4 ms·

>And when one says Amazon should get the amazon.com SLD, we are creating a very weird situation where "Amazon.com Inc. P.O. Box 8102. Reno, NV 89507" has cement

>And when one says Amazon should get the amazon.com SLD, we are creating a very weird situation where "Amazon.com Inc. P.O. Box 8102. Reno, NV 89507" has cemented itself as the only entity who can encapsulate all commercial activity in the world under the term "Amazon". Well that's how the domain structure is currently laid out. Someone has to get it. If you're just going to argue that the domain system needs more finesse, just say that. But asking these round about questions is pointless. At some point "amazon" the company gets a domain. right now that's the SLD, as it is for everyone else. ICANN has an appeal system if you think you deserve it more for whatever reason. >Why is it OK for that to be subsumed by "amazon.com." Because amazon purchased the domain. The domain points to a specific server. It's not a TLD that acts a registry for other domains. There is a very important difference there. One you don't seem to appreciate. >If it's ok for a single specific instance of "amazon companies" to get "amazon.com", why is it not ok for a single specific instance of "amazon" to get "amazon." ? I'm going to stop right here, because you're just arguing that the current domain system is broken. And that's not what we're discussing. I'm not sure what the motivation is for doing that is, but it doesn't belong here. >Why should only TLDs be for that? Because that's how categories and taxonomies work. I gave you an example with shapes. Hopefully you understand shapes.

ryanlol 8y ago
>Because amazon purchased the domain. The domain points to a specific server. It's not a TLD that acts a registry for other domains. There is a very important difference there. One you don't seem to appreciate. There's essentially no technical difference between a TLD and a domain name. Any practical difference is extremely questionable too.
- kadendogthing 8y ago
  >There's essentially no technical difference between a TLD and a domain name. Yes there is. You just need to stop talking about this subject because you are very much wrong. TLDs have authoritative organizations that adhere to ICANN regulations and act as a gatekeeper to a varied and diverse set of domains under that TLD. Certain TLDs have specific purposes. Some are country codes, others are specific scopes, some others are built in from decades past.
  - ryanlol 8y ago
    If I am so wrong would you mind describing any of the significant technical difference between TLDs and and domain names? I would seriously appreciate it if you could share your expertise on this topic. None of the TLD nameserver configs I’ve encountered have seemed very special, in fact they’re exactly like the nameservers for normal domains.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
icebraining 8y ago
Firstly, the current domain name system has included brand TLDs like https://home.barclays/ https://home.barclays/ for years. So you're the one saying it's broken, if you think those TLDs shouldn't exist. Arguments like "that's how the domain structure is currently laid out" work for Amazon getting a TLD, not against it. So we're not discussing how it works. We're discussing how you think it should work. And my request has been the same since the beginning: explain how the domains of level 1 are different from levels 2, 3, 4, 5, etc. Your argument around taxonomies absolutely doesn't explain this. Taxonomies may be - and usually are - many levels deep.
- kadendogthing 8y ago
  >for years. That's kind of an overstatement. This argument has been brought up multiple times. And no one can counter it except to say "but money." And it hasn't really been included for years. It's been discussed for years. >So we're not discussing how it works. I mean very much, based on the historical record in front of you, unless an HN has edited the posts, we very much are. You are concretely wrong. > We're discussing how you think it should work. No that IS how it works. Brand TLD's are a very new concept. With very limited surface area coverage, and very little actual use. I understand that some of you need to see how things fuck up before understanding how things could fuck up, but I think I spelled it out very clearly. Again I even used shapes. If you're going to argue about the semantics of shapes, I think you should adjust your opinions on this subject. Because it is tightly 1-1. >Your argument around taxonomies absolutely doesn't explain this. I explicitly referenced the domain specification and what their purpose is. I explained how taxonomies generally work. I explained how the domain taxonomy is laid out and its intended purpose. The fact that ICANN went for a quick money grab doesn't negate this. I understand that the HN technopoly cult thinks this justifies everything. But it doesn't. At least not logically or rationally or justifiably. You're just trying to turn this into a metargument. Please respond with something concrete. For the love of god redeem this forum.
  - icebraining 8y ago
    I understood the "semantics of shapes". What I struggled to understand, again, is how that doesn't apply to other domains as well. And I know I'm not a very bright person, but it shouldn't be something hard to explain succinctly. From what I understand now, you argument is based on historical precedent: TLDs are different because they were treated differently (as general taxonomies, whereas domains of other levels were not) before the ICANN money-grab. Fair enough. I don't find it convincing, but then again conservative arguments rarely appeal to me.

