5 ms·

> Ideally, search engine algorithms would give new domain owners a fresh start. Sadly, I think this would be instantly gamed by abusers. They would release the

> Ideally, search engine algorithms would give new domain owners a fresh start. Sadly, I think this would be instantly gamed by abusers. They would release the domain name and attempt to register as a new owner or start repeatedly doing handoffs. It's difficult to tell who the owner is changing between and whether or not the new one is a better actor than the former.

fhub 2y ago
Google product manager interview question - Write some code with an LLM tool that leverages a LLM to determine if the new owner of a domain is doing (a) same dodgy thing as prior owner that got flagged (b) different dodgy thing as prior owner but should be flagged (c) something completely innocuous (d) needs further review.
- jsheard 2y ago
  Please don't give Google ideas for more ways they can have an algorithm arbitrarily screw you over with no recourse, they're listening.
  - fhub 2y ago
    Follow up interview question. Update the code using your LLM code gen tool of choice that, when someone submits a complaint via an online form, feeds that complaint text back into your LLM to score it again. Points deduction if the candidate ever mentions informing the complainant of anything.
  - richardw 2y ago
    Well, current approach guarantees you’re getting screwed over. Any improvement is beneficial unless it blocks a better approach?
    - bruce511 2y ago
      You're looking at this from the perspective of a haunted domain owner. And from that perspective your idea is fine. A good technique to evaluate ideas though is to try and view it from different perspectives. In this case from the owner of a non-haunted domain. Can you see any potential problem with your idea when viewed from that perspective? Now, if there are potential problems, consider the relative sizes of the two groups. Do the benefits to one outweigh harm to the other? This technique can be used every day with pretty much any idea.
      - richardw 2y ago
        The parents rules seemed to indicate only reevaluating the status of a haunted domain. I see nothing about evaluating a normal domain.
        richardw 2y ago
        (Therefore, this has a one-way function of improving the status of haunted domains and why I think anything is better than nothing unless it blocks a better strategy.)
- lazide 2y ago
  Why would they care?
kmoser 2y ago
Sadly, the same holds true for IP addresses.
AnthonyMouse 2y ago
> It's difficult to tell who the owner is changing between and whether or not the new one is a better actor than the former. This doesn't seem like that hard of a problem to solve, because these are domains with negative reputation, i.e. worse than zero. So if a) the domain is no longer hosting any of the stuff previously complained about and b) is no longer receiving new complaints over a period of a year, it costs you nothing to reset the domain to zero. Because the bad actors don't have to behave for a year to get back to zero, they can just register a new domain. All you're doing is giving the new owner the same fresh start that anybody can get by buying a never before registered domain for the same price as a year's renewal on the existing one.
- dustyventure 2y ago
  Using a domain every second year in that environment would get it a gradually raising rank where it isn't penalized/sanitized (by accident, on principle, etc) so every restart after a $30 pause year would be much more effective than a new domain.
  - soared 2y ago
    It gets reset every year so how would it be more effective?
    - dustyventure 2y ago
      A system gets reset, what happens in obscure places like old HN content?
      - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
        The search index knows when the first time it saw that old link was. If it was before the reset, regard it as pointing to a different domain than the current one.
        dustyventure 2y ago
xg15 2y ago
If it's instantly released, then yes. But in this thread are reports where the offensive actions happened 15 years ago. After such a long time of "good behavior" it makes no sense for me to still keep the domain blocked/downranked.
- xp84 2y ago
  Honestly, these days, with domains in general being nearly free compared to the profit potential of a single successful spammer grift, I’m not sure I even see the point of blacklisting domains at all. 25 years ago maybe a spammer would be devastated that he had to “start all over and buy a new domain and build up its reputation.” Now, spammers launch and abandon what, a million new domains a day? Google or anyone spitefully holding onto hard feelings about what a domain “did” years ago is pointless because the spammers will move on anyway. They wouldn’t reuse abcqwertuiop26abc dot xyz anyway because it’s safer to make up a new gibberish domain anyway. Only people who acquire domains legitimately are hurt by this. I would want to experiment judging them based on what they’ve been seen to do in the past month.
  - lazide 2y ago
    The only reason they go to those new domains is because of the blacklist. If you remove the blacklist, they’d just stop doing that and it would be even easier for them.
    - xp84 2y ago
      I'm imagining/advocating for blacklisting them for say, 12 months, and re-evaluating them at that point. This imposes the identical cost on the spammer as now (each "detection" costs them a year's domain registration) while allowing a reputation "reset" for innocent people who acquire haunted domains. Yes, the spammers can sit on their domains once blacklisted, renew them, and redeploy their spam on them 12 months later, but they'd have nothing to gain from the reuse, since the names of their domains are just nonsense anyway.
      - 2y ago
mschuster91 2y ago
Require a deposit then, say 1000$, that is to be refunded after a year of probationary period. You get caught being a scammer/spammer, you lose the deposit.
- Dilettante_ 2y ago
  The deposit would be either too high for normal people to pay, or too low to matter to bad actors
  - mschuster91 2y ago
    Given that spammers cycle through thousands of domains, they'd run into serious cash flow issues very soon.
- lazide 2y ago
  Who holds the deposit, and what is to stop them from having someone report your domain as a spammer so they can keep your money?
ricardo81 2y ago
A tweak to that could be along the lines of "if the DNS lookup of the domain responds with NXDOMAIN for more than x days, give it a fresh start". I'm not up to date with SEO so unsure whether Google would (or is able to) reset the domain's backlink profile, I'd guess it would be possible. A lot of the value of using expired domains is for backlinks (or at least was)

fhub 2y ago

Google product manager interview question - Write some code with an LLM tool that leverages a LLM to determine if the new owner of a domain is doing (a) same dodgy thing as prior owner that got flagged (b) different dodgy thing as prior owner but should be flagged (c) something completely innocuous (d) needs further review.

