3 ms·

I've seen several negative reactions to this decision which I find to be odd since my reaction was very positive. Here are my reasons why this is awesome: -It

I've seen several negative reactions to this decision which I find to be odd since my reaction was very positive. Here are my reasons why this is awesome: -It opens up vast new swaths of web territory and makes it easier for the ordinary Joe Hacker to find a memorable web address -It devalues cyber-squatters current portfolios -It seems arbitrary to limit TLDs to a certain subset of characters in the first place Is there something I'm missing? Why all the anguish out there? edit: Actually, doesn't the existence of TLDs seem arbitrary, too? Why end every URL with .SomeString?

ComputerGuru 18y ago
TLDs are there because at one point they made sense. First it was locations... and, if there is anyone here who recalls before the dot-com boom it was actually pretty damn difficult to book a .org if you weren't an organization or .com if you weren't a company. But then with the huge surge of websites and startups back in the 90s these rules were highly relaxed and a TLD became meaningless and without value.
jonknee 18y ago
- For companies trying to protect their trademark, the job just got [infinitely] harder. - It will be harder to tell you're being phished (apple.computer is a fake?) - Companies with half a million dollars to burn will now own TLDs and have an advantage over smaller companies - It means you now have to remember two pieces of information, the domain and the TLD - It's simply a money grab by ICANN - etc My guess is most traffic will stay at the current TLDs just like the recent ones haven't done much (.biz, .info, .mobi, etc).
- mechanical_fish 18y ago
  My guess is most traffic will stay at the current TLDs I think that's right. The mitigating factor here is that Prometheus' observation: Actually, doesn't the existence of TLDs seem arbitrary, too? Why end every URL with .SomeString? ...is a pretty good description of the de facto situation today. Basically, there is only one important TLD - .com - and both surfers and browsers are happy to pretend that it's unnecessary. If you own a domain with any other TLD, it requires people to remember a meaningless suffix, and/or the placement of a meaningless dot inside your name. ("deli.cious? del.ic.ious? delic.io.us? What the hell was that, again?") The result is marketing poison, and nobody recommends it. This ICANN decision is bad, but I think the main effect will be to further amplify the value of .com domains (the ones which don't require you to remember a now entirely arbitrary TLD). And/or it will further cement Google's lock on the first five seconds of any web-surfing expedition (as if they needed it). The only danger is that we will wake up one day and discover that typing "zyzygy" into a browser redirects you somewhere other than zyzygy.com. If that happens than we'll know that ICANN has succeeded in setting off the biggest land-grab stampede in the history of the world, the cybersquatters will die of ecstacy, and I will want to kick something.
  - whatusername 18y ago
    yes and no... Remember one of the common ways of getting anywhere is to type www.google.com in the msn homepage that comes up. And then you type www.myspace.com into the google search box... This "may" be a solvable issue...
jcl 18y ago
Yes, it opens up new territory and devalues squatters, but only for a short while. After companies and squatters grab the new URLs they want, the situation will be the same as it is right now, except we'll have many more domain registrations pointing to the same amount of content. And don't expect the price tag to maintain sanity... The ICANN will gradually lower that over time to increase revenue, just as they have with regular domains, and just as they are doing right now by making TLDs available.

ComputerGuru 18y ago

TLDs are there because at one point they made sense. First it was locations... and, if there is anyone here who recalls before the dot-com boom it was actually pretty damn difficult to book a .org if you weren't an organization or .com if you weren't a company. But then with the huge surge of websites and startups back in the 90s these rules were highly relaxed and a TLD became meaningless and without value.

jonknee 18y ago

- For companies trying to protect their trademark, the job just got [infinitely] harder. - It will be harder to tell you're being phished (apple.computer is a fake?) - Companies with half a million dollars to burn will now own TLDs and have an advantage over smaller companies - It means you now have to remember two pieces of information, the domain and the TLD - It's simply a money grab by ICANN - etc My guess is most traffic will stay at the current TLDs just like the recent ones haven't done much (.biz, .info, .mobi, etc).

mechanical_fish 18y ago
My guess is most traffic will stay at the current TLDs I think that's right. The mitigating factor here is that Prometheus' observation: Actually, doesn't the existence of TLDs seem arbitrary, too? Why end every URL with .SomeString? ...is a pretty good description of the de facto situation today. Basically, there is only one important TLD - .com - and both surfers and browsers are happy to pretend that it's unnecessary. If you own a domain with any other TLD, it requires people to remember a meaningless suffix, and/or the placement of a meaningless dot inside your name. ("deli.cious? del.ic.ious? delic.io.us? What the hell was that, again?") The result is marketing poison, and nobody recommends it. This ICANN decision is bad, but I think the main effect will be to further amplify the value of .com domains (the ones which don't require you to remember a now entirely arbitrary TLD). And/or it will further cement Google's lock on the first five seconds of any web-surfing expedition (as if they needed it). The only danger is that we will wake up one day and discover that typing "zyzygy" into a browser redirects you somewhere other than zyzygy.com. If that happens than we'll know that ICANN has succeeded in setting off the biggest land-grab stampede in the history of the world, the cybersquatters will die of ecstacy, and I will want to kick something.
- whatusername 18y ago
  yes and no... Remember one of the common ways of getting anywhere is to type www.google.com in the msn homepage that comes up. And then you type www.myspace.com into the google search box... This "may" be a solvable issue...

jcl 18y ago

Yes, it opens up new territory and devalues squatters, but only for a short while. After companies and squatters grab the new URLs they want, the situation will be the same as it is right now, except we'll have many more domain registrations pointing to the same amount of content. And don't expect the price tag to maintain sanity... The ICANN will gradually lower that over time to increase revenue, just as they have with regular domains, and just as they are doing right now by making TLDs available.