3 ms·

> Americans may find that inconvenient, more radical tongues call it a sign of US imperialism that .com is often associated with the home for US companies. I'm

> Americans may find that inconvenient, more radical tongues call it a sign of US imperialism that .com is often associated with the home for US companies. I'm not sure why you felt the need to try and make some point about US imperialism in a discussion about a TLD with an extra dot when plenty of countries have a TLD that is customarily used without an extra dot: .de, .ch, .nl, .es, .ie, etc. It's simply a matter of convention (and sometimes local legislation) that .co.uk, .com.uk, .co.in, and others became the norm for commercial entities in these countries while .com similarly became a norm for US companies by convention. There's nothing stopping a non-US company from using a .com domain, as I'm sure you're aware.

Grimburger 4y ago
And to nitpick .au is actually available now too. It's actually not that popular with most people I know because it sort of muddies the water with most Australians being very comfortable with .com.au and having a basic understanding of its restrictions. https://domains.google/tld/au/ https://domains.google/tld/au/
sam0x17 4y ago
How the TLDs work is a really classic example of US imperialism. For example .gov is impossible to get for non-US entities, yet literal towns have .gov domains within the US, and there are even examples of people using .ca to mean california. Meanwhile outside countries have to resort to things like .gov.uk. That's right, tiny rural towns in the US have a better domain than the main UK government sites. Likewise .com typically implies US, as affirmed by the .com.mx, etc variants If ICANN wasn't super biased towards favoring the US, do you really think .gov would have been approved in the first place?
- vinay427 4y ago
  > For example .gov is impossible to get for non-US entities I'll gladly concede this point. I do agree that ICANN favors the US for .gov (and .mil). It would definitely be preferable if these weren't approved at all or at least weren't restricted to US entities. > Likewise .com typically implies US, as affirmed by the .com.mx, etc variants I responded to this in my previous comment. As far as I know there wasn't a decision to systematically favor US companies, so I'm not sure what this has to do with US imperialism. There are many websites in the UK and other countries that use .com, even if it's still far more common for US entities, and there's nothing stopping more from doing so.
  - sam0x17 4y ago
    My point is that the non-existence of a us-specific com suffix (.us.com) combined with the existence of country specific com suffixes (.com.mx, etc), implies that .com is us oriented, in a central sort of way affirmed by ICANN arguably. If com is for everyone, why have .com.mx? etc

Grimburger 4y ago

And to nitpick .au is actually available now too. It's actually not that popular with most people I know because it sort of muddies the water with most Australians being very comfortable with .com.au and having a basic understanding of its restrictions. https://domains.google/tld/au/ https://domains.google/tld/au/

sam0x17 4y ago

How the TLDs work is a really classic example of US imperialism. For example .gov is impossible to get for non-US entities, yet literal towns have .gov domains within the US, and there are even examples of people using .ca to mean california. Meanwhile outside countries have to resort to things like .gov.uk. That's right, tiny rural towns in the US have a better domain than the main UK government sites. Likewise .com typically implies US, as affirmed by the .com.mx, etc variants If ICANN wasn't super biased towards favoring the US, do you really think .gov would have been approved in the first place?

vinay427 4y ago
> For example .gov is impossible to get for non-US entities I'll gladly concede this point. I do agree that ICANN favors the US for .gov (and .mil). It would definitely be preferable if these weren't approved at all or at least weren't restricted to US entities. > Likewise .com typically implies US, as affirmed by the .com.mx, etc variants I responded to this in my previous comment. As far as I know there wasn't a decision to systematically favor US companies, so I'm not sure what this has to do with US imperialism. There are many websites in the UK and other countries that use .com, even if it's still far more common for US entities, and there's nothing stopping more from doing so.
- sam0x17 4y ago
  My point is that the non-existence of a us-specific com suffix (.us.com) combined with the existence of country specific com suffixes (.com.mx, etc), implies that .com is us oriented, in a central sort of way affirmed by ICANN arguably. If com is for everyone, why have .com.mx? etc