32 ms·
Didnt know there was a cern tld
by mjtlittle 2y ago
Didnt know there was a cern tld
- SiempreViernes 2y agoYeah... according to wikipedia they've had it since 2014, but even now a lot of their pages are on .ch
- sneak 2y agoYes, the root zone is terribly polluted now. Unfortunately there’s no way to unring that bell, people depend on a lot of these new domains now. It was a huge mistake, borne out of greed and recklessness. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICANN#Notable_events https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICANN#Notable_events
- jesprenj 2y agoI guess ICANN needs to get money somehow.
- lambdaxyzw 2y agoWhy can't it just get funding from the government?
- Biganon 2y agoI fail to see the problem with those new TLDs.
- oefrha 2y agoCertain gTLDs have been borderline scams. The most infamous one might be .sucks, an extortion scheme charging an annual protection fee of $$$, complete with the pre-registration process when you could buy <yourtrademark>.sucks for $$$$ before it’s snatched up by your enemies. They also screwed up some old URL/email parsers/sniffers hardcoding TLDs. Largely the fault of bad assumptions to begin with. Other than the above, I don’t see much of a problem. Whatever problems people like to point out about gLTDs already existed with numerous sketchy ccTLDs, like .io. Guess what, the latest hotness .ai is also one of those.
- 9dev 2y agoI still wonder why we need that arbitrary restriction anyway?
- 8organicbits 2y agoIf we allowed all possible TLDs, then we'd need a default organization to administer them. The current setup requires an organization to control each TLD, which allows us to grant control to countries or large organizations. The web should be decentralized, which means TLD ownership should be spread across multiple organizations. More TLDs with more distinct owners is a better situation than one default.
- ragebol 2y agoHandy if they host conferences, for people worried about too many TLDs perhaps. https://con.cern https://con.cern is not yet used, so...