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

StackOverflow also planning to switch from GoDaddy due to SOPA concerns.

meta.stackoverflow.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 79 posts

Re: StackOverflow also planning to switch from GoDaddy due to SOPA concerns.

#41

Post by scriptproof »

d_r wrote: post #21

Perhaps off-topic, but after reading GoDaddy's letter, I am surprised that our discussions against SOPA don't focus on the root -- the fact that the legislation is presented in an incredibly misleading and vague manner. At face value, its purpose is to stop the foreign counterfeit drug/goods sellers -- you know, the same guys who spam us with "enlarge your..." and such offers. The same guys who pollute Google search…

These sellers change domains each day. According to my host, they can even change servers several time per month. The process involved by SOPA, a judge decision to close the site will be absolutely inefficient against them.

Re: StackOverflow also planning to switch from GoDaddy due to SOPA concerns.

#43

Post by jeltz »

mythz wrote: post #31
ajays wrote: post #10

Wow... SO is still with GoDaddy? GoDaddy's position on SOPA has been clear since October; what took them so long?

Where has this been made clear? They may have written their statements in October, but waited till today to publish it: http://support.godaddy.com/godaddy/go-daddys-position-on-sop... It's another sleazy move by GoDaddy (that wreaks of corruption) to wait till nearly the eve of the SOPA vote before making their stance and rationale public.

Another possibility is that they wrote it a couple of days ago and backdated it to October to try to make it look like less of a panic move.

Re: StackOverflow also planning to switch from GoDaddy due to SOPA concerns.

#44

Post by hboon »

vinhboy wrote: post #30
steve918 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

eNom, Namecheap, like all of them?

This is something I never understood. I am not a sys-admin by any means, but I have never used a registrar, or host that does not have free DNS. However, I have seen people pay for DNS hosting, separate from their registrar... which is odd to me. Is this one of those things that was not available back in "good ol-days", so all the sys-admin thinks you have to worry about it separately? Or is there some sort of benefi…

* Ability to set a low TTL (usually temporarily) if you need to servers quickly.

* Often better uptime and fast

* Easier to change registrars

* A central place to manage DNS if you end up with domains spread across many registrars

Re: StackOverflow also planning to switch from GoDaddy due to SOPA concerns.

#45

Post by orblivion »

markbao wrote: post #15

I cannot believe how many people are using the worst domain registrar in existence, even if you don't consider SOPA support. Out of all of the domain registrars, why GoDaddy?

Imagine a world where GoDaddy was the only major registrar not supporting SOPA.

Oh wait it's Christmas, not Halloween. Sorry.

Re: StackOverflow also planning to switch from GoDaddy due to SOPA concerns.

#46

Post by gujk »

ceejayoz wrote: post #4
foobarbazetc wrote: post #3

Why did anyone ever use GoDaddy in the first place? There are much better options out there. Dynadot, Moniker, Gandi, ... the list is endless.

Gandi locks my Chase credit card each time I pay them. Using (ugh) PayPal is the only way I can use them.

Why would you use a credit card company that locks yo right account, ever? Fraud is the merchant's problem, not yours. Fraud investigation is a courtesy you provide to merchant customers, so the CC company should never have any reason or lock your account without your permission, unless they have tried and failed to reach you for close to the fraud-liability time limit.

Re: StackOverflow also planning to switch from GoDaddy due to SOPA concerns.

#47

Post by vidarh »

pork wrote: post #34
d_r wrote: post #21

Perhaps off-topic, but after reading GoDaddy's letter, I am surprised that our discussions against SOPA don't focus on the root -- the fact that the legislation is presented in an incredibly misleading and vague manner. At face value, its purpose is to stop the foreign counterfeit drug/goods sellers -- you know, the same guys who spam us with "enlarge your..." and such offers. The same guys who pollute Google search…

> Now suppose someone had asked you: "do you want legislation against these foreign illegal drug sellers?" Surely you'd say yes. Heck, I'd say yes. Let me stop you there. I'd say no, because I feel that in many matters, especially those concerning the Internet, legislation is about as effective as politely asking the rain not to drip through your leaky roof.

Even for the sake of argument assuming legislation is the right answer here:

The problem with SOPA is not so much what can be done to stop "bad guys", but how it can be done, namely without a court order, and only based on "reasonable belief".

It is massively chilling by virtue of causing large liabilities if someone don't act, even if/when they don't or even can't know for sure if the claim made is true, while granting immunity if they do act.

It creates a de facto assumption of guilt by creating a strong incentive to act without evidence of any wrongdoing.

Re: StackOverflow also planning to switch from GoDaddy due to SOPA concerns.

#48

Post by nextparadigms »

d_r wrote: post #21

Perhaps off-topic, but after reading GoDaddy's letter, I am surprised that our discussions against SOPA don't focus on the root -- the fact that the legislation is presented in an incredibly misleading and vague manner. At face value, its purpose is to stop the foreign counterfeit drug/goods sellers -- you know, the same guys who spam us with "enlarge your..." and such offers. The same guys who pollute Google search…

I think the drug related part has more to do with the fact that you can buy drugs from other country, just like they've forbidden you even buy drugs from Canada online - even if they are good drugs. They just don't want you to use anything that isn't from an American company.

While some online drugs may actually be dangerous to people's health, and it's obviously risky unless you know what you're doing, I think education on this issue would be much more effective than legalizing banning of online stuff.

I mean, people with common sense should already know that they need to be careful what kind of drugs they buy online. I don't think the Government's intervention is mandatory even for that, and just like trying to ban most everything online, it will probably hurt more than help.

Re: StackOverflow also planning to switch from GoDaddy due to SOPA concerns.

#49

Post by vidarh »

jws wrote: post #7
ceejayoz wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gandi locks my Chase credit card each time I pay them. Using (ugh) PayPal is the only way I can use them.

The only time American Express has called me has been twice on my Gandi payment. Makes you wonder about their fraud algorithms. Surely Amex can see I make the same payment every year, or maybe that is the mark of a patient and not greedy fraud. FWIW I haven't had any troubles in the last few years.

My bank is brutal about blocking my card on suspicion of fraud. Only in 11 years, there's never been a fraudulent transaction on that card.

While it very often happens when I try to place an order with companies I order from regularly, what seems to trigger them is not the transaction itself, but that it occurs near in time to another transaction, especially if I've ordered an online service from a company outside the UK (where I live)... Perhaps they didn't get the memo that the internet is international...

Re: StackOverflow also planning to switch from GoDaddy due to SOPA concerns.

#50

Post by justincormack »

BrandonM wrote: post #23
onedognight wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Name another registrar that is cheaper and comes with DNS?

Why do people equate registrars with DNS? Wherever you're hosting your site is where you should be handling DNS.

That is not particularly rational. It makes moving hosting providers harder and many provide very different dns services. You might want an api or support for different record types that otherwise good hosting services dont provide. I use zerigo just for dns because they are really goid at it...
Post reply on HN