jsheard 2y ago
Please don't give Google ideas for more ways they can have an algorithm arbitrarily screw you over with no recourse, they're listening.
- fhub 2y ago
  Follow up interview question. Update the code using your LLM code gen tool of choice that, when someone submits a complaint via an online form, feeds that complaint text back into your LLM to score it again. Points deduction if the candidate ever mentions informing the complainant of anything.
- richardw 2y ago
  Well, current approach guarantees you’re getting screwed over. Any improvement is beneficial unless it blocks a better approach?
  - bruce511 2y ago
    You're looking at this from the perspective of a haunted domain owner. And from that perspective your idea is fine. A good technique to evaluate ideas though is to try and view it from different perspectives. In this case from the owner of a non-haunted domain. Can you see any potential problem with your idea when viewed from that perspective? Now, if there are potential problems, consider the relative sizes of the two groups. Do the benefits to one outweigh harm to the other? This technique can be used every day with pretty much any idea.
    - richardw 2y ago
      The parents rules seemed to indicate only reevaluating the status of a haunted domain. I see nothing about evaluating a normal domain.
      - richardw 2y ago
        (Therefore, this has a one-way function of improving the status of haunted domains and why I think anything is better than nothing unless it blocks a better strategy.)
lazide 2y ago
Why would they care?

kmoser 2y ago

Sadly, the same holds true for IP addresses.

AnthonyMouse 2y ago

> It's difficult to tell who the owner is changing between and whether or not the new one is a better actor than the former. This doesn't seem like that hard of a problem to solve, because these are domains with negative reputation, i.e. worse than zero. So if a) the domain is no longer hosting any of the stuff previously complained about and b) is no longer receiving new complaints over a period of a year, it costs you nothing to reset the domain to zero. Because the bad actors don't have to behave for a year to get back to zero, they can just register a new domain. All you're doing is giving the new owner the same fresh start that anybody can get by buying a never before registered domain for the same price as a year's renewal on the existing one.

dustyventure 2y ago
Using a domain every second year in that environment would get it a gradually raising rank where it isn't penalized/sanitized (by accident, on principle, etc) so every restart after a $30 pause year would be much more effective than a new domain.
- soared 2y ago
  It gets reset every year so how would it be more effective?
  - dustyventure 2y ago
    A system gets reset, what happens in obscure places like old HN content?
    - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
      The search index knows when the first time it saw that old link was. If it was before the reset, regard it as pointing to a different domain than the current one.
      - dustyventure 2y ago

xg15 2y ago

If it's instantly released, then yes. But in this thread are reports where the offensive actions happened 15 years ago. After such a long time of "good behavior" it makes no sense for me to still keep the domain blocked/downranked.

xp84 2y ago
Honestly, these days, with domains in general being nearly free compared to the profit potential of a single successful spammer grift, I’m not sure I even see the point of blacklisting domains at all. 25 years ago maybe a spammer would be devastated that he had to “start all over and buy a new domain and build up its reputation.” Now, spammers launch and abandon what, a million new domains a day? Google or anyone spitefully holding onto hard feelings about what a domain “did” years ago is pointless because the spammers will move on anyway. They wouldn’t reuse abcqwertuiop26abc dot xyz anyway because it’s safer to make up a new gibberish domain anyway. Only people who acquire domains legitimately are hurt by this. I would want to experiment judging them based on what they’ve been seen to do in the past month.
- lazide 2y ago
  The only reason they go to those new domains is because of the blacklist. If you remove the blacklist, they’d just stop doing that and it would be even easier for them.
  - xp84 2y ago
    I'm imagining/advocating for blacklisting them for say, 12 months, and re-evaluating them at that point. This imposes the identical cost on the spammer as now (each "detection" costs them a year's domain registration) while allowing a reputation "reset" for innocent people who acquire haunted domains. Yes, the spammers can sit on their domains once blacklisted, renew them, and redeploy their spam on them 12 months later, but they'd have nothing to gain from the reuse, since the names of their domains are just nonsense anyway.
    - 2y ago

mschuster91 2y ago

Require a deposit then, say 1000$, that is to be refunded after a year of probationary period. You get caught being a scammer/spammer, you lose the deposit.

Dilettante_ 2y ago
The deposit would be either too high for normal people to pay, or too low to matter to bad actors
- mschuster91 2y ago
  Given that spammers cycle through thousands of domains, they'd run into serious cash flow issues very soon.
lazide 2y ago
Who holds the deposit, and what is to stop them from having someone report your domain as a spammer so they can keep your money?

ricardo81 2y ago

A tweak to that could be along the lines of "if the DNS lookup of the domain responds with NXDOMAIN for more than x days, give it a fresh start". I'm not up to date with SEO so unsure whether Google would (or is able to) reset the domain's backlink profile, I'd guess it would be possible. A lot of the value of using expired domains is for backlinks (or at least was)