3 ms·
Possibly. But say I'm starting a video-sharing website - I'm at a big competitive disadvantage when my customers need to type and remember an extra domain-name
by twelvechairs 14y ago
Possibly. But say I'm starting a video-sharing website - I'm at a big competitive disadvantage when my customers need to type and remember an extra domain-name level compared to my competitors (who own '.video', '.movie', '.youtube', etc. while i might own '.bobsvideo.fail').
- AndrewDucker 14y agoExcept that, as discussed above, "youtube" by itself is not a valid host name. It would have to be "mysite.youtube" Still easier than you having "mysite.bobsvideo.fail" I agree, but frankly most people don't even find sites via the domain name. They'll google "Bobs Video" and see what comes up.
- zokier 14y agowhy wouldn't "youtube" be valid hostname?
- AndrewDucker 14y agoSame reason that "com" and "net" aren't. Root nodes aren't, from my understanding, valid names for machines. Edit: Seems I'm wrong. See discussion downthread: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4105707 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4105707
- TazeTSchnitzel 14y agoWrong. "youtube." (or "youtube") IS a valid host name. "to." is an example, it was a URL shortening service, but it's down now.