Top
Best
New

Posted by HumanCCF 1 day ago

.self: A new top-level domain designed to support self-hosting(hccf.onmy.cloud)
651 points | 365 commentspage 3
akerl_ 21 hours ago|
What is the premise for being able to do "one person, one subdomain" that isn't a privacy/security nightmare?
myshapeprotocol 4 hours ago||
I'm currently documenting my research on this at myshape.com/genesis-100.html—would be keen to hear if others are tackling the continuity verification problem from a similar angle.”
sudonem 22 hours ago||
We should probably just bring back Geocities at this point.
IgorPartola 22 hours ago||
Neocities exists and you are welcome to it :)
koolala 18 hours ago|||
Their free terms are kind of bad. They use CORS security feature to block you from loading content from other sites. It doesn't cost them anything to let your site link outside content so they are only doing it make the free tier bad so people upgrade.
sudonem 22 hours ago|||
TIL. Nice.
Terr_ 22 hours ago||
Somewhat related, in case you missed it a few weeks ago, Oldavista (Altavista)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48447111

iamnothere 1 day ago||
Better charge an arm and a leg for it, or people will complain that it’s too cheap and argue for blocking it everywhere.
artyom 22 hours ago||
The reason why this won't work is right there, in the original link itself.

They're allowing comments and obviously the first thing there is a scam.

No way any goodwill on the Internet is going to prosper. Not anymore.

HumanCCF 21 hours ago|
Scam comment deleted.
pylotlight 19 hours ago||
and yet 5 more popped up.
HumanCCF 17 hours ago||
Deleting them as they appear.
LorenDB 1 day ago||
Looks like we've hugged it to death.
HumanCCF 1 day ago||
Indeed that appears to be so O_O. Our site is of course self-hosted, this is quite the response. Will have to troubleshoot what the bottleneck is!
red_hare 1 day ago|||
Apt for self-hosting
gorgmah 1 day ago||
yes and it's not even on the front page yet lol
LorenDB 1 day ago||
It's #10 on front page for me.
functionmouse 1 day ago||
.me is cooler, but...

That all the cool 2-letter TLDs are designated as country codes was an extraordinary mistake that will have unpredictable and devastating consequences long into the future.

HumanCCF 1 day ago||
Our goal is for .self to be more than just another TLD string, we want to specifically empower the self-hosting use case with local clients that integrate directly with the TLD and operate shared services like mail servers as a public good. We want to dramatically simplify the effort it takes to set up a domain for homelabs and offer free services that are directly tied to the domain like email.
quotemstr 1 day ago||
And you needed a gTLD for this task why?
HumanCCF 23 hours ago||
We don't necessarily, however there are many benefits for doing so. We could simply purchase a domain and then build our initiative beneath it but then everything we do would be beneath that domain, meaning there would be two dots in what is our effective TLD. That would also mean we are a bit beholden to whichever TLD we are beneath and also whichever registrar we purchased our domain from. With the services we hope to offer around things like TLS certs and emails, it just makes more sense for use to own the whole thing from the root.
quotemstr 23 hours ago|||
<something>.duckdns.org. works fine, and being "beholden" to ICANN is no worse than being a client of one of the big traditional gTLDs. If you want "one person, one name", well, .name is there for that.

It's a commons-pollution problem. Are we going to have to start thinking of every word with a dot in the middle as a potential name? IMHO, a new gTLD is justifiable only when there's some concrete differentiator attached to it, e.g. .local indicating mDNS, or .it indicating "Italy"

What value is there in "horse.horse" being something you can resolve with DNS? What value does <something>.self give me, as a reader, that <something>.name or <something>.me or any of the other zillion variations on the same idea doesn't?

If anything, it creates confusion! "Oh, I met Bob McBobFace. Is he mcbobface.me? mcbobface.name? mcbobface.local?".

I have no objection to providing people with free subdomains under whatever assignment scheme you guys are using, but wouldn't <something>.net have worked too, and been a lot cheaper?

I guess I just don't get the value to the public of increasing the set of dotted word suffixes that indicate that a word is a a cognizable DNS object.

HumanCCF 23 hours ago||
> It's a commons-pollution problem. Are we going to have to start thinking of every word with a dot in the middle as a potential name? IMHO, a new gTLD is justifiable only when there's some concrete differentiator attached to it, e.g. .local indicating mDNS, or .it indicating "Italy"

So the new gTLD round is open right now, we're getting more TLDs whether we like it or not. Our goal is to make one that has features built-in which cater to the self-hosting use case. So that is our key differentiator, that every endpoint leveraging our TLD should be someone's small-scale homelab setup.

