Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

XXX Goes Live In the Root Servers

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the did-you-feel-a-disturbance-in-the-force? dept.

The Internet 163

An anonymous reader writes that yesterday "IANA added the .XXX Top Level Domain to the root nameservers. While the registry operator Afilias is still in their setup process for ICM registry, the zone is currently propagating. While a number of registrars have already been taking pre-registrations, the actual timeline for the launch has not yet been published."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

The fundies will have a field day (3, Insightful)

Giant Electronic Bra (1229876) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839716)

Yeah, I'm going to pay for a domain that will be blocked in 90% of the world...

Re:The fundies will have a field day (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839756)

I've pre-registered goatse.xxx

Re:The fundies will have a field day (1)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839812)

Are you willing to pay ~$65 a year just to hold on to that domain? Not even the porn industry likes .xxx [pcmag.com]

Re:The fundies will have a field day (1)

trollforce1 (2042518) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839906)

But think about that.... its not just goatse.cx, its goatse.xxx..... goatsexxxxxxxx.... Perfect!

.com speculators were the only real opposition (5, Interesting)

rs79 (71822) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840164)

The porn industry could give a shit. Seven people own nearly half of .com names and a bunch of wanna ba .com kings have hands full of .com names. Enough of these guys felt threatened that they paid some no-account porn people to protest. They even paid a homeless guy in San Fransisco to protest. http://rs79.vrx.net/works/photoessays/2011/dot-xxx/ [vrx.net]

There's no real opposition in pornland. They don't give a shit. It's the guys with ".com portfolios" that were doing this to try to keep .com names valuable.

The whole point of tld expansion was to create new resources and to prevent regulation of extant resources; that is, life doesn't end at .com. Opposition with vested interests not withstanding.

Re:.com speculators were the only real opposition (1)

_Sprocket_ (42527) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840658)

The whole point of tld expansion was to create new resources and to prevent regulation of extant resources; that is, life doesn't end at .com. Opposition with vested interests not withstanding.

I'm a little skeptical of creating new resources solely for adult entertainment. I'm sure there are vested interests involved. But before we stress opposing vested interests too much, let's not forget the business interest in being the sole source of this tld - namely ICM.

Re:.com speculators were the only real opposition (1)

Urkki (668283) | more than 3 years ago | (#35841796)

I'm a little skeptical of creating new resources solely for adult entertainment.

Adult entertainment is one of the largest, if not the largest legal use of Internet. So I'd say it's pretty high on the list for getting new resources. And since it's somewhat controversial, doing something to (perhaps, eventually, partly) separate it from less controversial stuff sounds like a good idea, too. And just because something else deserving didn't get it's own TLD, is no argument against this, because you have to start somewhere.

Re:.com speculators were the only real opposition (1)

Bruha (412869) | more than 3 years ago | (#35842060)

It will become valuable once countries regulate that any port sites can only operate with a .xxx domain. They'll move, we can all update our spam links and be happy that the majority of the problem just becomes blocking .xxx from kids.

Now will they ban .xxx at libraries lol :)

Re:The fundies will have a field day (1)

MsGeek (162936) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840152)

Definite win. I wouldn't visit it, but man, that's awesome.

Maybe my current cyber-stalker will get one ... (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840680)

After all, the hosts file guy (APK - Alexander Peter Kowalski) will be able to push his "My hosts file keeps you safe - I only get one or two viruses a month now" junk to a whole new market.

For those who aren't logged in ... [slashdot.org] .

BTW - if you're going to tell this guy to stop spamming his hosts file crap, make sure you do it anonymously - not only does it drive him nuts, but he'll think it's me, and waste his time stalking me instead of you.

You seem to be doing the cyberstalking & troll (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35841378)

"Wait until he starts on another kick, then reply to him as an AC. It's the new meme". - by tomhudson (43916) on Sunday May 09 2010, @08:29PM (#32150544) Homepage Journal

QUOTED VERBATIM FROM -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1646272&cid=32150544 [slashdot.org]

I saw that in your post history and verified it tomhudson. It seems you stalk and troll that person by using ac posts to harass him. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. I am posting ac myself because I don't want you stalking, libeling, and trolling me the way you have for months now.

Re:You seem to be doing the cyberstalking & tr (1)

The End Of Days (1243248) | more than 3 years ago | (#35841816)

I'm jealous, you used to be all about me :(

EndOfDays = admitted troll & mult. reg'd accts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35841996)

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1892470&cid=34419130 [slashdot.org] where you admitted to trolling and stalking the same person also, and, that you don't do it by ac replies, but rather by multiple registered user accounts you admitted to having on this forums, here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1147437&cid=27056793 [slashdot.org] ? You said those things and admitted to trolling the same person tomhudson does and that you have multiple registered accounts on slashdot to do so. Is tomhudson one of your alternate registered account sock-puppets too?

Re:EndOfDays = admitted troll & mult. reg'd ac (1)

The End Of Days (1243248) | more than 3 years ago | (#35842018)

Maybe. Is there some way I can tell?

Your own words did the telling (of your trolling) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35842064)

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2086920&cid=35841996 [slashdot.org] and your own words are there admitting you trolled the same person tomhudson is for over a year now by harassing them as ac posts. You're a bit different though. You at least admitted to having multiple registered accounts to harass others here with (not that that's any better). I read that and just realize that you're another nutcase that can't even remember he admitted to trolling that person, and that you do so by using multiple registered accounts sock puppets to do so here at slashdot.

