On a related note, FUFME is still online: http://www.easylife.org/fufme/
The Y2K compliance statement was a great touch.
Fuck.com (1997)
51–60 of 109 posts
Re: Fuck.com (1997)
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
While this other policy got worse...? > If christian.org had been secured by out and out blasphemers, why couldn't I get a simple swear word? http://www.christian.org/ > This domain has been suspended due to non-completion of an ICANN-mandated contact verification.
This is solvable by just clicking on the link they send to the contact of record.
Maybe they don’t have God’s address?
Re: Fuck.com (1997)
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fun fact: There are countries in the world that are not the US!
We're talking about a product that was marketed to a US audience, and their legal disclaimer that specifically referenced US states.
Pretty sure this is a parody on CU-SeeMe, not an actual product.
Re: Fuck.com (1997)
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine if registration had stayed free, there'd be no domain squatters, and that cool idea you had that only works if the domain is available would be possible!
If registration were free one guy would write a script to register every possible domain and no one would be able to get one without buying it off of him.
Easy to handle, just use the rules of that time — single domain for single IP. Not applicable to v6 and dyndnses, but something like this can solve it.
Re: Fuck.com (1997)
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
If registration were free one guy would write a script to register every possible domain and no one would be able to get one without buying it off of him.
Easy to handle, just use the rules of that time — single domain for single IP. Not applicable to v6 and dyndnses, but something like this can solve it.
That seems like it would only further incentivize a problem we have today - wastefully holding a bunch of IPV4 addresses that you have no need for.
IMO the .com domain name fees are… acceptable. It’s similar to how we deal with scarce resources in almost every other domain. The only real improvement I can think of would be some sort of LVT-like-system where high-value domains (dictionary words, short domains) would cost more than low-value ones (robertospizzaottawa.com) to discourage camping.
Re: Fuck.com (1997)
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
Easy to handle, just use the rules of that time — single domain for single IP. Not applicable to v6 and dyndnses, but something like this can solve it.
That seems like it would only further incentivize a problem we have today - wastefully holding a bunch of IPV4 addresses that you have no need for. IMO the .com domain name fees are… acceptable. It’s similar to how we deal with scarce resources in almost every other domain. The only real improvement I can think of would be some sort of LVT-like-system where high-value domains (dictionary words, short domains) would c…
If to speak about free domains, this problem can be an advantage.
Re: Fuck.com (1997)
#57I was trying to register this too in 1994. I guess it was a race between several of us to register stupid domains. I was also bending their ears to get them to let me register the remaining single-character dotcoms. It is heartwarming to see the Internic form on that page - you used to type up the text file and email it to them and wait. You could have pretty much any domain you wanted in 1994. Except fuck.com. Also,…
It's like having the phone numbers of different BBS to dial into back in the day. Except, the internet was always connected - which totally blew my mind!
Re: Fuck.com (1997)
#58Around 1999, I had crot.ch and offered a small webmail service (and used the address for LinuxWorld registration) on the 'my' subdomain. I gave it up after a while when it became increasingly tedious to walk into my bank and request a wire transfer to the Swiss NIC to pay renewals.
Re: Fuck.com (1997)
#59On a related note, FUFME is still online: http://www.easylife.org/fufme/
I get the distinct feeling that website might be very useful prior art in any forthcoming teledildonics patent cases. Also, the "box cover" art is amazing . From their FAQ: > Can I use FuckU-FuckMe for anal or oral sex? > >Certainly! But be sure to set the preferences to oral/anal for best results. Ensure first that these acts are legal in your state. We cannot be held responsible for the legal consequences of extrac…
Yeah, sex toys were illegal to sell in my county in GA until pretty recently.
https://creativeloafing.com/content-172005-good-vibrations--...
Re: Fuck.com (1997)
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
iirc the hosts file was the primary DNS at the time, and would sync every 24 hours from a master hosts file online. Thus not needing TLDs to resolve hostnames.
While this would work, Internic would need to share the same HOSTS file. I don't remember a global shared HOSTS like that. When Windows 95 came out I created an online shared cdplayer.ini where everyone added their own track info and we intended to create a file that had info for every CD in the world (this was before CDDB was invented). Sadly the project self-destructed because W95 had a hard 64Kb limit on .ini file…
No, there was a global hosts file prior to DNS — see RFCs 811[1] and 953[2].
[1] — https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc811 [2] - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc953