3 ms·

I have a much better idea. Get rid of all domain names. Just use some sort of IP-like code that is basically random. (You can't use IP because IP's change and

I have a much better idea. Get rid of all domain names. Just use some sort of IP-like code that is basically random. (You can't use IP because IP's change and you may have multiple ones, or use a content distribution system, same reasons as now). Example: http://ewaouacswkaoieljoewa90d http://ewaouacswkaoieljoewa90d Step 2: Browsers don't emphasize the domain name anymore. No more bar to type domains in directly, you would have to open a modal dialog to type or paste one in. Since the url's aren't memorable anyway, it doesn't matter that you don't see them. If you are concerned about people spoofing your domain, you're already using certs to prevent that anyway.. right? 3. How do people find your site now!? The same way everybody does anyway, Bing. (Ok, I didn't want to say Google because this system of going without domain names shouldn't rely on a single company like google for it to work, although it does. This isn't so bad, since the internet de facto already does rely on google to function, we just have these short, memorable domain names that aren't necessary also. Having domain names is retarded. What if you had to get a street address that was also the name of your business?? What is the point of it?

makecheck 17y ago
Well for one thing, web browsers aren't the only place domain names appear. Network administrators are people, too. Suppose you had to administer a server; the task would be almost impossible without domain name patterns. Take a proxy server, for instance. Right now, I can set it up by saying that domains "*.xyz.com" are local to my network, forcing everything else to go through the proxy. If every location were an incomprehensible name (as you suggest), the only way to configure the server would be to list every obfuscated name. It also wouldn't be future-proof; without a pattern, the server couldn't possibly determine how to handle a new machine name, so someone would have to go in and add more obfuscated names to the list.
- justin_vanw 17y ago
  I see what you are saying. why can't you say *.alsfjosajlksajdf, just the same as now? It's harder to remember, but encryption keys are literally impossible to remember and people maintain lists of those. So to be clear, the idea is just to take away any choice when you buy a domain name. Since people don't use domain names much to navigate around, and tend to use google, this won't change much. The domain is hidden and ugly, but otherwise works as per usual, perhaps I should have been explicit about that. Something else I should have been more explicit about: The whole point is to make it impossible to have squatting and lawsuits about domain names. Let a search engine decide what is the best 'flower' site, not who happened to buy flower.com in 1994. The current system inherently favors existing sites over new sites, which is silly.

makecheck 17y ago

Well for one thing, web browsers aren't the only place domain names appear. Network administrators are people, too. Suppose you had to administer a server; the task would be almost impossible without domain name patterns. Take a proxy server, for instance. Right now, I can set it up by saying that domains "*.xyz.com" are local to my network, forcing everything else to go through the proxy. If every location were an incomprehensible name (as you suggest), the only way to configure the server would be to list every obfuscated name. It also wouldn't be future-proof; without a pattern, the server couldn't possibly determine how to handle a new machine name, so someone would have to go in and add more obfuscated names to the list.

justin_vanw 17y ago
I see what you are saying. why can't you say *.alsfjosajlksajdf, just the same as now? It's harder to remember, but encryption keys are literally impossible to remember and people maintain lists of those. So to be clear, the idea is just to take away any choice when you buy a domain name. Since people don't use domain names much to navigate around, and tend to use google, this won't change much. The domain is hidden and ugly, but otherwise works as per usual, perhaps I should have been explicit about that. Something else I should have been more explicit about: The whole point is to make it impossible to have squatting and lawsuits about domain names. Let a search engine decide what is the best 'flower' site, not who happened to buy flower.com in 1994. The current system inherently favors existing sites over new sites, which is silly.