Re:Your own words did the telling (of your trollin (1)

The End Of Days (1243248) | more than 3 years ago | (#35842080)

what if i admitted that i lied about doing that? would that make me a better person, or worse?

You're telling us to stalk and troll with you tom? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35841556)

Your reaction shows us that you're guilty of what has been asked of you, and that you're telling us to stalk and harass a fellow forums member now as you have been for about 1 year now here? Tom, you're losing it. Take your meds. No way Tom. Grow up, or take your meds, or whatever it is that is making you a psychotic freak stalking and trolling others on slashdot.

Re:The fundies will have a field day (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839836)

NIGGERS ON UNICYCLES!

Re:The fundies will have a field day (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35840564)

NIGGERS ON UNICYCLES!

You mean NIGGERSONUNICYCLES.xxx

Re:The fundies will have a field day (3, Interesting)

Zeek40 (1017978) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839850)

Porn sites are already blocked in some percentage of the world (I really doubt it's 90%, regardless of what metric you use) and still makes huge amounts of money. Changing your domain from .com to .xxx is only going to lose you that tiny fraction of users who both live in oppressive nations and are tech savvy enough to work around government internet filters.

Re:The fundies will have a field day (1)

Asm-Coder (929671) | more than 3 years ago | (#35841136)

and are tech savvy enough to work around government internet filters.

If they are tech savvy enough to work around government filters, why can't they work around a domain name filter?

Re:The fundies will have a field day (1)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839858)

Just wait till the "think of the children" meme goes to porn domains and they takes out your .com or .whatever domain if it is meant for porn, forcing you to only use .xxx. If you plan to start the race to get the good domains in that moment you already lost.

Re:The fundies will have a field day (1)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840702)

I used to lose sleep over that, too, but (a) if a registrar did that, they'd just be driving business elsewhere and (b) the idea of seizing a porn domain like the DHS has been seizing "copyright-infringing" domains would be a problem given the lack of a stern party convinced their rights are being infringed.

I mean, no one could be so stupid as to claim that, right?

NOTE: If in Australia, assume all porn is censored anyway.

Re:The fundies will have a field day (1)

davester666 (731373) | more than 3 years ago | (#35841116)

My god-given right to a porn-free internet shall not be infringed! You pervert.

Besides, I've already downloaded all the porn I want.

Stupidity knows no limits (1)

mangu (126918) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839894)

Do you think the creators of this film [imdb.com] ever considered how bad a choice of name they did? A film for teens whose name itself causes it to be blocked by almost all net filters...

Re:Stupidity knows no limits (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839938)

That was 9 years ago, when internet advertising comprised a tiny fraction of a films advertising budget so I doubt the thought even crossed their minds. And the movie made $44 million on it's opening weekend and grossed $150 million (both from the link you provided) so claiming "stupidity knows no limits" is perhaps a bit uncalled for.

Re:Stupidity knows no limits (3, Funny)

Rizimar (1986164) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840124)

I can see the reason for the success of that movie:

"I paid to see a porno in a theater, but they screwed up the showing and I got a movie about Vin Diesel skiing and blowing up boats instead! So I paid again to see a later showing, thinking they fixed this problem, but they didn't. I thought that that theater was bad, but they did the same thing at every other theater I went to! Those morons!"

Re:The fundies will have a field day (1)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839956)

Nothing creates better demand than prohibition.

Re:The fundies will have a field day (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35840034)

Actually, I think addiction beats prohibition on that point, but prohibition is great way of making something relatively benign, exciting.

Re:The fundies will have a field day (-1, Troll)

Threni (635302) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840032)

Only in the third world. Who gives a fuck what sites they visit? They're too busy trying to work out which direction to kneel.

Meanwhile, back in civilisation, you can view what you want when you want, except at work. I don't see a problem here.

useful (2)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839762)

I want to register re.xxx and put cool REstructured eXtended eXecutor scripts there

gold rush (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839774)

The owner of sex.xxx is going to make a fortune

Re:gold rush (1)

h4rm0ny (722443) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839810)

The owner of sex.xxx is going to make a fortunequote> They might make some money from selling it due to the high perceived value of the domain, but in practice, are many more people likely to visit a site their for their porn than any other site? So I doubt they'll make a fortune. The only ones going to make money out of this, are ICANN and the domain registries. It's just a money making stunt. It has very limited practical value and the potential for considerable destructiveness.

Re:gold rush (2)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840480)

ICANN doesn't get a cut - and there will be only one registry. ICM, the company that submitted the application. They will be the ones getting very, very rich off XXX. All purchases of XXX domains, including renewals, are via payment to ICM.

Re:gold rush (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839900)

didn't read tfa?

[T]he registry website, sex.xxx [sex.xxx] and porn.xxx (both placeholder pages, safe for work) are now resolving under the new TLD. xxx.xxx is resolving as well.

Re:gold rush (1)

kulnor (856639) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839962)

Then wonder what slashdot.xxx would be worth

Re:gold rush (1)

MsGeek (162936) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840174)

Or 4Chan.xxx . Or nsfw.xxx . The possibilities are nearly endless!

Re:gold rush (1)

yahwotqa (817672) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840522)

Hmm, endlesspossibilities.xxx... *rushes off to register*

only good thing (2)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839794)

The only good thing about .xxx domain finally being implemented is that we no longer have to read stories and endure the arguments of those who want to create the domain. I kind of think IANA finally allowed it to be created so they would no longer have to put up with requests. I remember reading stories about it (and why it was a bad idea) as far back as 1997.

Re:only good thing (5, Insightful)

Vekseid (1528215) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839826)

Except now we're going to see arguments that all adult sites should move to .xxx domains.

I hope that idea will be a straight up non-starter and stay that way.

Re:only good thing (1)

Chaugnar (1983084) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839848)

People should be able to filter whatever they choose. This just allows them to do it effectively. Just because you view porn at work doesn't mean the rest of have to suffer.

Re:only good thing (1)

MimeticLie (1866406) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840004)

How exactly are you suffering because porn exists in the .com TLD? As it stands, people are able to filter whatever they choose. Nice combination of an ad hominem and a strawman, though.

This isn't going to change the status quo, all it'll do is provoke a land rush for new domains that users will ignore. When was the last time you went to a .mobi? How about a .travel? .pro?

Re:only good thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35840418)

You've got that backward, I'm afraid.

You are free to filter what you want, the rest is free to watch what they want. Why do you feel you are suffering if someone else views porn?

Re:only good thing (1)

IgnitusBoyone (840214) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840594)

He has it wrong? I think your confused. See several things on the internet have what we call involuntary viewing. He doesn't want to suppress porn's presence what he wants to do is only view it when he means to. As porn becomes more popular you tend to see more adds for websites on non porn websites. To be fair generally things like pirating.

Now, because you made porn so popular his torrentz.com search engine can make a great deal of money off displaying adds and there is a lot of images on google image search ( Never going to get around that). But, he hopes he can avoid this by making it easier to filter. Its a false hope, but you have to admit if no one looked at porn on the internet those ads would not be around. So inf act some people do suffer because others view porn. Allowing them a simple way to filter that doesn't affect your viewing habits is the best middle ground I can think of.

Re:only good thing (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 3 years ago | (#35841672)

The respectable, rule abiding websites may be easier to filter. That just means more traffic for the ones operating without regulation, even voluntary regulation. They can spam all they want still. Even if forced frim .com, they'd just move to a country-code tld.

Re:only good thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35841830)

Please. Define: porn.

Re:only good thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35841878)

I'm hoping to not whoosh here, but buddy - you're delusional.

Re:only good thing (1)

bunratty (545641) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839866)

The xxx sites are already too raunchy. We need a top level domain that has a more neutral name for non-raunchy adult material. IANA, please make a .nc17 TLD!

Re:only good thing (5, Interesting)

rs79 (71822) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840088)

No, ICANN finally approved it because all their criteria for a new tld had been met. There were some back door manuoverings to block the domain during the Bush Administration, specifically Karl Rove told the head of the Department of Communications (who oversee ICANN) not to add it the last time they were going to (the decision had been a "go" at ICANN, and they asked DoC to include it) as a favour to the Southern Baptist Conference who has specifically asked for it in exchange for delivering the south.

This of course isn't legal in that there were processes set up and this sort of thing was never accounted for.

Now, .xxx couldn't sue icann, their contractual obligations mandated they go through arbitration first. Cerf behaved very cagily and it went against him and the arbitration panel decided icann had to do what it said it would do.

And yes it goes back to 1996/97. Up until this year I made sure .xxx worked in every alternative root cluster; I was sorta there at the birth of .xxx

Note that about 10 years prior I also had alt.sex created.

This took all the porn off the rest of Usenet and put it in one place. Those that wanted to filter it did, those that want to find it, know where it is, and you never heard any more about dirty pictures elsewhere in Usenet. For the most part.

My favorite line I ever used during the DNS wars was when I got to tell the newly appointed director of DoC, who'd just been handed the the domain stuff to deal with: "Don't worry Becky, half of .com ISN'T porn". My guess is, in 10 years a porn site in .com is gonna seem really out of place.

It's nice to see this finally go through but they have a way to go to be profitable. 10 years at about a million a year adds up. But I'm sure they'll do fine.

Disclaimer: I have no interest or stake, financial or otherwise in .xxx (or any tld).

Pffft! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35840660)

Note that about 10 years prior I also had alt.sex created.

The usenet hierarchy is a content classification system, TLDs are not!

Given the questionable legitimacy of typical .info and .biz domains, .xxx is going to be widely blocked regardless of pornographic content.

My guess is, in 10 years a porn site in .com is gonna seem really out of place.

My guess is that in 10 years .xxx will be overrun with useful, non-pornographic content from people wishing to make the "not a content classification system" point to would-be censors and other such imberceils! Perhaps that was the profit step all along?

Re:only good thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35840770)

My guess is, in 10 years a porn site in .com is gonna seem really out of place.

No - in 10 years there will be just as much port in .com as anywhere else. There is no reason to distinguish porn from any other content found in .com space.

Re:only good thing (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35840232)

Not really, I've already added wildcard blocks at work and at home. I've no problem with porn, however a TLD has nothing to do with content classification so .xxx is being blocked simply because it's a disgusting perversion of the global tld namespace.

Re:only good thing (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35840516)

however a TLD has nothing to do with content classification

Ever heard of .edu? It's for educational related sites.
Ever heard of .gov? It's for (US) government sites.
Ever heard of .mil? It's for (US) military sites.
Ever heard of ...
Shit. just check this list [wikipedia.org] .

