Live data from Hacker News

Find a good available .com domain

sive.rs

21–30 of 301 posts

Re: Find a good available .com domain

#23
post #7

Q: Do we (still?) think that dictionary words make good choices for domain names?

A: No, random combination of characters (ideally with some numbers too) both are easier to remember, looks more secure and is easier to pronounce.

:)

I'm thinking of branding - think Google, Pepsi, Adidas, Nike, Starbucks

You'd really prefer to attempt build a brand around SearchEngine.tld or RunningShoe.tld ?

Re: Find a good available .com domain

#26
post #13

I love the comment that someone dropped on the post. One could replace the first Ruby script by a one-liner: "cat /tmp/com.txt | awk '{ print substr($1, 1, length($1) -5) }' | uniq > domains.txt"

Classic useless use of cat?

I don't agree with the whole 'useless use of cat' meme: cat creates an output stream, which in turn allows you to build up the subsequent command bit by bit and allows you to cut and past chunks from useful building blocks you keep in a file.

The first command changes all the time so by using 'cat' those blocks remain reusable, everything will use the piped input that cat sends if there is no preceding program, rather than to have to insert < somefile in the middle of the first command.

Re: Find a good available .com domain

#27
post #4

Would the same process work for other tlds?

Why wouldn't it?

Because different tlds are operated somewhat differently and afaict this seems to be a secondary service that isn’t fundamental to routing or other required operations of a registrar.

In this case it seems to work with “participating tlds”, whichever those are.

Re: Find a good available .com domain

#29

> If you’re on Mac, Linux, or BSD, you should have a dictionary of words at /usr/share/dict/words Why do they come with a dictionary of words?

Password generators, spell checkers, password crackers, textual analysis, the 'look' program. Probably more than that!

Re: Find a good available .com domain

#30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Classic useless use of cat?

I don't agree with the whole 'useless use of cat' meme: cat creates an output stream, which in turn allows you to build up the subsequent command bit by bit and allows you to cut and past chunks from useful building blocks you keep in a file. The first command changes all the time so by using 'cat' those blocks remain reusable, everything will use the piped input that cat sends if there is no preceding program, rathe…

I'd agree with avoiding the redirection because it's sorta annoying to grok in one-liners. But in this case the file would just go after the awk command.
Post reply on HN