4 ms·

> ICANN fees should be ten to one hundred times greater than they are in order to reduce the ridiculous hoarding that has occurred. No. Hobbiests and regular

> ICANN fees should be ten to one hundred times greater than they are in order to reduce the ridiculous hoarding that has occurred. No. Hobbiests and regular people won't be able to afford domains just because some squatters decided to profit off this. You are probably salty just because a squatter grabbed a domain you liked, and yeah thats irritating but that doesn't mean that millions of people should be denied the right of having their internet presence by making prices so high that they can't afford them.

Retric 7y ago
1$ / month per domain would have zero impact on affordability for the average American on .com. With .counrty codes they could have higher or lower fees at their discretion. Instead DNS is basically useless for the average person who uses search engines and bookmarks to find things. PS: The Phone number system oddly enough is far more user friendly in practice.
- pdonis 7y ago
  > 1$ / month per domain would have zero impact on affordability for the average American on .com Sure, but if there are no price caps, what makes you think .org domains will be available for that price? > DNS is basically useless for the average person who uses search engines and bookmarks to find things. Um, you do realize that when you click on that search engine link, you're using DNS to find the actual site, right? Search engines point at URLs, not IP addresses.
  - Retric 7y ago
    DNS as an abstraction layer is useful, but the specific name is not. There is a reason people resort to bit.ly and other URL shortcuts.
    - justinclift 7y ago
      > ... people resort to bit.ly and other URL shortcuts. Isn't the usage of that on the way out (likely long tail though), due it being a security nightmare? eg you never know if some url shortener is pointing to malware, bouncing through trackers, (etc). Even if the same url "seemed ok yesterday".
      - Retric 7y ago
        I don’t think they are safe or a good idea. But, t.co ranked #36 most popular website. (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_popular_websites https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_popular_website...) So, they still seem to be very common. DNS is incredibly important infrastructure, but the protocol is more than just a name. Getting a geographically local IP from a universal name is independent of what the name is. Replace Microsoft.com with MVKVS or other short string and that still works.
        ajdlinux 7y ago
        t.co is a special case, as Twitter generates t.co links automatically in tweets.
    - pdonis 7y ago
      > DNS as an abstraction layer is useful Indeed. Which means it's not "basically useless for the average person", since the average person needs it in order to find the websites they want to visit.
      - Retric 7y ago
        Most people use search engines over typing in URL’s. HTML lets you hyperlink to an IP address. So, useful but not needed.
ynniv 7y ago
That's ridiculous. In the worst case a domain name would cost $10 or $20 instead of $8 per year, which is less than actually hosting a page on that domain. In the best case, an uncommon and unused domain that's for sale for thousands of dollars will become available for the cost of registration. I don't care if speculators take all the good domains, or even a lot of mediocre ones. The current state of affairs is that speculators have a very large number of all reasonable domains, just because it's cheap.
- saagarjha 7y ago
  FWIW, I pay $12/year for my domain and $0 for hosting.

Retric 7y ago

1$ / month per domain would have zero impact on affordability for the average American on .com. With .counrty codes they could have higher or lower fees at their discretion. Instead DNS is basically useless for the average person who uses search engines and bookmarks to find things. PS: The Phone number system oddly enough is far more user friendly in practice.

pdonis 7y ago
> 1$ / month per domain would have zero impact on affordability for the average American on .com Sure, but if there are no price caps, what makes you think .org domains will be available for that price? > DNS is basically useless for the average person who uses search engines and bookmarks to find things. Um, you do realize that when you click on that search engine link, you're using DNS to find the actual site, right? Search engines point at URLs, not IP addresses.
- Retric 7y ago
  DNS as an abstraction layer is useful, but the specific name is not. There is a reason people resort to bit.ly and other URL shortcuts.
  - justinclift 7y ago
    > ... people resort to bit.ly and other URL shortcuts. Isn't the usage of that on the way out (likely long tail though), due it being a security nightmare? eg you never know if some url shortener is pointing to malware, bouncing through trackers, (etc). Even if the same url "seemed ok yesterday".
    - Retric 7y ago
      I don’t think they are safe or a good idea. But, t.co ranked #36 most popular website. (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_popular_websites https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_popular_website...) So, they still seem to be very common. DNS is incredibly important infrastructure, but the protocol is more than just a name. Getting a geographically local IP from a universal name is independent of what the name is. Replace Microsoft.com with MVKVS or other short string and that still works.
      - ajdlinux 7y ago
        t.co is a special case, as Twitter generates t.co links automatically in tweets.
  - pdonis 7y ago
    > DNS as an abstraction layer is useful Indeed. Which means it's not "basically useless for the average person", since the average person needs it in order to find the websites they want to visit.
    - Retric 7y ago
      Most people use search engines over typing in URL’s. HTML lets you hyperlink to an IP address. So, useful but not needed.

ynniv 7y ago

That's ridiculous. In the worst case a domain name would cost $10 or $20 instead of $8 per year, which is less than actually hosting a page on that domain. In the best case, an uncommon and unused domain that's for sale for thousands of dollars will become available for the cost of registration. I don't care if speculators take all the good domains, or even a lot of mediocre ones. The current state of affairs is that speculators have a very large number of all reasonable domains, just because it's cheap.

saagarjha 7y ago
FWIW, I pay $12/year for my domain and $0 for hosting.