TLD nothing to do with content classification? Yeah, right.

Re:only good thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35841062)

Ever heard of .edu? It's for educational related sites.
Ever heard of .gov? It's for (US) government sites.
Ever heard of .mil? It's for (US) military sites.
Ever heard of ...
Shit. just check this list [wikipedia.org].

TLD nothing to do with content classification? Yeah, right.

You appear to be confusing "content" with "organisation". Plenty of sites report, discuss and contain resources relating to education, government and the military on general use domains. The TLD tells you nothing about the content as the .edu publication of a PHD on the cultural impact of bukkakke would prove.

I know this may come as a shock to you but there's also multilingual sites engaging in international trade from CC TLDs. Just because a site is registered under .de, doesn't mean the content is not availiable in English nor that they only trade in Germany.

ow

Re:only good thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35841316)

a TLD has nothing to do with content classification so .xxx is being blocked simply because it's a disgusting perversion of the global tld namespace.

Try telling that to your average school librarian or teacher, who sees anything not "ending with .edu or .gov" to be utter crap...

the natural next step is (2, Interesting)

v1 (525388) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839890)

to try to force the porn peddlers into using an .xxx domain name. Yes, they'll get blocked by a huge percentage of the web. But that's for the most part in places they're already not supposed to be like business and school networks. So while they may lose 90% of their coverage area, it won't disconnect them from more than 2% of their customers, the majority of which are hunkered down on their computers at home.

Normally I'm not a "think of the children!" type, but in this particular case, I see it as a net-positive thing. Maybe my opinion would be different if I were in the porn business. But if things come around this way, it will make a LOT of network admins jobs a little bit easier, and will give the people paying the internet bills the service change they want. The vast majority of the public will be either indifferent or will benefit from it, the only losers will be the porn industry, and they actually won't lose that much. The only market they're going to lose is the market that they weren't supposed to be in, that they weren't making very much on anyway. If you want to talk about "market" you have to compare the seller and the buyer, (the porn site and the school for example) and can't be considering the actual audience. (the kids at school, or the worker on lunch break) They're not the customer, they're not the market. This step will help stop the porn industry from making a small amount of additional money off a market that doesn't want to be their customer.

So I don't see this as a bad thing at all.

Re:the natural next step is (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839976)

This step will help stop the porn industry from making a small amount of additional money off a market that doesn't want to be their customer.

Sorry, but if I don't want to be their customer, why would I give them any money? Has "They made me do it" suddenly become a valid excuse for porn surfing? Inquiring minds want to know!

Re:the natural next step is (1)

PPH (736903) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840100)

I think you read that statement backwards. v1 was saying that this will stop the porn industry from accessing a very few customers that (although they may seek porn) the porn industry doesn't want.

If you don't consume porn, this won't transfer money from you to the industry. In fact it will cost the industry a small amount, having to switch .com to .xxx. And it will make administration much simpler.

Force? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35840076)

Let's say for a second you can force everyone with adult content into the .xxx domain. Now, who defines what is adult content? The line becomes quite blurry very quickly.

Re:the natural next step is (4, Insightful)

bfree (113420) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840118)

What is porn? Who gets to decide the answer to that question? Will all sites covering beach volleyball have to move to .xxx? What about a site which includes instructions for how to put on a condom? How about Victoria Secrets or Sports Illustrated? How about english tabloids which feature "Page 3"?

Let's imagine for a moment you said all those need not be forced onto .xxx, should Playboy be forced on and treated the same in this regard as donkeyrapingshiteaters.com (no idea or interest if that exists or would be legal in any juristiction, just don't complain to me if you go check and throw up)?

Should anyone wanting access to IPs which serve any content hosted on .xxx be forced to opt in and register themselves with their ISP? Should the ISP have to verify that any access to a .xxx site is by someone over an age determined by their local laws (and they are not on any lists banning them from such access)?

Re:the natural next step is (1)

v1 (525388) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840230)

While I'll agree that the definition of "porn" varies from place to place, and in some cases is extreme, the concept remains the same, sexual stimulation. There are very few web sites that actually operate somewhere in the in-between, because they generally have problems getting customers that are interested in more hard core. ("soft porn" is a relatively small industry) So it's not like there's going to be a huge number of "borderline" sites that have to be more carefully considered.

Look at the movie industry. They have a very clear and concise way to define what makes a film rated R.

Re:the natural next step is (2)

kbonapart (645754) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840424)

Clear and concise? Nay, my good man, nay.

Pop over to Netflix and watch "This Film Has Not Been Rated." It takes a look at the ratings board's style and members of the MPAA.

Some of the gems include making a movie rated X because of a too long shot of a woman's /face/ while attaining orgasm.

Re:the natural next step is (1)

The End Of Days (1243248) | more than 3 years ago | (#35841870)

It's a pretty simple standard, if it makes you tug at your collar, it gets an R, but if you get wood, it's X.

Re:the natural next step is (1)

paiute (550198) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840612)

the concept remains the same, sexual stimulation.