> I have no objection to providing people with free subdomains under whatever assignment scheme you guys are using, but wouldn't <something>.net have worked too, and been a lot cheaper?

Technically yes it could work, but given the suite of features we'd like to build into our TLD, it would make things more difficult if we didn't own it. We would be dependent on external parties for our root domain, the root of trust for TLS certificates, all users' subdomains would have an extra dot etc.

akerl_ 21 hours ago||
It just feels a bit like you've decided to solve the hardest possible side quest first.

Everything else on your roadmap could have been built and shipped in the universe that exists, and then if down the road it's working, you could have aimed for your own TLD.

Instead you're putting the TLD first and any of the actual functionality that end users might want afterwards.

HumanCCF 21 hours ago||
That is a fair criticism, however I would say that the reason we are going for the TLD now is because now is the only time we can do it. The last round of TLD applications was in 2012, so if we don't apply now, it could be a veeery long time before the opportunity comes around again. We are a new org and our goal is to build functionality in parallel with the ICANN application which will likely take years to resolve.
akerl_ 21 hours ago||
Are you working on the not-TLD parts in parallel? If you don't get the TLD, do you plan to launch on a more traditional domain?

The marketing stuff makes it look like the TLD is your main focus.

psychoslave 14 hours ago|||
You can't purchase a domain, only rent it. If anything, going through a "pay to get a temporary monopoly on some virtual object" is the very opposite of empowering people with more autonomy as the project seems to try to support.
9dev 1 day ago|||
The only mistake was not opening the root namespace altogether. It’s just a money grab.
microgpt 1 day ago||
The only mistake was not putting all US domains under .us, now the US has an an exorbitant privilege to print and enforce rules on new TLDs.
kmoser 23 hours ago|||
What do you mean by "US domains?" Domains registered by US citizens? Hosted in the US (in which case does that include territories)? Regardless of the definition, I don't see an easy way to do this, nor a reason to, since domains can change hands (and hosts) across countries.
NewJazz 23 hours ago|||
.edu and .gov are us-specific, not sure if that is what they are referring to.
microgpt 21 hours ago|||
Domains that fall under the jurisdiction of the US? The domains themselves not the websites they point to? Everything under .games is controlled by the US government, the German government gets .games.de instead. To be fair it should be .games.us and .games.de (or .spiele.de)

Even gTLDs using other languages, like .kaufen, are under US jurisdiction. A German website selling to German customers using a .kaufen domain is forced to abide by US law as well as German law or loses the domain. Using a .de domain they would only have to abide by German law. That's unfair that the US government gets to stick its grubby fingers into every TLD that isn't a country code.

weakened_malloc 19 hours ago||
> That's unfair that the US government gets to stick its grubby fingers into every TLD that isn't a country code.

You're right in a sense, but the US invented the internet, so they get to invent the rules, no?

dgellow 1 day ago|||
I mean, that wasn’t done by mistake
philipallstar 1 day ago||
Sometimes hindsight is 1/20.
namegulf 22 hours ago|||
That's a popular tld for 'me' domains, like you said it's closer to .self in meaning but has better appeal

However .me (https://namegulf.com/tld/cctld/me) is a ccTLD managed by the Government of Montenegro, they set their own rules

pezezin 16 hours ago|||
I have the opposite opinion, TLDs should have been restricted to ISO 3166 codes only, with only a few exceptions for international organizations and private networks.
AlienRobot 23 hours ago|||
I think letting anyone make any TLD is a bigger mistake.

.zip .pdf .mp3

I'd like to thank Caribbean island of Anguilla for having a ccTLD that helps identify which websites aren't worth your time in one quick look.

croes 1 day ago||
How about .mine?
cherryteastain 1 day ago||
In practice sadly many of these more obscure TLDs seem to be more expensive than more 'normal' ones like .org
jdiff 1 day ago|
Some of them, the more corporate or tech-focused ones like .ai or .inc or .tech or .llc. Very many of them are comparable within a dollar of .org.
eichin 17 hours ago||
Well, the .meow kickstarter raised €121,896 with just an assertion and a voucher system, so there's at least some community support for this kind of thing, without it needing to be a good idea :-)
block_dagger 18 hours ago|
> Human-Centered

If this is supposed to be human-centered, why isn't it .human? I assume there will be many agents with their own ".self" domains that have very little human oversight.

More comments...