111–120 of 147 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Couldn't this also be mitigated by making all domains mandatorily delegated from a national ccTLD? Eliminate/redirect apple.com to apple.com.us, then make sure it conforms to the rules for US domains (Latin character set only, etc) whereas apple.com.ru comes under the rules of the Russian registrar?
I prefer an unfractioned internet
I might be missing something, but I completely don't get this idea, especially with the examples provided by the author. I have two major concerns: > Bind searches to domain names, eg "food in chicago" => f02970848a63988965aa40cd368ffcf9046209ca.com This IMO is bad, and goes in completely wrong direction. We've invented search engines to have such phrases not bound to a particular domain. Who would handle the "#://fo…
"and the primary source of frustration is that they are mostly taken by various squatters and other scums of the Internet" "Scums of the Internet"? Oh please. Where are you getting this all from exactly? You've just decided that since you weren't able to buy a domain [1] that you wanted at a price that you could afford to pay that all domains "are mostly taken by various squatters and other scum of the Internet". I m…
Solutions? I'd like to see something like a tax proportionate to asking price on domains, analogous to a land value tax, to discourage claiming domains that you're not actually using.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does this solve anything? Instead of registering france.com, I'll register the hash of "France". Adding a level of indirection hasn't provided any benefits. People can already register domains like "food-in-chicago.com" or "for-sale-baby-clothes.com". Your contrived example about "Google" meaning "China" in Chinese, is irrelevant. The .CN registrar can enforce whatever rules they want. The US .COM registrar can h…
The problem is that .COM is de facto the universal entry point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The is a horrendously horrible idea, for the same reason why unicode domain names are a bad idea. So, you suggest that non english speakers should just "learn it" to use DNS?
Until we can figure out something that doesn't suck, yes. Look, I'm sympathetic with a huge chunk of the world's population having to deal with a (potentially) unfamiliar character set, but what can you do about it? There has to be some standard that everyone can agree to which doesn't compromise the integrity of the net.
Well, seeing as that "huge chunk" is a large majority, then the solution isn't "learn english because I'm used to typing URLs _this_ way."
I understand that English is the current lingua franca, but it's aggressive to expect everyone to deal with it just to use the internet.
Why not use our country tlds? It might mean that ICANN has to actually do some work, but I think that the uppermost tld for countries should actually be reserved for suffixes.
e.g.
apple.us #should have never been sold apple.com.us #there, none of that scary unicode apple.com.ru #same unicode problem abound (but at least it addresses the first issue)
Reminds me of "RealNames". Dot-com era company. $130 million in funding. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RealNames RealNames was a company founded in 1997 by Keith Teare. Its goal was to create a multilingual keyword-based naming system for the Internet that would translate keywords typed into the address bar of Microsoft's Internet Explorer web browser to Uniform Resource Identifiers, based on the existing Domain Name…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This might at first sound like a xenophobic, anglocentric position, but it actually makes quite a bit of sense. There are a number of instances in which it is advantageous / critical to adopt a lingua franca -- that is, a single language that everyone in the world agrees to use for a particular purpose. In the case of domain names, Patrick is right: If we allow characters that appear to be one thing but are actually…
Couldn't this also be mitigated by making all domains mandatorily delegated from a national ccTLD? Eliminate/redirect apple.com to apple.com.us, then make sure it conforms to the rules for US domains (Latin character set only, etc) whereas apple.com.ru comes under the rules of the Russian registrar?
e.g.
I buy 'apple.com' and while if I want to leave it as this, fine. However, I should also have 'apple.com.us' and 'apple.com.ru' so that I can handle these appropriately. It's not perfect, but it at least gives my users a chance to say "hey, I probably prefer (english|russian), so please give me that page."
Of course, this is also a bit lazy and somewhat of a non-solution, as this only addresses the issue for English speakers. A russian speaker using the .ru namespace is already willing to "play by the ascii rules."
People going to 'apple.com' really expect to go to the webpage of the American electronics company. One could assume this by the TLD. Users sending a request to 'apple.рф' would be doing something somewhat strange (user sends english base label, followed by a cyrillic tld). This isn't that absurd though, as english company names become loanwords (at least in russian -- see "xerox" or even ask a russian if he owns a 'yabloko makkniga pro' or an 'apple macbook pro' for example). Should the presence of a non-unicode TLD trigger country-specific mode in browsers for the sake of security? How do we handle loanwords (spoiler to above: russians say 'apple' when referring to the brand, even though it shadows the actual Russian word for apple) with non-ascii TLDs?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What on earth do you think Investment Bankers do? build playgrounds for the local children? Creating nothing useful is in the definition of "Investment Banker".
Umm, yes actually? Where do you think the playground equipment manufacturer got their initial capital?
Basically, from the same places that the manufacturer gets their money from in order to pay dividends to the investors.
Investment banking is _a_ lubricant of industry, not _the_ lubricant, certainly not the fuel.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The concept just covers hash-n-slash but you also touched a very different concept of p2p content delivery. But talking about hash-n-slash why it is bad. Just like domains have the issue of being kidnapped so would be the keywords. For example with the hash-n-slash you would never know where you will end up being when you search for "france". By giving search engine the liberty to direct me to a site I lose the abili…
Yes hash-n-slash is bad for domain names, that's what I meant: it is a good poison, it will accelerate it's death.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does this solve anything? Instead of registering france.com, I'll register the hash of "France". Adding a level of indirection hasn't provided any benefits. People can already register domains like "food-in-chicago.com" or "for-sale-baby-clothes.com". Your contrived example about "Google" meaning "China" in Chinese, is irrelevant. The .CN registrar can enforce whatever rules they want. The US .COM registrar can h…
The problem is that .COM is de facto the universal entry point.
In fact, most non-technical users I know go to the sites they visit daily by clicking the first result of the corresponding Google search.
This is quite an interesting experiment, and a step in the good direction, which should and must lead us to the complete removal of domain names. Why are domain names bad? That should be obvious. The main symptom of domain names' inherent brokenness is that the law must patch it so that an unknown squatter cannot kidnap some domain, e.g. register "france.com" and ransom it to the people who are most qualified to clai…