Emilio
msg:3927583 | 11:50 pm on Jun 5, 2009 (gmt 0) |
Crazy? Yes.
|
CWebguy
msg:3927658 | 3:32 am on Jun 6, 2009 (gmt 0) |
in a perfect world... :)
|
piatkow
msg:3927833 | 2:09 pm on Jun 6, 2009 (gmt 0) |
I would add:
1. Rigidly control who gets a TLD. If you want to be .com then you must have a business. If its for your local PTA then you must be .org
2. Abolish generic TLDs and only have ccTLDs. No more discussions about getting your .com to rate in google.co.uk. If its a UK business then it is .co.uk Now just borrow that TARDIS and go back and get it all fixed.
|
httpwebwitch
msg:3927851 | 3:00 pm on Jun 6, 2009 (gmt 0) |
well, you should start up your own WWW then. >> every site built would match the domain name
the problem there is who would be the arbitrator to judge whether my site matches the domain? You? Would it be Democratic? and... what "matches" boingboing.com? >> leased to the highest bidder
the problem there is that the internet will be owned by Nestlé and Monsanto and Coke. >> the better domain names would go to the highest bidder
what you've described is not a free market. it's a tyranny where you do not have the right to own your property, because the choice to sell or not is not yours.
|
MrHard
msg:3928096 | 3:07 am on Jun 7, 2009 (gmt 0) |
This is about the opposite of what the web should be, and what I hope it never becomes. A predictable swill of corporate walmarts who have all outbid us, forced us to watch their annoying commercials like they do on TV, and who we end up buying from because we cannot find any small shops with character nearby. Plus, what about keeping things interesting? The spice of life, finding something you did not expect to find?
|
kaled
msg:3928171 | 10:01 am on Jun 7, 2009 (gmt 0) |
You missed your calling - you should have gone into politics because this idea is beyond bonkers! Kaled.
|
rocknbil
msg:3928258 | 3:33 pm on Jun 7, 2009 (gmt 0) |
Since we're on "shoulda' coulda' woulda's" I think anyone purchasing a computer should be take a mandatory online safety course. Throw 20 emails at them; if they don't spot the phishing emails, no license, retake the test. If they click any links in the phishing emails or spam mails, they go on a permanent black list, no Internet access for life. Present them with a joke or Internet Scare email; if they a) forward to everyone they know, no license, must re-take the test, or b) forward to everyone they know using the CC field (as opposed to BCC), permanent black list, banned for life from using a computer. Present them with options to buy licensed software or download it for free, if the hit the pirate site, re-take the safety test before getting a license. Present them with three ecommerce sites to make a purchase, if they enter sensitive information on a non-secure site, re-take the test, no license for you. Ask them to provide FTP/Control panel/domain info to a third party, if they email it -retake the test, no license. Ask them to register a domain, if they enter themselves as all three contacts - you guessed it - no license. Present a form with simple one-line instructions by each option, then ask them what they chose. If they don't know and just clicked through, not only do they have to re-take the test they have to provide a basic reading skills certificate before they can re-take the test. No license. Present them with three pages with errors, either input or server errors, with specific indications as to what the error is, and ask them what happened. If the response is "it just said error" or "it wouldn't let me" no license. Pass the test first. Present them with three browsers, set for "home page" at Google, Yahoo, and MSN ("Bing" . . . . lol . . .) Ask them to find example.com in all three. If they enter "example.com" in the search box instead of the address bar . . . . back to Internet Safety school you go. Sorry for the O.T., but since we're on wishful thinking for things that will never happen, this is a reasonable list . . . we require driving licenses to try and keep people from injuring each other on the road, it's not that far of a stretch to demand the same thing for things from users that affect all of us on the "Information Highway . . . "
|
FourDegreez
msg:3928294 | 4:58 pm on Jun 7, 2009 (gmt 0) |
I would just be happy if domain parking were abolished. So many potentially useful domains, wasted.
