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

.io considered harmful

beep.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 254 posts

Re: .io considered harmful

#121

Post by pseudalopex »

Turing_Machine wrote: post #41
dijit wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Virtue signaling is the expression of a conspicuous, self-righteous moral viewpoint with the intent of communicating good character. It doesn't actually have to be virtuous, it only needs to signal virtue to others. Virtue signalling usually does not genuinely solve anything anyway it's merely supposed to impress upon you that "this person is good", that's the entire goal. Whether it's meaningful or not doesn't enter…

A prime example: "Acknowledging that you're on Comanche (or whoever) land". This "acknowledgment" never seems to involve paying any rent to the Comanche for being on "their land", nor doing anything else that actually benefits the Comanche. Taking the 15 seconds to add this to your social media profile means you can signal to everyone what a Good Person you are without ever having to actually do anything.

Some indigenous people believe land acknowledgements are a good 1st step. Some believe they are a waste of time. But the 2nd group don't claim the 1st group don't exist.

Voluntary land tax programs exist.[1] They seem to benefit from land acknowledgements.

[1] https://nativegov.org/news/voluntary-land-taxes/

Re: .io considered harmful

#122

Post by immibis »

thiht wrote: post #95
teddyh wrote: post #2

I would go further and say this: Never treat foreign ccTLD’s (two-letter domains) as anything you can just register and use a domain in. You should only ever use a ccTLD of your own country or region you actually have your main presence in. Your domain name is often your most secure key to your entire online identity, and you want that to be on as a secure legal footing as possible. Older discussion here: https://new…

I used to work at a registrar and I completely agree with you. This is exactly my take as well (with a small exception for .eu, just don't use it) For your online identity (ie email address) I'd even go as far as suggesting not using a ccTLD at all, no matter if you check all the boxes. No fancy gTLD either, just use a .com. I don't think any TLD is remotely as reliable as this one (maybe .net because they're both Ve…

A lot of sites use .org because .com is a bit censor-happy when it comes to certain topics.

Re: .io considered harmful

#123

Post by [deleted] »

IceHegel wrote: post #88
organsnyder wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This post is perhaps extreme (I don't know enough about the history to comment), but not only can we both learn from history while looking forward, but we should do so—best to put our most self-aware foot forward as we hope to expand beyond our planet.

In agree in the abstract. In practice, we are very over-indexed on these deconstruction type issues by selectively reopening old wounds, often along racial lines, which isn't leading anywhere good, defiantly not to mars.

[deleted]

Re: .io considered harmful

#124

Post by tromp »

tempodox wrote: post #117
KaiserPro wrote: post #40

The article starts with "everything is FACT" then ends with: Every .io domain you buy funds a government committing crimes against humanity. Every .io domain you renew legitimises and reinforces the continued exile of the Chagossians. which is hyperbole at best, and bollocks at worst. .io isn't sold or owned by the british (or US) government Most people don't understand what .io is for, moreover the UK goverment has…

> The article starts with "everything is FACT" No, it doesn't. That phrase occurs nowhere in the article.

The article states "Here's the history and the facts."

Advice to GP: Don't put something in quotes unless quoting literally.

Re: .io considered harmful

#126

Post by oooyay »

teddyh wrote: post #114
oooyay wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your domain name is often your most secure key to your entire online identity, and you want that to be on as a secure legal footing as possible. No, it absolutely isn't. Domain names are rented from a TLD registrar, someone who literally just controls a bunch of DNS servers and some automated systems that's approved by and has paid ICANN. They can reject your renewal for any reason and there's nothing you can do ab…

> Ordering from your own country maybe ups the ante from a civil court perspective if you have money to sue a registrar and the time to go to court for it. Yes, that’s my point. If your local government and associated court system is completely unworkable for you (corruption, onerous fees, etc.), then some other TLD might be preferable. But a local citizen will almost always have a large advantage in a dispute with s…

That was a point, but your first point was that domains are secure sources of web identity. That's what I disagreed with. I do agree that if your civil courts are knowledgeable you at least have some defense, but domains are more rent and less property which makes them an insecure form of identity imo.

Re: .io considered harmful

#127

Post by RockRobotRock »

KaiserPro wrote: post #40

The article starts with "everything is FACT" then ends with: Every .io domain you buy funds a government committing crimes against humanity. Every .io domain you renew legitimises and reinforces the continued exile of the Chagossians. which is hyperbole at best, and bollocks at worst. .io isn't sold or owned by the british (or US) government Most people don't understand what .io is for, moreover the UK goverment has…

wait until they find out my domain comes from Afghanistan (.af)

Re: .io considered harmful

#128

Post by ethbr1 »

KronisLV wrote: post #50
KaiserPro wrote: post #40

The article starts with "everything is FACT" then ends with: Every .io domain you buy funds a government committing crimes against humanity. Every .io domain you renew legitimises and reinforces the continued exile of the Chagossians. which is hyperbole at best, and bollocks at worst. .io isn't sold or owned by the british (or US) government Most people don't understand what .io is for, moreover the UK goverment has…

> Every .io domain you renew legitimises and reinforces the continued exile of the Chagossians. The history there is unfortunate (although the history lesson itself is welcome), but at the same time this is akin to saying: you should boycott products and services from the UK/US. If you feel that way, you can try to do that, but I get the feeling that purely logistically that would get pretty difficult to do. Looking…

Well, the thought process is that cents from every .io registration go to a private equity firm.

And none of that money goes to the people who historically lived there and were displaced.

So... that's a pretty shitty thing to support (as someone registering a domain), when the alternative is simply "Pick a different TLD."

Tbh, ICANN/IANA should either (a) dissolve the TLD as-is, as there is no independent country it covers (and the UK already has one and doesn't want it) or (b) switch it to Chagossian ownership, so they financially benefit.

The current situation and ownership is indefensible.

Re: .io considered harmful

#130

Post by ethbr1 »

rfw300 wrote: post #101
gowld wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's like the Cuba buying Florida from the USA. Floridians wouldn't consider that "legal" People can't be legally bought and sold.

Ironic, considering the United States literally purchased Florida from Spain.

Yeah, but it wasn't like there were pre-existing inhabitants in the Americas at that time. /HEAVIEST-S-POSSIBLE
Post reply on HN