5 ms·

> Truthully, I think its pretty bad that I was able to do this. It is not. The explosion of TLDs is bad. It's simply a racket. But, Google supported it. So if

by bambax 6y ago

> Truthully, I think its pretty bad that I was able to do this. It is not. The explosion of TLDs is bad. It's simply a racket. But, Google supported it. So if they happen to suffer some of the consequences... so be it.

fermienrico 6y ago
Explosions of TLDs is bad!? Why?. It got rid of impossible to buy good sounding and short names, largely massive multi million dollar companies holding onto them. Explosions of TLDs literally has absolutely no downsides besides the security and phishing implications. It just wiped out the domain mafias and replaced it with a massive competitive marketplace.
- echelon 6y ago
  Many of the gTLDs charge exorbitant yearly fees for "premium" domains as a means of recouping costs. I pay $300/yr for {myFirstName}.dev. It's extortion, and I might drop it. With many of the common domain suffixes now becoming TLDs, branding seems much more difficult since you have to buy multiple domains. Is it audiotech.com? audio.tech? tech.audio? Who knows. I don't think that I would call this better. My opinion is that Google wants to erode the open web and is using gTLD proliferation to make it confusing to consumers. Instead of remembering a URL, just Google for it.
  - fermienrico 6y ago
    I think it’s the opposite: if the market can bear premium prices and exorbitant fees, I’m fine with that. There is nothing asymmetric about it. Your company wants to sell $4000 purses? Go for it as far as you can find buyers. Louie Vuitton has. Luxury products are not exploitation.
  - colejohnson66 6y ago
    > I pay $300/yr for {myFirstName}.dev. It's extortion, and I might drop it. From where? Google? I just paid $12/yr for a .dev domain on Google Domains.
    - echelon 6y ago
      Yes, from Google Domains. Some of their domains are "premium". Here's an unregistered one. "red.dev" is $720/yr from Google: https://domains.google.com/m/registrar/search?searchTerm=red.dev https://domains.google.com/m/registrar/search?searchTerm=red... "god.dev" is cheaper at $180/yr: https://domains.google.com/m/registrar/search?searchTerm=god.dev https://domains.google.com/m/registrar/search?searchTerm=god... And, of course asdfasdf.dev is only $12/yr: https://domains.google.com/m/registrar/search?searchTerm=asdfasdf.dev https://domains.google.com/m/registrar/search?searchTerm=asd... Most of the {firstname}.dev domains are in the $300/yr range, but it's uneven. Some names cost more or less than others. I remember seeing one as $1000/yr, but I can't remember what it was. I double checked my cost. "$180 plus tax"/yr. From Google.
endgame 6y ago
.sucks is one such example. Everyone feels obliged to buy their own .sucks, lest someone else use it to stand up a hatepage. A whole bunch of money changes hands, but nobody is better off. gTLDs were a mistake.

by bambax 6y ago

fermienrico 6y ago

Explosions of TLDs is bad!? Why?. It got rid of impossible to buy good sounding and short names, largely massive multi million dollar companies holding onto them. Explosions of TLDs literally has absolutely no downsides besides the security and phishing implications. It just wiped out the domain mafias and replaced it with a massive competitive marketplace.

echelon 6y ago
Many of the gTLDs charge exorbitant yearly fees for "premium" domains as a means of recouping costs. I pay $300/yr for {myFirstName}.dev. It's extortion, and I might drop it. With many of the common domain suffixes now becoming TLDs, branding seems much more difficult since you have to buy multiple domains. Is it audiotech.com? audio.tech? tech.audio? Who knows. I don't think that I would call this better. My opinion is that Google wants to erode the open web and is using gTLD proliferation to make it confusing to consumers. Instead of remembering a URL, just Google for it.
- fermienrico 6y ago
  I think it’s the opposite: if the market can bear premium prices and exorbitant fees, I’m fine with that. There is nothing asymmetric about it. Your company wants to sell $4000 purses? Go for it as far as you can find buyers. Louie Vuitton has. Luxury products are not exploitation.
- colejohnson66 6y ago
  > I pay $300/yr for {myFirstName}.dev. It's extortion, and I might drop it. From where? Google? I just paid $12/yr for a .dev domain on Google Domains.
  - echelon 6y ago
    Yes, from Google Domains. Some of their domains are "premium". Here's an unregistered one. "red.dev" is $720/yr from Google: https://domains.google.com/m/registrar/search?searchTerm=red.dev https://domains.google.com/m/registrar/search?searchTerm=red... "god.dev" is cheaper at $180/yr: https://domains.google.com/m/registrar/search?searchTerm=god.dev https://domains.google.com/m/registrar/search?searchTerm=god... And, of course asdfasdf.dev is only $12/yr: https://domains.google.com/m/registrar/search?searchTerm=asdfasdf.dev https://domains.google.com/m/registrar/search?searchTerm=asd... Most of the {firstname}.dev domains are in the $300/yr range, but it's uneven. Some names cost more or less than others. I remember seeing one as $1000/yr, but I can't remember what it was. I double checked my cost. "$180 plus tax"/yr. From Google.

endgame 6y ago

.sucks is one such example. Everyone feels obliged to buy their own .sucks, lest someone else use it to stand up a hatepage. A whole bunch of money changes hands, but nobody is better off. gTLDs were a mistake.