Very nice! Some more sorting and filtering options would be handy, and some more view options, so each TLD doesn't take up half the screen when it has a lot of applicants.
PS - Your Source link is a 404.
21 minutes ago [-]
varun_ch 43 minutes ago [-]
so many TLDs that seem to be exploiting similarity to existing ones?
.cmo/.con are particularly egregious
sheept 8 minutes ago [-]
I wonder if xyz.com is simply requesting TLDs based on domains their users enter, so cmo and con come from their users’ typos rather than malicious intent. It would be similar to how some registrars park domains when a user checks if a domain is available.
JoshTriplett 5 minutes ago [-]
That would be an absurd amount of money to spend on typosquatting.
skrtskrt 28 minutes ago [-]
I have been looking for an expansion of TLDs that are short, have a decent ring for self-hosting stuff, and don't sound too scammy.
Like `.link` is pretty cool but it's expensive because one of those personal-link-inbio companies created it and wants to cash in on it.
Just from scanning these, maybe:
* .air
* .bit
* .hub
* .iam
* .index (long but I love how universal it is)
* .lab
* .log
* .pod
* .port
* .self is really interesting, wonder if that would take off
* .sys
* .zen
yathern 30 minutes ago [-]
Very useful! I found this article a really good summary of the gtld situation:
NSFW warning please. I clicked on this link while my screen was visible to to others and freaked out.
gelstudios 24 minutes ago [-]
i'd like to see this (filter / exclude) the dotBrand or brand-specific TLDs, as they are not open to the general public.
like .playstation or .airbnb or .nike
bhaney 34 minutes ago [-]
> .lan
Don't you dare, Coffee Danger LLC
skrtskrt 22 minutes ago [-]
Seriously that is the sort of thing that could get you hunted down by angry nerds.
I am NOT going to use .home.arpa.
pasc1878 36 minutes ago [-]
How many of these are companies that learnt from the 1990s and made sure they registered their own name/tradmarks etc rather than having to buy them off scalpers, even though they might have no plans to use them?
10 minutes ago [-]
embedding-shape 49 minutes ago [-]
Finally .scam might be something for all us scammer, I'm tired of getting mixed up with a bunch of honest-looking people.
None of this seem to have any rhyme or reason. What's the reason for these to exists, besides to raise funds for whorever is selling these?
etatester 44 minutes ago [-]
The cat is out of the bag. TLDs are now the domains of the rich. Why not have .taylorswift? It's just 250k https://gtlds.fyi/names/taylorswift
As for the rest, meh, these could be "I have an idea for a domain" but the domain costs 250k
Why limit yourself to just words? I'm hoping to get one of the single-letter domains on the new abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz TLD if I can afford it.
MarsIronPI 50 minutes ago [-]
Am I the only one who's not a fan of these new, longer TLDs? IMO TLDs should be two or three characters. I'm not sure why I feel this way, but there's something unwieldy about a TLD like .cooking.
jnettome 37 minutes ago [-]
What we really need is one char TLDs so we bring back WWW
eg: www.x
ocdtrekkie 36 minutes ago [-]
In theory it can be shorter. Imagine good.cooking is shorter than goodcooking.com
But every one of these plays with all sorts of collisions of user expectations. "word.cloud.microsoft" is one of those URLs that will never look right to me, but is now a corporate staple.
OutOfHere 36 minutes ago [-]
2 to 4 chars is a good range.
24 minutes ago [-]
devmor 32 minutes ago [-]
I'm exhausted by all of the new gTLDs at this point, opening them up to specific companies and organizations basically violated the entire purpose of a gTLD in the first place.
OutOfHere 37 minutes ago [-]
Why are these TLDs so tightly bound to a specific organization? Why can't their registration be more open? Keeping them so locked down makes them useless. Or am I misunderstanding something?
majorchord 12 minutes ago [-]
I thought TLDs were sponsored/registered by corporations, and hence had a say in what can be registered on that TLD and by whom.
Rendered at 21:18:52 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
Sure if AirBnb wants to administer .airbnb and charge a lot, whatever.
But `.bit` domains should be some bargain basement price if so many people want to run it.
PS - Your Source link is a 404.
.cmo/.con are particularly egregious
Like `.link` is pretty cool but it's expensive because one of those personal-link-inbio companies created it and wants to cash in on it.
Just from scanning these, maybe:
* .air
* .bit
* .hub
* .iam
* .index (long but I love how universal it is)
* .lab
* .log
* .pod
* .port
* .self is really interesting, wonder if that would take off
* .sys
* .zen
https://www.wired.com/story/icann-top-level-domains-meow/
like .playstation or .airbnb or .nike
Don't you dare, Coffee Danger LLC
I am NOT going to use .home.arpa.
None of this seem to have any rhyme or reason. What's the reason for these to exists, besides to raise funds for whorever is selling these?
As for the rest, meh, these could be "I have an idea for a domain" but the domain costs 250k
eg: www.x
But every one of these plays with all sorts of collisions of user expectations. "word.cloud.microsoft" is one of those URLs that will never look right to me, but is now a corporate staple.