Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Yeah. I heard this 13 years ago too. http://shirky.com/writings/domain_names.html

So because someone suggested it 13 years ago makes it not true today? Look at how the new TLDs are working out; if you want to find a company using a funny TLD you just search for their name and unless the .com is higher ranked the company comes right up to the top.

Look at it from a user's perspective; do you know anyone who actually types in a domain name anymore that isn't a technie? If a user wants to find a specific company they just simply use voice and ask their phone or open a browser and just type it in.

Typing in a TLD adds friction especially since ICANN added all of these stupid TLDs that no one is even used to. The lower the friction the better, right?



> do you know anyone who actually types in a domain name anymore that isn't a technie?

That's a problem. It means we rely more and more on search engines, thus centralising the web (and with it, the internet) more than it needs to be. Centralizing the network means centralizing the power. Not a good idea. It never was.


DNS is already centralized.


Yes, and that is a problem. But that's not nearly as bad as having Google and Bing have the same role. DNS goes through a highly decentralised network of name servers, many of which aren't at all controlled by the ICANN. Each country based top level domain has its own set of servers, and there name requests are generally cached on other servers still.

But when you type "company name" in a search engine, you give away your search to an ad supported private company in real time. Juicy profiling, no privacy. Much worse than using DNS.

Besides, when you click on a link from your favourite search engine, you're still using DNS. Now you have two single points of failure.


I don't see the problem with G and B in this role; at least they answer to the end user. Who does ICANN answer to? What is your alternative if you get crappy service from the .com operator? If what PG says is correct, you don't really have an alternative.


> at least they answer to the end user.

Yes they do. Just don't forget that the end user is the advertiser. We poor schmucks who type text in the search box are the product.


That's a different kind of centralized.

Everything going thru search engines, means you depend on someone who has no responsibility towards the people they have power over. That's bad; you have to waste time understanding their incentives and staying on their good side.


DNS suffers the same flaw.


The absolute lowest friction is to have a .com domain. And yes, it's still true.


I'm not convinced; if you look at Google Trends there are many, many company names in the top 100 searches. Why are people only searching the company name instead of going directly to their website? Typically their website is the first several results depending on the size of the company.

Also, only anecdotal because I can't find any studies one way or another, but I can't find anyone in the younger generation who actually types in any domain names. I even had a frustrating experience telling someone who's used the internet all his life what .com even was as he had never typed it before. Plenty of people in my generation still type it though.

Also many of the older generation folks I've worked with who had their internet start with AOL don't seem to type in domain TLDs either.

So until I see some solid, current research regarding the behaviors of the different generations I'm not convinced a .com is lower friction; you type less when you just type the company's name and most browsers nowadays will give you the option to autocomplete directly to their website.




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: