Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Google

Google Registry Launches .ing Domains, Begg.ing For Wordplay (9to5google.com) 75

Posted by BeauHD from the what-could-possibly-go-wrong dept.
Google Registry has added domains ending in ".ing" -- "a situation seem/ing ripe for exceed.ing amounts of wordplay," reports 9to5Google. From the report: Google Registry -- which is different from Google Domains, the service Google is sell.ing off to SquareSpace -- tries to push the boundaries of domain names by launch.ing options like ".dev," ".app," and ".meme" (soon). After first be.ing announced in August, Google Registry is officially open.ing registration of .ing domains through partner companies like GoDaddy and 101Domain. As you might expect, the new domain end.ing is meant to inspire a sense of action, as exemplified by the first wave of companies debut.ing new domain names:

If you want a .ing domain of your own, you can do so from the official ".ing" site, but you'll be pay.ing an extra one-time fee dur.ing the Early Access Period, which runs until December 5, 2023, with fees decreas.ing on a "daily schedule." Register.ing during "Phase 1" will set you back over $1 million -- quite a lot of cha-ch.ing -- while "Phase 9" drops down as low as $144.99.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Registry Launches .ing Domains, Begg.ing For Wordplay More

Google Registry Launches .ing Domains, Begg.ing For Wordplay

Comments Filter:

  • We ought to be contracting the space (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Baron_Yam ( 643147 ) on Tuesday October 31, 2023 @07:36PM (#63970302)

    Country codes as TLDs. That's it.

    • I strongly agree. e.g. turn all the existing US controlled TLDs into .us subdomains (.com.us, .org.us, etc) and then each country can resolve internally so that they work like you would expect, i.e. the way they work now

      • The amount of breakage this would cause is staggering. Plus many .org are transnational.

        • Any transnational can get a domain for every nation where it is active.

        • Transnational is not the biggest problem. .org, .com, .net and sometimes even .edu are used as generics, not as US domains. e.g. there are a not of British businesses that use .com domains.

          The problem lies in the history of .us which was not taken up very much IIRC the problem was that the subdomains were based on states rather than purpose. Most other countries either allowed a set of subdomains by purpose (e.g. .co.uk and .ac.uk) or just allowed people to register domain just under the TLD.

      • Re:We ought to be contracting the space (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Tony Isaac ( 1301187 ) on Tuesday October 31, 2023 @10:19PM (#63970584) Homepage

        There is literally no rationale to link internet TLDs to political national boundaries. The internet is truly borderless. Who knows which country slashdot.org is headquartered in, and why should anyone care? Restricting TLDs in this way is no more productive or meaningful than strict rules for organizing paper clips in a desk drawer. TLDs have exactly one purpose: to begin the process of looking up an IP address based on a user-friendly name. Let's not bring politics into it any more than is already the case.

        • Who knows which country slashdot.org is headquartered in, and why should anyone care?

          Yeah, about that... Slashdot is US-centric, and very much so. Time and again, when commenting, I was reminded by various individuals that "Slashdot is US", so it seems that a lot of people care.
          I personally don't give a rat's arse.

          • So maybe 'slashdot' was a poor choice for an example. The point was that web sites are borderless, they do not (usually) belong to a specific country.

        • There is literally no rationale to link internet TLDs to political national boundaries. The internet is truly borderless.

          If that were true then we would have either one entity or no entity in charge of doling out domains in the first place. But in the really real world, entities have homes and websites are controlled by entities. They belong to someone or something, and that someone or something has an address, and that address is inside of a country.

          Who knows which country slashdot.org is headquartered in, and why should anyone care?

          Everyone (except perhaps for you) knows that Slashdot.org is headquartered in the US, owned by a US company, and is in general US centric — the "editors" tend to select and

          • The entity in charge of domain names, ICANN, is an international agency.

            Sorry, slashdot was a bad example. The point is that people can use any web site from anywhere. Some are clearly focused on a specific nation, but many are not.

            • The entity in charge of domain names, ICANN, is an international agency.

              And yet each nation has its own TLD, and is in charge of that TLD (or in charge of delegating its management to someone else.)

              It's very valuable to be able to see at a glance what nation a corporation is affiliated with. It lets you know what kind of regulatory regime they operate under, it lets you know who they're going to be sharing your PII with regardless of what the law says, and it also helps you spot frauds. Many people here for example have talked about blocking [the identifiable] traffic from mult

              • I don't object to nations having a TLD that they manage. I just don't think that should be the *only* kind of TLD.

