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

First .dev Domains Go Live

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 227 posts

Re: First .dev Domains Go Live

#151

Post by _v7gu »

CydeWeys wrote: post #126
_v7gu wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> reverse-dutch auction Why? Even if it's "cute", it serves no other purpose than racking up prices and keeping buyers second-guessing themselves. Just run a normal Dutch or a second-price auction.

This is a normal Dutch auction. If your question is why not run a standard auction, the answer is that operational overhead to do that is much higher than simply having a given price for creations on a given day, and there'd thus be fewer registrars participating. You need a whole eBay-like experience to run a standard auction; it's a non-trivial amount of work just to support one launch.

I stand corrected on the name. The operational overhead might be reasonable excuse, but I don't think a second-price auction would necessitate that much effort. You could get by with just a form and running a query on it.

Re: First .dev Domains Go Live

#152

Post by 0xffff2 »

reaperducer wrote: post #41
morpheuskafka wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For Microsoft (which owns GitHub) that is a tiny expense, but if they couldn't really afford it they could just file a dispute under UDRP.

But does the money come from Microsoft or from GitHub? In a lot of the large companies I've worked, money is siloed from one operating unit to the next. They would send bills between units and sometimes even departments. The larger the company, the more common this seemed. It's not one giant piggy bank.

Does it really matter? Surely $11k is still a tiny amount for GitHub.

Re: First .dev Domains Go Live

#153

Post by josteink »

dragonwriter wrote: post #109
josteink wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But nobody with any respect for themselves has an un-ISP doing borderline illegal shit like that. It hardly seems like a worthwhile problem to solve at gTLD-scale.

> But nobody with any respect for themselves has an un-ISP doing borderline illegal shit like that. advertising and malware (both ad-related and not) injection by ISPs is a well documented global issue.

If so, that’s a local problem and you fix it with regulation, not technology.

Re: First .dev Domains Go Live

#154

Post by aclelland »

all2 wrote: post #133
core-questions wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google owns Youtube, which bans people for any reason they feel like, including people for whom it had become a full-time job with their channel monetization paying the bills. It is extremely unwise and very much against the founding spirit of the Internet to allow one company this much control, especially one that has shown itself to be censorious in the past.

Wait, does a YT ban extend to all Google products? Does this lock someone out of, say, webmaster tools?

Not normally but they do ban your entire account if their bots believe you've been very naughty.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-47278362

Despite the ban being due to a violation of YT terms of service they lost their entire Google account. > "But because my Google account was terminated as well I didn't have access to my email so I couldn't see what happened."

Re: First .dev Domains Go Live

#155

Post by dragonwriter »

josteink wrote: post #153
dragonwriter wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But nobody with any respect for themselves has an un-ISP doing borderline illegal shit like that. advertising and malware (both ad-related and not) injection by ISPs is a well documented global issue.

If so, that’s a local problem and you fix it with regulation, not technology.

> If so, that’s a local problem

It's a well-documented global problem.

> and you fix it with regulation,

Governments are often not opposed, and sometimes active encouragers or procurers of the ISP injection.

Also, the HTTPS requirement for .dev domains is regulation, even if it isn't government regulation.

Re: First .dev Domains Go Live

#157

Post by kfwhp »

benologist wrote: post #148
babypuncher wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For what reasons does Google actually ban accounts?

Information withheld - https://www.reddit.com/r/k12sysadmin/comments/9qg2vw/google_... System errors - https://www.reddit.com/r/GooglePixel/comments/7nrx07/google_... We're twenty years in so likely there are actually thousands of legitimate reasons, the problem is their system seems designed to dismiss any evidence to the contrary so a false positive is a lifetime ban too.

>I remember your story. I clicked this expecting to hear that everything is wonderful and you're living the good life. Instead, the nightmare continues. I'm sorry

Something is really fucked up if getting one of your Google accounts banned is a "nightmare".

To everybody who's reading this: make the necessary arrangements to make sure getting one of your Google accounts banned is not the end of the world for you.

Re: First .dev Domains Go Live

#158

Post by CydeWeys »

_v7gu wrote: post #151
CydeWeys wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a normal Dutch auction. If your question is why not run a standard auction, the answer is that operational overhead to do that is much higher than simply having a given price for creations on a given day, and there'd thus be fewer registrars participating. You need a whole eBay-like experience to run a standard auction; it's a non-trivial amount of work just to support one launch.

I stand corrected on the name. The operational overhead might be reasonable excuse, but I don't think a second-price auction would necessitate that much effort. You could get by with just a form and running a query on it.

It's a LOT of effort. And said effort is required not just at the registry level, but also at the dozens of registrars that support EAP.

This isn't a theoretical concern. We actually did use standard auctions for our first three TLD launches. They were operational nightmares. The Dutch auctions we're using now are much more light-weight, have greater participation, and are now the preferred way of doing launches across the entire industry. We're not even the ones who started using Dutch auctions for TLDs.

You'll just have to trust the word of someone who's been doing this stuff for years that the alternatives really are worse.

Re: First .dev Domains Go Live

#159

Post by jhgg »

CydeWeys wrote: post #70
ravenstine wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On a per-year basis, yes. However, this is the subtotal at the checkout on namecheap when I typed in ravenstine.dev: C$14,572.71 :(

Yeah, because we're currently in the early access program, which is a Dutch auction. Once the auction ends on the 28th, domains will be available starting from the base registration price.

How does a company who owns a trademark get a domain early like Slack and Github did?

Re: First .dev Domains Go Live

#160

Post by CydeWeys »

rynop wrote: post #121
mslev wrote: post #38

Me: "Wow [myfirstname].dev is available! I gotta get it!" Aaaaaaand its $11,500.

Same experience, huge turn-off. I was hoping for `.dev` to be free and along the lines of letsencrypt.org. Very disappointed

The huge problem with free domain names is the unfathomable amount of abuse, phishing, scamming, etc., that they are used to perpetrate.
Post reply on HN