Fine. Now define 'sexual' and define 'stimulation'.

this is some sort logic failure (2, Insightful)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840840)

there should be a term for it, because i see this fallacy a lot. "reducto ad grey area"?

anyway, the point is simple: because a grey area exists does not mean we can't define black and white. people are always saying "ooh! ooh! look! a grey area! therefore there is no black and white, good and evil, right and wrong" etc. this is some lame loser teenager bullshit in your thinking

a site that instructs women how to inspect their breasts in the shower for lumps/ breast cancer is NOT pornography

a site that shows a woman being penetrated by two guys and giving a blowjob to a horse IS pornography

and in between exists a grey area, yes. so what?

the existence of that grey area does not nullify or change the fact that black and white are real, nor does it argue anyone should try to stop classifying pornography as pornography. pornography is real, pornography can be defined. the existence of grey areas doesn't change that. got it?

Re:this is some sort logic failure (1)

misexistentialist (1537887) | more than 3 years ago | (#35841314)

The only practical definition of "pornographic" would include all nudity and most physical contact. Most parents would certainly demand that breast exam videos not be shown to children. Just like they wouldn't want them seeing sex scenes, the level of detail shown being irrelevant. "Pornographic" in the world of adults has a more specific meaning, but since censorship doesn't apply to free adults, determining the degree of obscenity is not decisively important.

Re:this is some sort logic failure (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35841350)

The gray area is the problem, not the edges of the space. It is simple enough to classify the extremes, because that is what they are. Extremes. The hard part is classifying websites that are gray in nature.

The first example would be a site that may or may not display nude people, but is primarily used for art. Would showing the human body in such a case be considered pornography? Some may get off on it, but others may enjoy it for what it is.

Going into a more recent yet still gray area is body painting as some do to conventions (got a picture of a Mass Effect 2 body paint job). Are people that put paint on their birthday suit going too far? Would a website that displays such things be considered pornography? If this is classified as pornography, than what about a site that displays people in speedos and g-strings? What about public nude beaches as a greater extreme of public appearance?

Now there is a much much older area here as well. What if there is a website that collects images of antique art? I have seen images of bronze statues of nude boys pissing out water for a statue. The statue is in Germany. Would putting that on a website be considered pornography because some long dead appreciated artist and some long dead financier made a statue centuries ago? I am sure I could cite work after work that contain nude imagery.

Or should we go to some of the extremes that the Victorian Era in England did? Must we put skirts on Piano / Table legs to young boys do not get horny? Must we call chicken legs, drum sticks because referring to a body part is considered foul?

A threshold maybe able to be set, but it certainly would have either a lot of false positives or a lot of false negatives so the usefulness would be very very limited. I suppose there is also the path of paying an independent group to create a blacklist of non-XXX sites and possibly create a list of sites that use XXX, but do not deal with pornography. Microsoft.XXX anyone? Steve Ballmer throws more than just chairs. US-GOV.XXX; All your favorite representatives, photoshopped onto models! etc. etc.

Re:this is some sort logic failure (2)

NeutronCowboy (896098) | more than 3 years ago | (#35841358)

No. You're missing the point. The issue is not that there's a grey area, it's that what is sexual stimulation for one is just a medical curiosity for someone else. What do you think a fetish is? Some people get turned on by naked bodies, others consider them normal.

That's the real issue, and the real danger. Your breast exam site would require a .xxx location in many muslim countries. Your naked breast ads would be in .xxx in the US, and on the corporate site in Europe.

What this can lead to is a mad rush to put everything objectionable to someone behind a permanently blocked TLD, turning everyone who visits those sites into pervs and deviants. - because only pervs and deviants go to the TLD that hosts porn.

Re:the natural next step is (2)

misexistentialist (1537887) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840888)

the concept remains the same, sexual stimulation

So Amazon, the largest seller of vibrators and literary erotica goes into xxx?

Look at the movie industry. They have a very clear and concise way to define what makes a film rated R.

The X rating was a failure. A lot of films worth watching aren't submitted to be rated, because it is in effect a censorship board.

Re:the natural next step is (1)

Urkki (668283) | more than 3 years ago | (#35841920)

the concept remains the same, sexual stimulation

So Amazon, the largest seller of vibrators and literary erotica goes into xxx?

If they wanted (read: had a business interest) to create a site with limited selection, or perhaps even separate their sex products from the rest completely, or just have a different front page and "theme", then amazon.xxx sounds like a pretty good idea.

Why wouldn't you want them to have that, if they'd happen to want it?

Re:the natural next step is (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35840608)

A few examples of sites that are borderline (not really porn, yet still porn to some):
http://www.castfetish.com/
http://www.cyberium.net/bnguy/
http://randomsnaps.com/
and more. Would these be forced to use .xxx? This is ridiculous.

Re:the natural next step is (1)

paimin (656338) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840670)

"Server not found". Looks like you've identified a new market!

Ah, but that now is clear (2)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840678)

Porn is that whichever is clearly obscene. What is obscene has always been hard to get established in an American court. That is why porn often can't be blocked in public places.

BUT now there is a porn domain. Use it and you just labelled yourself as obsene. Making you very easy to block.

Already US senators have discussed, LONG before .xxx was created, laws to force sites to use it AND then laws to enforce blocks. Blocks on everything publicly accesible. Possible because the obscenity would be proven.

There is a reason there are articles in Playboy, Penthouse AND even Hustler. Articles that are often of significantly higher journalistic standards then found in other non-adult magazines. It gave them the defence they were not just porn mags and could therefor not be blocked from distribution.

Most of the people in the know are extremely wary about this. Hopefully it will fizzle out like .mobi and all the other domains but this time, there are puritans in the wings waiting to launch yet another attack on freedom of speech.