ryanlol 8y ago

>Because amazon purchased the domain. The domain points to a specific server. It's not a TLD that acts a registry for other domains. There is a very important difference there. One you don't seem to appreciate. There's essentially no technical difference between a TLD and a domain name. Any practical difference is extremely questionable too.

kadendogthing 8y ago
>There's essentially no technical difference between a TLD and a domain name. Yes there is. You just need to stop talking about this subject because you are very much wrong. TLDs have authoritative organizations that adhere to ICANN regulations and act as a gatekeeper to a varied and diverse set of domains under that TLD. Certain TLDs have specific purposes. Some are country codes, others are specific scopes, some others are built in from decades past.
- ryanlol 8y ago
  If I am so wrong would you mind describing any of the significant technical difference between TLDs and and domain names? I would seriously appreciate it if you could share your expertise on this topic. None of the TLD nameserver configs I’ve encountered have seemed very special, in fact they’re exactly like the nameservers for normal domains.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

icebraining 8y ago

Firstly, the current domain name system has included brand TLDs like https://home.barclays/ https://home.barclays/ for years. So you're the one saying it's broken, if you think those TLDs shouldn't exist. Arguments like "that's how the domain structure is currently laid out" work for Amazon getting a TLD, not against it. So we're not discussing how it works. We're discussing how you think it should work. And my request has been the same since the beginning: explain how the domains of level 1 are different from levels 2, 3, 4, 5, etc. Your argument around taxonomies absolutely doesn't explain this. Taxonomies may be - and usually are - many levels deep.

kadendogthing 8y ago
>for years. That's kind of an overstatement. This argument has been brought up multiple times. And no one can counter it except to say "but money." And it hasn't really been included for years. It's been discussed for years. >So we're not discussing how it works. I mean very much, based on the historical record in front of you, unless an HN has edited the posts, we very much are. You are concretely wrong. > We're discussing how you think it should work. No that IS how it works. Brand TLD's are a very new concept. With very limited surface area coverage, and very little actual use. I understand that some of you need to see how things fuck up before understanding how things could fuck up, but I think I spelled it out very clearly. Again I even used shapes. If you're going to argue about the semantics of shapes, I think you should adjust your opinions on this subject. Because it is tightly 1-1. >Your argument around taxonomies absolutely doesn't explain this. I explicitly referenced the domain specification and what their purpose is. I explained how taxonomies generally work. I explained how the domain taxonomy is laid out and its intended purpose. The fact that ICANN went for a quick money grab doesn't negate this. I understand that the HN technopoly cult thinks this justifies everything. But it doesn't. At least not logically or rationally or justifiably. You're just trying to turn this into a metargument. Please respond with something concrete. For the love of god redeem this forum.
- icebraining 8y ago
  I understood the "semantics of shapes". What I struggled to understand, again, is how that doesn't apply to other domains as well. And I know I'm not a very bright person, but it shouldn't be something hard to explain succinctly. From what I understand now, you argument is based on historical precedent: TLDs are different because they were treated differently (as general taxonomies, whereas domains of other levels were not) before the ICANN money-grab. Fair enough. I don't find it convincing, but then again conservative arguments rarely appeal to me.