                As for the "spotting frauds" use case, that is a very tenuous correlation. Sure, many who want to commit fraud congregate around certain TLDs, including .com and .org. But the TLD isn't by itself a good indicator whether the site is malicious.

                I don't follow your logic regarding the internet being one big place. Of course it is. I can access web sites from pretty much anywhere, regardless of TLD.

    • Why?

      They're just friendly names that point to an IP address. Why should we have strict rules about what they are allowed to be? Different people have different motivations. You like country TLDs. But that's as arbitrary as any other kind of TLD, including .com, .org, and .edu, which are not countries.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by jonadab ( 583620 )
      You have to keep .arpa for technical reasons. (The DNS relies on it, under the hood, for reverse lookups.)

      And frankly I'm cool with also keeping .com, .net, .org, and maybe even .edu (because a ton of things that are actually important use them, and it's not practical to transition them by having them redirect to subdomains of a CC TLD, unlike e.g. .gov, which could become a CNAME for .gov.us without causing any real problems, given decent preparation).

      But garbage like .info and .biz can .die.in.a.fire. I

  • No (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Local ID10T ( 790134 ) <ID10T.L.USER@gmail.com> on Tuesday October 31, 2023 @07:37PM (#63970304) Homepage

    or should i say no.fuck.ing/way

    These crap TLDs are just more places for spammers and scammers to play.

    • I suppose it's 'easy' enough to stop - all we have to do is get the masses to ignore the new TLDs and they'll have no value and support for them will dissipate.

      But I'd bet there are a LOT of sites right now looking to get in on the .ing rush because it sounds 'actiony' or whatever buzzword the advertising hacks come up with for it.

    • Spammers will not be in any way deterred by restricting TLDs to specific countries.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by xlsior ( 524145 )

      or should i say no.fuck.ing/way

      These crap TLDs are just more places for spammers and scammers to play.

      .ing is dumb, but abolutely NO good will come from the new .mov and .zip TLDs, those are pretty much guaranteed to be abused and trick users.

    • Re:No (Score:5, Funny)

      by arglebargle_xiv ( 2212710 ) on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @05:05AM (#63971006)
      Are you kidding? Mr.Tulip will love this! As long as you can register -.ing that is.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      On the plus side it makes it easy to block malware sites by simply banning entire TLDs. .top .buzz .wang .us .tk .icu

      That will block a substantial amount of phishing sites, with near zero downside since very few legitimate organizations use those TLDs.

    • These crap TLDs are just more places for spammers and scammers to play.

      This is a good thing since it makes it easy to filter out scam sites. It's like the unintended industry self execution of the early 00s proposal to pass laws saying porn could only be published from the .XXX domain.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by dbialac ( 320955 )
      Fucking, Austria might have a problem with that.

    • These crap TLDs are just more places for spammers and scammers to play.

      I was thinking of blocking this domain before they even start but I'm kinda curious to see who'd pay a million bucks to spam me.

      I assume the "f" domain is going to cost much more than that.

  • Microsoft tries to register b.ing (Score:5, Funny)

    by fabioalcor ( 1663783 ) on Tuesday October 31, 2023 @07:46PM (#63970326)

    Google answers "haha nice try".

    • You say that, but right now it's showing as "available".

      > How exciting! b.ing is available.
      > The following partners are selling .ing domains during the Early Access Period.

  • abus.ing
    wast.ing
    los.ing
    reject.ing
    gam.ing

  • ING [lion] (Score:5, Interesting)

    by tepples ( 727027 ) <tepples@gmai3.14159l.com minus pi> on Tuesday October 31, 2023 @07:48PM (#63970332) Homepage Journal

    Conspicuous by absence from the featured article is what power ING, a multinational banking corporation based in the Netherlands [wikipedia.org], will have over this top-level domain.

  • I like wordplay (Score:3)

    by The Evil Atheist ( 2484676 ) on Tuesday October 31, 2023 @07:58PM (#63970348)
    But the joke was tired the second time they used it, and the whole article is just obnoxious from its overuse.

    Typical humourless nerd who thinks if "once is good, then more must be better."

  • just annother money grab (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ClueHammer ( 6261830 ) on Tuesday October 31, 2023 @08:03PM (#63970364)
    There is zero need for this, but now everyone with a domain name will have to grab the ing version to stop their competitor (or other malicious entity) getting it

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      It seems like most orgs have given up on that. There are loads of phishing sites where the .com TDL was replaced by .top or .us.

      Using certificates to verify the authenticity of websites is dead as well.

      It seems that the only system anyone is relying on now is browser based lists of malicious URLs.

