Top level domain names lodged with ICANN.
October 24, 2000 9:16 PM   Subscribe

Top level domain names lodged with ICANN. These are the TLD's lodged with ICANN, of which we might see the first ones early next year. And yes, .xxx is one of them.
posted by Zool (13 comments total)
 
.web

That seems kinda redundant.
posted by capt.crackpipe at 9:25 PM on October 24, 2000


I've always wanted .. http://www.www.www/
posted by chrish at 9:27 PM on October 24, 2000


".dot" oh man that's too funny.

".nyc" (coming from a company called world domains - so I suppose they'll start with New York first?)

I think the funniest thing is seeing ".kids .xxx" together from one proposal.

I can't believe how much effort people are putting into some of these TLDs, they're starting campaign sites (http://www.dotkid.com/)
posted by mathowie at 9:38 PM on October 24, 2000


I looked at the about section of that site and it's saying no anonymous chat, no anonymous email. Talk about a hunting ground for pedophiles.
posted by Zool at 9:52 PM on October 24, 2000


It's about damned time they created .xxx; there's been a crying need for it for years. It will serve both the people who want to avoid that kind of thing and those seeking it out. (Remember, it's constitutionally protected speech for adults speaking to adults.)
posted by Steven Den Beste at 10:21 PM on October 24, 2000


I don't like xxx at all. What if my webpage has, *heaven forbid*, a naked person on there among other content. Do I have to go out and buy an .xxx to protect the children.

For commercial porn it makes sense, but there's lots of things that could fall into the category of pornography and I doubt commercial porn sites would bother changing over unless a law was passed. Think of all the links, advertising, and such would have to be redone. A "Oh we've moved to passionatejerkingoff.xxx wait 2 seconds and you'll be there" page kinda defeats the purpose when you type in the old .com address.
posted by skallas at 10:38 PM on October 24, 2000


skallas: what scares me more about .xxx is that it smacks of the old segregation/isolation/elimination strategy. If there's a designated place for commercial porn shops, "encouraging" servers which happen to have erotic images available at addresses accessible via other domains to move will start to seem like a reasonable idea to the clueless masses.

-Mars
posted by Mars Saxman at 11:03 PM on October 24, 2000


I have no problem with the possibility of an eventual rule that would require commercial porn sites to use an .xxx TLD. Explicitly specifying the commercial aspect, however, is vital, or we will indeed have people who have the slightest bit of noodity on their sites being pushed to use that domain, which could have an overall chilling effect.
posted by kindall at 1:09 AM on October 25, 2000


You doubt incorrectly, Skallas. The commercial pornography purveyors are *slathering* over .xxx; they *want*, for the most part, to be as far away as possible from the rest of th e web. That way, they're less likely to get shut down for being "accidentally" accessible to minors.

OTOH, it helps us, too: "of course it's not porn; I'd have put it in ".xxx" otherwise."

That domain helps everyone.

".kids", otoh, is pretty moronic

posted by baylink at 8:28 AM on October 25, 2000


Prediction: next thing we'll see is pressure on ISPs to disallow .xxx access ...
posted by dhartung at 9:03 AM on October 25, 2000


There will be no pressure at all on ISPs to disallow .xxx access. The ISPs will be jumping all over themselves to do it. You'll be able to get either a "no porn" account or a "free speech" account, possibly from the same ISP, but certainly from competing ISPs. In fact I would wager the ISPs are fairly drooling at the prospect of being able to offer .xxx access as a "value added" service.
posted by kindall at 10:45 AM on October 25, 2000


This will also allow censorware to finally work: blocking any web address with a .xxx suffix. This way, maybe they'll finally stop blocking legitimate sites with words like "breasts."

It'll also make it much easier for parents to prevent thier kids from seeing porn, thus letting this hysterical wave of Internet paranoia subside.

Thus, people will be more open to the Net.

See?

Pornography is free speech, but it is constitutional to limit when and where it can be displayed. We're just seeing the Internet equivalent of that.

Nader Nader Nader!
posted by solistrato at 11:46 AM on October 25, 2000


Are there many porn sites left which (like the infamous whitehouse.com) try to boost their traffic from mistyped URL's? If so, those are the ones unlikely to be thrilled with .xxx.
posted by harmful at 11:55 AM on October 25, 2000


« Older Great this Modern World cartoon   |   Undecided voters aren't stupid after all. Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments