4 ms·

the only problem with this piece is, I have yet to find the mythical "real domain that you can own". I've leased/rented/licensed/used quite a few domains over t

by rdj 17y ago

the only problem with this piece is, I have yet to find the mythical "real domain that you can own". I've leased/rented/licensed/used quite a few domains over the years, but they each come with some sort of expiration and a threat that someone else can take the name if I don't pay up. ..and the "Facebook Username Debacle" won't help solve that problem either....

blogimus 17y ago
I have yet to find the mythical "real estate you can own" I've leased/rented and even taken out a mortgage on my condominium, but if I don't pay my condo fees every month, the association threatens to take my condo away... And if you don't pay taxes on any real estate, house, condo, or land?... Yeah, I hate the idea of having to pay each year for my domain names. It sucks, it feels like we pay too much, but it is probably cheaper than if you could pay once up front and never have to pay any infrastructure costs. Imaging the hording and domain name market under those conditions. So since I can't do anything about it, and I want those domain names, I chalk it off to infrastructure costs.
- wmf 17y ago
  People have proposed solutions to this problem, like if you own a domain but stop paying the maintenance fees it will disappear from the DNS (so you can't use it), but will still appear in WHOIS and you'll still have legal title to it forever. Ultimately it's political: Some people believe that domains should be property, some believe they shouldn't be, and everyone has trouble understanding the opposing viewpoint.
  - boundlessdreamz 17y ago
    That is not a solution at all. What if somebody actually wants to use the domain? The solution proposed will actually increase domain squatting since there is no cost involved! The only problem with domains right now is that it atleast the .com TLD is controlled by a monopoly and you have price increases. We need to have several companies who can issue .com domains
sdt 17y ago
I thought Anil's piece was hilarious. However, I think he and others have missed out on the significance of the 'URL on facebook' as opposed to the 'real domain that you can own'. The reason that people are excited it about it is because it's starting from scratch. That is, I may actually have the chance to get a username like 'scott' or 'sdt' rather than scott-siliconvalley94043. Since facebook is already a fairly canonical place to go for personal contact info, interests, etc, this is fairly huge. The other important bit is that because facebook is a fairly canonical reference point, and it has very good search rankings, having your name established is going to be important. If some random 6th cousin of mine got the facebook.com/my.full.name and started ranking higher than my personal site for googling "my full name", I'd be pretty pissed. Of course, nobody really knows how Google is going to treat these vanity URLs.

by rdj 17y ago

blogimus 17y ago

I have yet to find the mythical "real estate you can own" I've leased/rented and even taken out a mortgage on my condominium, but if I don't pay my condo fees every month, the association threatens to take my condo away... And if you don't pay taxes on any real estate, house, condo, or land?... Yeah, I hate the idea of having to pay each year for my domain names. It sucks, it feels like we pay too much, but it is probably cheaper than if you could pay once up front and never have to pay any infrastructure costs. Imaging the hording and domain name market under those conditions. So since I can't do anything about it, and I want those domain names, I chalk it off to infrastructure costs.

wmf 17y ago
People have proposed solutions to this problem, like if you own a domain but stop paying the maintenance fees it will disappear from the DNS (so you can't use it), but will still appear in WHOIS and you'll still have legal title to it forever. Ultimately it's political: Some people believe that domains should be property, some believe they shouldn't be, and everyone has trouble understanding the opposing viewpoint.
- boundlessdreamz 17y ago
  That is not a solution at all. What if somebody actually wants to use the domain? The solution proposed will actually increase domain squatting since there is no cost involved! The only problem with domains right now is that it atleast the .com TLD is controlled by a monopoly and you have price increases. We need to have several companies who can issue .com domains

sdt 17y ago

I thought Anil's piece was hilarious. However, I think he and others have missed out on the significance of the 'URL on facebook' as opposed to the 'real domain that you can own'. The reason that people are excited it about it is because it's starting from scratch. That is, I may actually have the chance to get a username like 'scott' or 'sdt' rather than scott-siliconvalley94043. Since facebook is already a fairly canonical place to go for personal contact info, interests, etc, this is fairly huge. The other important bit is that because facebook is a fairly canonical reference point, and it has very good search rankings, having your name established is going to be important. If some random 6th cousin of mine got the facebook.com/my.full.name and started ranking higher than my personal site for googling "my full name", I'd be pretty pissed. Of course, nobody really knows how Google is going to treat these vanity URLs.