Because if you think those that want to censor the web are going to stop at nude people, you are very much mistaken.

Re:Ah, but that now is clear (1)

NeutronCowboy (896098) | more than 3 years ago | (#35841380)

Damn. Posted my own version of this before I saw your post. Here's a virtual mod point for you.

Knees! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35842110)

One must not forget that in Victorian times, "porn" would have been considered anything above or including the vulgar display of a person's knees! [Maybe even ankles]

Re:the natural next step is (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35840330)

Problem: The obvious fellowup would be for many ISPs to move to.a default filter - all .xxx blocked unless you contact them and ask. This is already the norm on mobile phone internet in the UK. This would hurt the porn industry, as a lot of customers are not the only users of their connection. Just imagine someone in their early twenties and still living with their patents (ie, me) trying to ask the parents to enable porn on the connection... or having your girlfriend visit and ask why you turned the filter off. If the filter is on by default then everyone who turns it off will have to admit to looking at porn, which still carries some stigma. I don't doubt that many ISPs will move to.block.XXX by default - it'll be great advertising, really win points with the pro-family types.

Re:the natural next step is (3, Insightful)

QuantumRiff (120817) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840588)

Are we also going to force all COMpanies out of .org and .net? Really, the only "protected" domain that does what it was intended is .EDU, and there have been some that have been allowed that should really be .COM.

Re:the natural next step is (1)

Cimexus (1355033) | more than 3 years ago | (#35841138)

Agreed, though I think .GOV, .MIL, .INT have also done their job pretty well too (i.e. remained true to the original intentions of the domain). Most of the newer ones too, like .mobi, .aero etc. (though they are barely used, the few users that do exist do satisfy the registration criteria).

The ccTLDs are a mixed bag. Some countries enforce proper restrictions on these (in-country use only, to registered companies/people/organisations. For instance, you won't see any 'abuses' of .jp, .uk, .au, .nz etc. Others have chosen not to enforce many/any restrictions on ccTLD use (all those random ones like .tv or used for various domain hacks ... bit.ly, goo.gl, blo.gs, etc).

I've heard someone mention that ".com" is now thought of as being the COMmon domain (i.e. everything else that doesn't fit into the other TLDs, goes into COM), rather than COMmercial. Retrospectively changing naming/history, of course, but it wouldn't be the first time (.ARPA is another example ... got back-renamed to Address and Routing Parameter Area).

The two really 'polluted' TLDs seem to be the two you mention: .net and .org. I'm not too fussed about .org (since technically 'organisation' could cover almost anything), but I would like to see .net properly reserved only for ISPs, backhaul providers, transit/peering networks, network infrastructure etc. Would make it easier when tracing routes to see where it leaves a 'network providers' area of responsibility and enters a private entity's network.

Re:the natural next step is (1)

Riceballsan (816702) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840972)

I agree and disagree, I actually agree with the idea of even putting all porn in one domain that can easily be blocked by certain venues. As a father I would like to be able to put a block that would prevent my son from hitting the sites accidentally until he's about 14 or 15, and I fully agree with blocking porn on the workplace etc... In theory .xxx allows people who want to look at porn to find it easier, and people who don't want to or shouldn't where they are don't have to wade through it. However it is a double edge sword, due to possible future threats from the FCC and the even worse "think of the children" groups. When you look at the possibility, what happens next is lobbying to ensure that ISP's block the .XXX domain until after midnight etc... As it is now I see it perfectly reasonable (assuming you don't live in an unfairly controlling country that blocks them, but they probably block 95% of porn anyway, and methods to bypass them will still work just the same.)

Re:the natural next step is (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35841068)

Honestly I see it as using the system for what it was intended for. A categorization of sites. .com has become a huge mess. It became just something extra to type in. Since it is that why bother... Some sort of category system is a good thing.

artificial scarcity (2)

StripedCow (776465) | more than 3 years ago | (#35839954)

The whole TLD domain thing is seriously wrong and outdated, I think. I mean take the country codes... they have in many cases nothing to do with the actual country in which the servers are located. For example, "yousend.it" is an italian website?

TLD's are just a form of artificial scarcity. And this is a bad thing.

Why not let us just choose the names we want to choose.

Re:artificial scarcity (1)

Max_W (812974) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840052)

Interesting idea.

Re:artificial scarcity (1)

1s44c (552956) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840234)

The whole TLD domain thing is seriously wrong and outdated, I think. I mean take the country codes... they have in many cases nothing to do with the actual country in which the servers are located. For example, "yousend.it" is an italian website?

TLD's are just a form of artificial scarcity. And this is a bad thing.

Country codes are being abused to hell because the whole system is now about extracting money from domain trolls and forcing multinationals to register their name in every domain in existence to fend off domain trolls.

Remember when Mr Elz was actually checking com.au registrations to make sure they were in fact registered to real companies? He got the boot to be replaced by corrupt money-grabbing bureaucrats who don't care if I register slashdotblows.com.au as long as they get paid. They really don't care if the data they serve is total BS.

We need an alternative DNS setup away from parasitic organizations. Actually we need an alternative internet away from parasitic organizations.

Re:artificial scarcity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35840316)

you mean like the several alternative DNS roots that already exist?

Re:artificial scarcity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35840698)

Why not let us just choose the names we want to choose.