|
JS_Harris
msg:3928519 | 7:30 am on Jun 8, 2009 (gmt 0) |
Correction: So many potentially useful domains held ransom because the cost to buy new is 7 bucks vs the asking price of 1500.00+ for even remotely good names. My twilight thoughts the other night were bonkers, i'll give you that, but the problem is real. It just struck me that instead of trying to target the end user causing the problem... a step back reveals that another problem exists at the other end of the spectrum. Search engines, their free traffic is what bottom feeders game afterall, if only a browser could learn from you with far less influential factors (such as links) to guide it. edit: search engines haven't solved the problem yet but nobody is really looking for a solution that doesn't include search engines, as in the solution completely bypasses the need for a search engine at all, are they? Even social networking is being gamed to influence search. Again, I do love a good search but there has to be a better way. [edited by: JS_Harris at 7:38 am (utc) on June 8, 2009]
|
Gibble
msg:3928653 | 2:39 pm on Jun 8, 2009 (gmt 0) |
Something better than search would be great, but what is there other than directories, which fail because there are just too many sites for people to categorize manually. [edited by: Gibble at 2:39 pm (utc) on June 8, 2009]
|
dailypress
msg:3929731 | 5:25 pm on Jun 9, 2009 (gmt 0) |
You should have told Microsoft before they invested millions in Bing search engine.
|
anand84
msg:3966794 | 11:16 am on Aug 6, 2009 (gmt 0) |
wow..I will buy Google.com because I will have a mathematics site there..
|
HRoth
msg:3966801 | 11:34 am on Aug 6, 2009 (gmt 0) |
So you think the person best qualified to write about a particular topic is the person with the most money, who will win the auction? Absolutely not. Teh Internets does not need a reboot. Sometimes I think I could use one, though.:)
|
ganeshgrowth
msg:3966929 | 2:03 pm on Aug 6, 2009 (gmt 0) |
in a perfect everything takes shape gradually and one needs wait patiently for their turn. in this case it does not look like one
|
ganeshgrowth
msg:3966938 | 2:06 pm on Aug 6, 2009 (gmt 0) |
one could start being strict now, and delete all non used domains. One can surely give a deadline to start things with a strict warning. Warning: Correct your website, or you will loose it.
|
MrSavage
msg:3968667 | 3:00 am on Aug 9, 2009 (gmt 0) |
There is only but one simple solution to this problem. I agree in principle about the need to deal with people buying just to sell or hold you hostage. A pretty pathetic way to make money if you ask me. However, there is only 1 solution. That is to drastically raise the price of a domain. And I mean drastically. I think most of us realize the value of a domain name, and a lot of us can cover the cost of a domain in the matter of a few banner clicks. These nerds who buy domains for no actual purpose, other than to inflate the cost, simply doesn't make sense and shouldn't happen. Just cause them all to go bankrupt with the increase per domain charges. Simple.
|
ganeshgrowth
msg:3969030 | 5:53 am on Aug 10, 2009 (gmt 0) |
To decrease the road accidents, increasing the price of petrol is not a solution? Implementing stricter rules is the only solution.
|
ganeshgrowth
msg:3969034 | 5:55 am on Aug 10, 2009 (gmt 0) |
Domain name is a virtual product. The cost of manufacturing one is very negligible and in fact the current price should be further reduced.
|
lammert
msg:3973093 | 11:08 pm on Aug 16, 2009 (gmt 0) |
| If you buy (lease) the domain name example.com your site had better be 100% about example.com |
|
Domain names which should match the main keyword(s) of a sites are only for the small players. Look at the top sites in Alexa: Google, Bing, Yahoo, Youtube. These are all domains which didn't exist as a word before they were introduced by their owners.
|
webtress
msg:3973783 | 12:55 am on Aug 18, 2009 (gmt 0) |
httpwebwitch and rocknbil, I just love reading your replies - LOL all kidding aside you both are always on target.
|
|