  • Time to block these registrars? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Midnight Thunder ( 17205 ) on Tuesday October 31, 2023 @08:04PM (#63970368) Homepage Journal

    Given this is all a money grab diluting the system, maybe it is time to block these registrars or extensions?

    Iâ(TM)d agree moving this junk to .us since it is fck.ing.us.

  • not car.ing

  • First, the wordplay was downright bad. People here could do a better job in their sleep.

    Second, there's a fair bit of bogosity going on. The claim is that these domains cost $1 million right now (decreasing over time) - however the announced first wave of names is mostly made up of tiny entities that couldn't afford even 1% of that amount. It seems pretty likely Google went looking for customers - as in cold-calling candidates they themselves came up with - trying to artificially create some sort of bogus d

  • Only about $38,000 to reserve one.

  • I have blocked all the other garbage TLDs;
    a) There is nothing there that is of interest to me
    b) Scammers use them because they are cheap

    So one more piece of garbage in the junk file will not matter.

  • TLDs are like phone numbers now, they don't need to be memorable because I can quickly find what they point to anyway.

  • Electronic Frontier Foundation (Score:5, Funny)

    by dgatwood ( 11270 ) on Tuesday October 31, 2023 @08:47PM (#63970456) Homepage Journal
    I thought about reserving a domain for the Electronic Frontier Foundation as a joke, but I realized no EFF.ing domain was worth that much money. :-D

  • The one with those commercials ending in ing. [wikipedia.org]

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by PPH ( 736903 )

      No doubt Microsoft is scrambling to buy b.ing. And Boeing, boe.ing.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by stooo ( 2202012 )

        or not.
        that will not bring Boeing more orders for planes, nor MS more users.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by PPH ( 736903 )

          True. But it will bring more business to Google as these tradename owners will be forced to defend themselves against squatters.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by stooo ( 2202012 )

            why would anyone be "forced" to buy a domain ?
            just let "squatters" squat.
            There's enough space for all of them. Squatting is good for your health.

  • Dutch auctions are the correct way to sell these (Score:3)

    by FeelGood314 ( 2516288 ) on Tuesday October 31, 2023 @10:41PM (#63970604)
    Ignoring most of the joke and condescending comments, a domain name is a valuable asset to many companies. Companies want names that are easy for their customers to remember and type. So these do have value and this is the optimal way for price discovery. When price discover fails we get either unsold goods or middle men able to extract the difference. The classic example is the parasites that are ticket master and scalpers or when the ticket price is to high empty stadium seats.
    • Except there is nothing from stopping Google or other registrar to sell .ng or .g domains later, so if you want it sell.ing, you get to pay millions for selli.ng and sellin.g. Then, once they collect all that money, .ling domains, etc, etc.
  • So rather than be obvious and sell keyword search rank boosts, they decided to sell keyword domains instead. In a little while they will sell .ng, so they can resell every .ing domain owner a .ng domain, you know extort.ing or extorti.ng existing customers. Next up, .g, , more customers payin.g millions to get the domain and thousands annually to keep it.

  • Nobody will will want to be "talk dot-ing" like this because when they get angry (trying to solve an anagram, for example) they would start sound dot-ing like: "I don't know what you're dot think dot-ing you're do dot-ing, but god fuck dot-ing do what I dot told dot you dot to dot do, damn dot it!!!!"

  • ... this leads to phishing and all kinda malware.

  • Asking for a friend.

  • All you crypto bros are going to pay big time to get into my HODL.ing site!

    Thank you, Google for this valuable addition to the net! There was such an outcry for more useless TLD.

  • I'm sure they've already thought of this and preemptively registered it, but sometimes obvious stuff sits in a blind spot so ya never know. How about Googl.ing? Probably different enough that it wouldn't represent trademark or copyright infringement, and it would definitely get a rise out of them.

  • Google will have to admit they and everyone else uses their brand as a common language verb, which removes the copyright ;)

  • Because the addition of the ".zip" TLD went over so well:

    cts (@gf_256):

    ThioJoe (@thiojoe):

    The whole .zip TLD thing is worse than I thought. Here’s a 4 year old comment on YouTube that has now had the mention of 42 .zip converted to a link.

    Guess what visiting that domain does? IT AUTOMATICALLY DOWNLOADS THAT ZIP BOMB. (So do not visit)

    I see that people have been greatly enjoying my new .zip domain

    -- https://nitter.net/gf_256/stat... [nitter.net]

    I look forward to the shenaningans that their .ing-TLD is going to c

Slashdot Top Deals

Real programmers don't comment their code. It was hard to write, it should be hard to understand.

Close