And how do you handle the case where 2 people choose the same name?

Re:artificial scarcity (1)

h0dg3s (1225512) | more than 3 years ago | (#35842038)

TLD's are just a form of artificial scarcity. And this is a bad thing.

Why not let us just choose the names we want to choose.

Because then you'll clog up dns servers adding whatever dumb TLD you choose.

Wondering (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35839984)

Has Commander Taco registered goatse.xxx yet?

The only thing I want to know is (1)

StripedCow (776465) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840056)

What country does .xxx stand for?
And how can I get there?

Re:The only thing I want to know is (1)

h0dg3s (1225512) | more than 3 years ago | (#35842062)

The same country that .aero .pro .travel and .asia stand for.

Why ... (1)

PPH (736903) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840186)

.... is everyone making such a big deal out of the Coat of Arms of Amsterdam [wikipedia.org] ? What association does that fine city have with the sex trade anyway?

http://xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/ (2)

binkzz (779594) | more than 3 years ago | (#35840262)

I'm afraid I have some old documentation I need to update to prevent people from going places they shouldn't be going..

Re:http://xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/ (3, Informative)

coplate (1187701) | more than 3 years ago | (#35841222)

That is what this is for:
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2606.html [faqs.org]
2. TLDs for Testing, & Documentation Examples
  ".example" is recommended for use in documentation or as examples.
3. Reserved Example Second Level Domain Names
      The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) also currently has the
      following second level domain names reserved which can be used as
      examples.

                example.com
                example.net
                example.org

Somebody should have read the official documentation before creating their own ~

Re:http://xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/ (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35842086)

Not quite, he's obviously referring to IPs.

Somebody should have tried to better understand others' problems before pulling the "There's an RFC about it that I know about, that I want you to know that I know about" card.

New Comcast pricing model (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35840668)

I'm wondering if this will be one of the things that some ISP's will start to filter. Maybe in the near future we will be having to pay an added fee to access the .XXX domain similar to how cable subscribers have to subscribe to porn channels.

All of the "porn" .com sites will still exist. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35840674)

It's less than $10 a year to keep up the registration on a .com domain.

No one is going to abandon them.

They will just add on a link "click here to go to our .xxx site".

Actually work in the adult industry (5, Informative)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 3 years ago | (#35841018)

As an industry insider I can tell you that this new domain is NOT going over terribly well. The only ones in favour are ICM (the ones taking the money for the new domains) and advertising agencies. The adult industry? Not so much.

At it most basic, it is seen as a money grab. This is clear from how they are going to handle trademark disputes. For a fee, you can remove your trademark from EVER being registered as a .xxx domain. So Disney need not be worried about disney.xxx. As long they pay the fee. How much? They ain't saying (really, I asked at a live forum and the guys in charge refused to answer). But Disney will pay it because it won't be a lot of money (to them) and there are plenty of others who will also pay the fee to keep their name blacklisted (forever for now but of course it is only going to be a matter of time before that comes a yearly fee). That means ICM coffers will get a HUGE boost straight from the start AND they will want to keep that money flowing because money is a drug. The more you get, the more you need.

But there are other issues at work:

As a .xxx domain owner you agree to have your site monitored... for what? Well, child porn is trotted out predictably BUT you have to remember that this is ICM policing the site owners, NOT the police as on ALL other domains. But HOW are they going to monitor?

http://domainincite.com/icm-faces-porn-anger-over-xxx/

I attended this myself and the following is true:

At one point, Liley flatly denied that ICM plans to “spider” .xxx domains to enforce compliance with IFFOR policies, such as the prohibition on meta tags that suggest the presence of child pornography.

Minutes later, a .xxx opponent read aloud from the IFFOR policy (pdf) that says all registrants must consent to “automated monitoring”.

Vaughn refused to answer many questions and weasled his way around others. The porn industry is CLEARLY not in favor of this.

One thing unanswered is how they are going to monitor CLOSED sites. Remember, most porn sites are membership sites and there content is NOT meant to be available to just anyone out there. Is every .xxx site owner going to have to provide ICM with a username and password that allows full access to the site? Who is going to be responsible for breaches where these accounts are lost? Does any other site have to give full access to a private company by default to be allowed on the net?

But should I care

A lot of people, even on slashdot don't like porn and want it to be hidden. Fair enough? No. Not really. If you like freedom of speech and believe me, many do not, then the .XXX domain is the registration of jews.

Godwin? Maybe but its parallels must be found in method rather then is shock effect. How did the nazi's know where to find Jews? Contrary to nazi propoganda they ain't all that easy to spot. It is not like they had it as easy as the US and its prosecuted minorities like blacks and asians. You can just tell a black person just by looking at him/her. Jew? Not so much, unless you believe nazi propoganda.

What allowed the mass murder to happen is the "harmless" registration of religion done long before the true horror of the nazi's became clear.

Yeah yeah, you know. So how does it apply to porn?

Obscenity

What is obscene? The US courts can't tell you AND this has been VERY important in ensuring free speech survives DESPITE being against the law. As long as the courts can't agree on what is obscene, the law cannot be used to ban your material. This is what allowed the porn mags such as Playboy, Penthouse and Hustler to survive countless court battles. Is obscenity forbidden? Yes. Are the mags obscene? Not proven, case dismissed. Why do you think these mags have higher grade journalism then many rags that can be bought from any store? Because it stopped them from being simply labelled as obsene AND banned.

