There have been a few comments about Handshake already. I agree that there needs to be a single DNS and not just an “alternative” bc that will fragment the namespace. I think Handshake has the potential to become the DNS that the world uses bc it’s compatible with the traditional system — existing TLDs are blacklisted and the Alexa top 100k have been reserved as TLDs for the domain owners. Given that ICANN isn’t opening the gtld program for 2-3 years and how fast things can grow on the Internet, I think Handshake can become the de facto DNS that everyone uses before there’s a possibility for conflict.

Re: Internet Society told to halt .org sale by its own advisory council

#89

Post by troquerre »

rasengan wrote: post #12
mxuribe wrote: post #9

This whole situation is ridiculous. We need an alternative to all this centralized control, and we need it now.

> We need an alternative to all this centralized control, and we need it now. The Handshake Naming System [1] provides a decentralized option, works directly with the existing legacy system so there will be 0 difficulty in the transition, and it’s usable right now [2]! Just install hsd [3] and point your resolution to localhost to join the movement to an internet owned by the people. [1] https://handshake.org [2] htt…

PSA if you had over 15 followers on GitHub by August 2018 you were likely included in the Handshake airdrop. Basically they developed a way to give each dev in the airdrop 4662 coins each (worth a lot since current market price is $0.20[1]). These instructions walk through what the claiming process is like https://namebase.io/airdrop. [1] https://namebase.io

Re: Internet Society told to halt .org sale by its own advisory council

#90

Post by mxuribe »

troquerre wrote: post #88
mxuribe wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To clarify: I think we need something different __instead of__ the current centrally control system, and not something __in addition to__. We need change, and not addition.

There have been a few comments about Handshake already. I agree that there needs to be a single DNS and not just an “alternative” bc that will fragment the namespace. I think Handshake has the potential to become the DNS that the world uses bc it’s compatible with the traditional system — existing TLDs are blacklisted and the Alexa top 100k have been reserved as TLDs for the domain owners. Given that ICANN isn’t open…

Fingers crossed; let's hope so!
Post reply on HN