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

Gail, not Gmail

gail.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–166 of 166 posts

Re: Gail, not Gmail

#161

Post by Exuma »

belovedeagle wrote: post #154
Exuma wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm the CTO for a top 100 alexa site. I know how DNS works lol. I just didn't see that part of the site that explained that the content was hidden.

> I'm the CTO for a top 100 alexa site I'm sorry to hear that, I hope they have better luck hiring in the future. Why should someone have to serve http explaining to you what they're using their domain for? Why can't someone just have a domain for email and SSH and be left the fuck alone?

It's my own company, nice try though. I see you've resorted to being an aggressive little prick though just because someone disagrees with you.

Re: Gail, not Gmail

#162

Post by stagbeetle »

BlackFingolfin wrote: post #101
stagbeetle wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps. But with the limited nature of domain names, gail.com could definitely be used for something more productive, and helpful, to society. Considering the state it's in now, you're looking at a large upper range.

How on earth could one do something "more productive, and helpful, to society" with gail.com that one couldn't do just as well or better with some other domain name? I don't buy this argument at all.

Gail.com already has a large free pool of constant visitors through misspelling gmail.com.

This pool is much more diverse than through targeted marketing, etc.

The hostmaster could renovate and display, for example, an unknown, but horrible, misjustice going on with the world. Added with some instructions on how to help raise awareness and stop this misjustice and you have a more productive and helpful webpage, to society.

The hard part in raising awareness is getting people to see and acknowledge your message, with gail.com this is already taken care of.

Re: Gail, not Gmail

#163

Post by stagbeetle »

alekratz wrote: post #107
stagbeetle wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps. But with the limited nature of domain names, gail.com could definitely be used for something more productive, and helpful, to society. Considering the state it's in now, you're looking at a large upper range.

So just because you have a sought-after domain name, you can turn it in to greatness just because... you have a special domain name? This argument feels very vague and hand-wavy. I imagine execution of a good idea could do much more for you than a fancy domain name.

It's not intrinsically the domain name, it's the uniqueness of how it gets visitors, and the diversity of said pool.

Re: Gail, not Gmail

#164

Post by jsjohnst »

Exuma wrote: post #145
belovedeagle wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DNS exists for more than just http and email too. I reckon you should learn more about how the technology works before telling other people how to run their lives and dispose of their private property. Or maybe... Just don't do those things at all.

I'm the CTO for a top 100 alexa site. I know how DNS works lol. I just didn't see that part of the site that explained that the content was hidden.

While the other person was way to negative in their response, I can definitely see their point. How does being a CTO automatically confer knowledge of how DNS works, especially in very technical detail? Seems to me a clear case of an appeal to authority argument, which is usually (and probably also in this case) a logical fallacy.

Re: Gail, not Gmail

#165

Post by MuppetMaster42 »

gravypod wrote: post #67
ipsum2 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also in fun domain-related trivia: http://nissan.com/

So you can have a last name, use it as your trademark first, file all sorts of documents, get two domains, and then be put through the hoops by a forign company? That's crazy. This guy whould have been awarded damages. He was the first to use Nissan in America before the auto-company in 1984.

It's the same reason we don't have Burger King in Australia. We have Hungry Jack's.

When burger king tried to start its brand in Australia way back when, they were unable to register the burger king licence in all states because in one state a man already had a long running burger place by that name.

So instead of having every state bar one with burger kings, they instead opted for a new name entirely.

Post reply on HN