But the .XXX domain is a yellow star, it is the entry in the register that shows you are related to jews and therefor, a jew. A .xxx domain is ONLY available for adult material there for by definition a .xxx domain IS adult and therefor... obscene.

There are some who claim that registering a .xxx domain is labelling yourself as an obscene site just waiting to be blocked.

If you have followed the news on censorship then you know that there are constant moves to have censorship rules applied, starting with public places. And they get struck down. Your local library and college/university are often not allowed to filter "porn" because as long as something is not obscene it can't be blocked. Those that wish these censorships to take place CLAIM they want to block porn but oddly enough a LOT of sites having nothing to do with simple porn are caught in their nets as well.

Luckily the laws that protect tranny porn also protect sites about gay rights and abortion (yes, I know republicans, truly awful this free speech thing isn't it).

.XXX will suffer no such problems and in fact, US senators were already discussing laws to block .XXX from public places long before it was ever likely to happen.

But there is one step missing... it is NOT yet enforced.

Yet. One issue that crept up at the above mentioned panel was the issue of price. A .XXX domain will cost several times the price of a .com. But, the proponents claimed, prices would come down if people didn't buy... yes... that is how the market works. If something doesn't sell (and most legit companies don't want to buy) then prices come down. UNLESS, you can MANDATE its sale... oh yes... what if a .xxx domain became MANDATORY for adult content? Impossible, that would be like enforcing a mobi domain on mobile sites, a travel domain for travel sites? One BIG fucking difference. Puritans. Nobody hates travel sites with enough passion to pass laws to require travel sites to be on a certain domain. There are plenty of porn and free speech haters (99% of the time the same people) who want to push all the porn into a corner... and then what? Remember, at the time of the registration of the Jews, nobody was thinking of gas chambers yet (mass shooting, the gas chambers were invented after a leading nazi was ill after attending a mass slaughter and wanted a less messy method).

A forced .XXX domain would benefit ICM and they clearly already know how to get things done through "donations". Do you REALLY think it is going to be allowed that .XXX dies a quiet death like the other sponsored TLD's?

But will this block non-obsene sites

Ah... but that is the bit. You might not find something Obscene, but does everyone else agree with you. Should Playboy be forced to .xxx? How about The Sun (page 3 nudity)? What about a site TALKING about sex? Abortion? Same gender sex? Interracial sex? Lotsof people find this obscene and want it banned. .xxx has shown them the way.

Oh, maybe a forum giving open advice to people about sex won't go to .xxx No... they create a new one .adult and do it all over again.

WATCH the movie, The people vs Larry Flynt. The same war is still being fought and if you believe in free speech, then your battle line is with the porn pushers, because once they are gone, the battle will be in your own frontyard. Fight the puritans in porn land, or you will be fighting them in your own country, your own city, your own house.

Overly dramatic? No nice society has ever banned porn. I invoked Godwin for a reason, look up nazi attitudes to porn.

But you want to keep your kids safe? Indeed, from what? Naked people or jack boots? It is a straight choice. Either your kid will see nude people but have free speech or be "safe" and life in a controlled world for the rest of his life.

Lets hope that .xxx is going to be an ordinary money grab and then fail. Because some people see a list and item 1 has just been struck off. Lets hope they and me are completely wrong. Can you risk it? Where were you, when they came after the porn industry?

Re:Actually work in the adult industry (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35841164)

You sound like a complete pervert!

Re:Actually work in the adult industry (1)

germansausage (682057) | more than 3 years ago | (#35841492)

You say that like it's a bad thing.

DNS info instantly exists. No "propagation". (4, Interesting)

gavron (1300111) | more than 3 years ago | (#35841028)

> the zone is currently propagating

Domain name zones do not propagate, and there is no "delay" in "publishing" zone information.

Domain name information is provided by domain name servers. As soon as the server can provide the data it is considered "published". When people talk about propagation they are mistakenly referring to cached false-positives or false-negatives.

A cached false-positive is when a previous lookup has returned a result that is no longer accurate, but the cache persists in providing that result. Instead of doing a new lookup and finding the --now changed-- data, the old stale data is returned. This is an indication of failure on the part of the domain administrator to reduce the cache time-to-live (TTL) field on the record or the entire Start of Authority for the zone.

A cached false-negative --typically on Microsoft operating systems-- is when a previous lookup has failed to return a response, the system caches that "there is no response." A subsequent query by an application OUGHT to do a DNS query and resolve properly, but the cache instead returns the --now stale-- "there is no response." This is an indication of failure of the operating system authors to have read the relevant RFCs on DNS (or ICMP or ...) and indicates lack of knowledge, a poorly designed product, and years of asshattery.

As soon as the ".XXX" TLD was available on the gTLD servers, it ***was*** live. Here's what affilias has: ;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
xxx. 300 IN SOA a0.xxx.afilias-nst.info. noc.afilias-nst.info. 70 7200 3600 3600000 300

You'll note that the TTL is 300, the minimum allowable value (300sec=5min). That means they have PROPERLY set a value so that results are refreshed by those who cache them.

Best regards,

Ehud Gavron
Tucson AZ

Re:DNS info instantly exists. No "propagation". (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35841712)

While it's true that the records aren't technically propagated, they are uploaded to the 13 dns clusters, and I normal dns servers don't check immediately, because they cache the records, afaik.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?