ICANN opens applications for new gTLDs
www.theregister.com
: $227k gets you a hearing for your dot.vanity project, or strings in one of 27 scripts
  • MonkderVierte@lemmy.zipEnglish
    3 hours

    Another protocol instead of that historically grown hodgepodge and the DNS domain grift.

  • Chais@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    3 hours

    .antifa and .profa so we don’t have to guess where the company/project/person/etc. stands.

    • CameronDev@programming.devEnglish
      50 minutes

      Unless the domain registry is going to research each and every applicant, you’ll still have to guess. I own a .uk domain despite never having visited Ukraine United Kingdom.

      Edit: not sure why I was confused about the .UK TLD, fixed.

        • CameronDev@programming.devEnglish
          41 minutes

          I have no idea why I got that stuck in my head wrong. Still, my point stands, anyone can buy any domain at any time. Ownership of a domain implies nothing.

  • njordomir@lemmy.worldEnglish
    3 hours

    .fart because decades of growing up haven’t quite cured my potty humor.

  • Alvaro@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
    10 hours
    • .md
    • .tar
    • .gz
    • .iso
    • .lnk
    • .txt
    • .exe
    • .mp4
    • .mp3
    • .jpg
    • .png

    I want to watch the world burn like it did on the creation of the .zip TLD

  • Tanoh@lemmy.worldEnglish
    8 hours

    .er .db

    All two letter TLDs are exclusive to countries. So unless you make a country called Ergostan and Dbaseistan and get them internationally recognised you are out of luck. However, if you manage you don’t have to pay the fee!

  • BoofStroke@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    14 hours

    I believe more Tlds is generally stupid. But instead of all the protect the children bullshit, I’d be good with a .kids tld that requires certification to own. Then you can just whitelist that for your precious crotch goblins and leave the rest of us alone.

    • eleijeep@piefed.socialEnglish
      13 hours

      That’s a good suggestion, but unfortunately age verification is not about protecting the kids, it’s about removing anonymity from online platforms and making sure that we can’t exercise our right to speech online without risking government harassment.

      Oh yeah and the advertisers don’t want to pay to advertise to bots.

      • ilmagico@lemmy.worldEnglish
        10 hours

        The idea would be to provide a “protect the kids” alternative that doesn’t require global surveillance and privacy violations, so the next time they try to justify another rights violation to “protect the kids” they can be pointed to the sane alternative, and (hopefully) they’ll run out of excuses.

        I mean, one would wish it’ll play out like that, though I have some doubts. Somehow excuses seem to be always found.

        • Default Username@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
          5 hours

          They’ll just start using the other classic excuse of “preventing terrorism” instead in the case that “protect the children” no longer works.

          If you’re against mass surveillance, you must be pro-terrorism, right?

  • kalkulat@lemmy.worldEnglish
    9 hours

    I would again recommend that anyone doing online marketing and/or tracking be legally confined to the .COM TLD. Severe penalties for corporate abuse would include removal of all internet access. Less severe penalties might include a confiscation of double of all profits made outside of .COM during a deliberate infraction.

    There would be no cost for any TLD’s outside of .COM; all regulation and legal costs to be paid-for by .COM - users.