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

Never buy a .online domain

0xsid.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 513 posts

Re: Never buy a .online domain

#281

Post by jagged-chisel »

duped wrote: post #240
NikolaNovak wrote: post #22

Oh man. The infinite loops of impossible verification by large companies that should know better are massive pain peeve of mine. This goes right to the top for me, along the ubiquitous "please verify your account" emails with NO OPTION to click "that's NOT me, somebody misused my email". Either people who do this for a living have no clue how to do their job, or, depressingly more likely, their goals are just complet…

A chronic problem is the idea that if something can't be automated with a human in the loop then it simply can't be done at scale. Technologists will do anything except employ humans to solve social problems.

s/technologists/venture capitalists/

Re: Never buy a .online domain

#282

Post by prmoustache »

plagiarist wrote: post #106
NikolaNovak wrote: post #22

Oh man. The infinite loops of impossible verification by large companies that should know better are massive pain peeve of mine. This goes right to the top for me, along the ubiquitous "please verify your account" emails with NO OPTION to click "that's NOT me, somebody misused my email". Either people who do this for a living have no clue how to do their job, or, depressingly more likely, their goals are just complet…

I prefer "please verify your account" to "thanks for joining" by a lot. The former presumably does not verify when I ignore it. The latter should be illegal but somehow isn't. I do wish there was a requirement for some sort of "no" button that would stop sending sign up requests entirely.

> The former presumably does not verify when I ignore it.

That doesn't prevent a huge majority of them from sending you notification emails all the time even if you never verify.

Re: Never buy a .online domain

#284

Post by jama211 »

nativeit wrote: post #158
Romario77 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I logged in several times to other people's accounts and reset their passwords. But it's too tiring, people keep adding my email. I hope it's because I have small simple email and not because they want to steal it.

You’re confessing to several actual felonies here, may want to change strategies.

No harm done no one is gonna prosecute this

Re: Never buy a .online domain

#285

Post by krickelkrackel »

tracker1 wrote: post #273
nativeit wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re confessing to several actual felonies here, may want to change strategies.

You give someone ownership of something and they used that ownership...

It's like leaving your bike in the street, with no lock. Still theft, but you'd be up for a part of the responsibility.

Re: Never buy a .online domain

#286

Post by bradgessler »

I got og.plus that expands to OpenGraphPlus.com.

At first I was stoked to have a two letter domain, but then I looked into it and learned these companies will get you hooked with a low initial price, then jack up the prices as the domain becomes established.

Quite the grift. My plan is to tread lightly on that domain and be ready to back away from it when the rent seekers move in.

You’d think there would be some sort of rules to the neutrality of these TLD administrators, but nope.

The second time around I wised up and go ogplus.net for an API domain instead of ogplus.media. I’ll take neutrality over vanity any day.

Re: Never buy a .online domain

#287

Post by ivanjermakov »

xnorswap wrote: post #67
g947o wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They seem to be almost always associated with scam sites. So, might as well to block entire TLDs and never buy a domain under those TLDs

The only .fun site I know is neal.fun, which regularly features on the front page here: https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=neal.fun

I can also name https://beamng.tech/

Re: Never buy a .online domain

#288

Post by otterley »

rtsam wrote: post #142
otterley wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(IAAL but this is not legal advice.) It’s not libel. Defamation requires a false statement of fact. Marking a website as “unsafe” is an opinion.

I always wonder what the settlement and damages would be if google marked Amazon as a phishing site for even a few minutes. The problem is that these gatekeepers of the internet respond to false statements of facts/opinions by so called professionals. I had cloudflare mark a worker as phishing because a AI "security company" thought my 301 redirect to their clients website was somehow malicious. (url redirects are no…

There is a potentially different cause of action, tortious interference with business relationships. It does require that the defendant intended to interfere in a way that would cause harm to the plaintiff, though. Proving Google intended such harm would be difficult and expensive.

Re: Never buy a .online domain

#289

Post by prmoustache »

jeroenhd wrote: post #120
g947o wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They seem to be almost always associated with scam sites. So, might as well to block entire TLDs and never buy a domain under those TLDs

These alternative domains are quite popular with the fediverse and other hobbyist-run groups. Affordable domains with somewhat recognisable names still available. Scam websites will use any TLD in my experience. Based on the ones that made it to my Google search results, .it and .info are the TLDs I should be blocking. When I search for "free roblox cash", most websites are .com. "Free robux" also brings forth a few…

> Affordable domains with somewhat recognisable names still available.

Aren't they only affordable for the first year though?

Re: Never buy a .online domain

#290

Post by otterley »

ses1984 wrote: post #144
otterley wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(IAAL but this is not legal advice.) It’s not libel. Defamation requires a false statement of fact . Marking a website as “unsafe” is an opinion .

Maybe libel is the wrong term, but erroneously marking a website as unsafe can lead to damages.

Only if it’s intentional (or maybe grossly negligent).
Post reply on HN