
We should retire Aaron's number - davewiner
http://threads2.scripting.com/2013/january/weShouldRetireAaronsNumber
======
drivingmenuts
So, if we make a permanent "monument" out of his domain name, what's the
deciding factor for or against doing it for any other website?

Will the internet become littered with millions of permanent monuments to
misguided souls, like the little crosses on side of our highways?

~~~
rachelbythebay
Take this sentiment and jump forward 100 years. What's left?

I suspect this will happen to any namespace after long enough. Domain names,
Twitter handles, Facebook URLs, whatever. Once enough real estate is taken up
with immobile monuments to the dead, the living will have to move on to
something else.

I also think this will happen well before 100% utilization. After some point,
the number of collisions you hit when trying to get a memorable name becomes
too much of a burden and you just go somewhere else, as previously described
here: <http://rachelbythebay.com/w/2012/11/28/namespace/>

~~~
raldi
The first number ever retired in all of sports was Lou Gehrig's, in 1939. By
the 100th anniversary of that ceremony, the Yankees will have retired about
25-30 numbers. The active roster requires 40+ free numbers < 100\. What
happens when they run out?

~~~
alexkus
> What happens when they run out?

2 digits of base > 10?

3 digit numbers?

Hardly a tricky problem to solve...

~~~
prawks
Got a nice chuckle picturing them wearing hex numbers.

------
tav
Nice thought Dave. Aaron did already address this in his "If I get hit by a
truck..." post: <http://www.aaronsw.com/2002/continuity>

And Sean is most definitely on the case. But please give him some time and
space.

~~~
rhinoe
I agree. We should leave the responsibility of the upkeep of a virtual
presence after death to the person themselves. Aaron showed that you can plan
for your presence after death: maybe we should all have some sort of plan.
(Something like a will).

~~~
leejoramo
If you read through Dave Winer's past writings on this subject, you will find
that there is currently no good way to implement this such a plan.

------
leejoramo
Dave Winer has discussed the issue of preserving websites for a long time. He
calls this "Future Safe Archives".

[http://scripting.com/stories/2007/03/29/fourIdeasForTheFutur...](http://scripting.com/stories/2007/03/29/fourIdeasForTheFuture.html)
[http://scripting.com/stories/2007/12/10/futuresafeArchives.h...](http://scripting.com/stories/2007/12/10/futuresafeArchives.html)
[http://scripting.com/stories/2009/10/10/onceAgainFuturesafeA...](http://scripting.com/stories/2009/10/10/onceAgainFuturesafeArchive.html)
[http://scripting.com/stories/2011/01/10/nytOnFuturesafeArchi...](http://scripting.com/stories/2011/01/10/nytOnFuturesafeArchives.html)

Even just a week or so before Aaron's death.

[http://threads2.scripting.com/2013/january/makingWebArchives...](http://threads2.scripting.com/2013/january/makingWebArchivesSafe)

I am sure that I have read him write about this many other times, maybe going
back over a decade.

~~~
davewiner
I first got really serious about it when we lost the RSS 2.0 spec on a server
upgrade at Harvard. That's when I realized that unless we took serious steps
to protect the content, by using least common denominator technology, and not
requiring a separate domain, that it wouldn't last very long after everyone
who cared about it was gone from Berkman.

It's turned out pretty well. The spec is still there and accessible, and now
it's been almost ten years at that spot.

I'm also hosting my uncle's site and now my father's. I'm not happy with the
job I'm doing on either of them, but I have my own work to move forward, and
as I do that of course I'm creating MORE problems. But I'm also trying to be
mindful of separating the content from the rendering. The actual content is
stored pretty permanently, and the rendering is considered lose-able.

Eventually I hope to have ultimate editorial flexibility and have it also be
very future-safe. CMSes can anticipate these problems, and I've tried to do
that in my latest development.

------
a3r0
It's hardly a "small" hack. Who would be running the site, paying for
bandwidth, etc. Who decides who gets a memorial like this? It's essentially
creating infinitely long registrations and adding a "special case" that will
remain in the internet's infrastructure forever.

~~~
sunils34
Aren't all physical memorials, statues, plaques, banners paid for? Just like
paying for the upkeeping of a memorial, I see no difference.

~~~
a3r0
Someone just has to keep paying for the domain and hosting and it will remain
forever. This is proposing that we never allow these domains to be registered
again, even if they expire

~~~
toomuchtodo
If the Internet Archive would support hosting the content/collection, I'd be
willing to throw $50-100 into a pool to prepay the domain for the next 10-20
years.

The content can't be over a GB. Hosting that all static in S3 would be, what?
~$0.10/month+transfer costs?

------
tytyty
While the idea is novel, domains are virtual real estate. I don't think it's
in anyone's best interest to retire domains/addresses. There are many more
sane ways to make all of the content easily accessible indefinitely.

~~~
SoftwareMaven
Isn't that exactly what a grave site is? Real estate permanently set aside for
a deceased person.

~~~
wmf
Moving or simply paving over cemeteries may be more common than you think.

------
nanch
It's a good idea. I'd say there are a number of options; at the very least a
mirroring setup would be sufficient - I'm certain that there are people that
are able to do this quite easily with wget.

Even I have servers that I'd be willing to provide that could certainly handle
the load his now-static mostly-text sites. I'd even be happy to hold the
domains and pay the registration into the future. I think Aaron already had a
post about who would be handling his assets if he "got hit by a bus".

------
listaware
For the domain name, aaronsw.com . It's currently not possible to register
domains for more than ten years.

You could envisage some sort of way have putting the domain in a trust fund.
Where there would be funds to renew the domain, you could potential show how
much is in the fund, on the trusts's page. And as long as there is money in
the fund, the domain would be renewed. The domain technical contacts, and
possibly the other contacts too would need to be put in the trusts name so
that they can renew with the registrar, and possibly change the DNS if needed.

As for the hosting, you could probably run a script that would take a static
snapshot, and save the files in plain HTML. This of course gets more
complicated for sites that use things dynamically with database backends.

------
nonamegiven
It depends on what arrangement he had with/for his heirs, and with his
registrar.

------
largehotcoffee
"The Internet is just software."

~~~
cm-t
ah, just noticed your comment :)

( cf: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5066250> )

------
simonw
I've often thought that the Internet Archive would be a good entity for this.
I would happily pay a large one-off fee to cover domain name renewals and
static hosting in perpetuity. I don't know how such a fee would be calculated
- the cost of 100 years of .com renewals at the lowest negotiable fee perhaps?

~~~
logn
You could just start your own domain name registrar. Family can transfer the
name after death or you could transfer there before you die. Add a small link
to the bottom of the page to donate to support re-registering the name ad-
infinitum. The registrar collects donations to keep it going. Maybe add
hosting too. Unfortunately getting your own registrar company would cost
$50-100K from what I've read plus $8K annual dues.

------
dendory
I'm surprised there are no virtual cemetaries. A company (a known Internet
entity like Archive.org, WikiMedia or W3C would be best, not a startup that
will pivot away in 3 years) could offer for a fixed fee to take your blog,
freeze it in time, and publish it online forever.

~~~
jacquesm
> I'm surprised there are no virtual cemetaries.

There are several obituary sites, they're one step away from that. And in a
sense portions of <http://reocities.com/> are exactly that, for instance:
<http://reocities.com/SunsetStrip/1838/> I'm committed to keeping that alive
as long as I can afford it. So far so good.

------
nextstep
Why would a porn site ever choose aaronsw.com as their domain? We aren't going
to run out of strings.

~~~
user24
traffic and backlinks are a valuable commodity, that's why.

------
cm-t
>The Internet is just software.

wait, what ?

