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

You’re just using bad registrars.

https://porkbun.com/products/whois_privacy



Porkbun only came out in 2014

Two decades late on a problem


Oh the good ol days. $10/m for slow PHP shared hosting and $150 for an SSL certificate too.


Web hosts competing based on who had the prettiest cPanel theme. The number of email accounts were allowed was something that mattered. If you were lucky enough to get SSH access, it was jailed and only really allowed you to move files around easier or edit something with vim/nano.

Oh, I have unintentionally become a GoDaddy customer (a company I have spent ample time hating and shitting on over the years) because I was a legacy Media Temple customer going back to like 2006 and I still just can't be bothered to clear out everything on those sites/domains and they eventually got acquired


Let's encrypt has done great work with certs for free. But they do still cost money. Insane for how long unencrypted traffic was the default. But i could not have done anything, if browsers had soft-enforced https earlier. I simply could not have paid that money.


You and everyone else: unencrypted stopped being the default as a pretty direct consequence of increased accessibility of TLS certificates.


Yeah in late 90s telnet to server was the default. So all those delicious cli were just flowing in the Ethernet traffic in plain text.


You could get free SSL certs before LE. What LE changed was making it possible to fully automate the process.


How do they still cost money?


Or had to get an isdn line just to get an static ip for your clients to ftp the files


I still can't get my head around why a .com costs $9.59 (plus registrar margin)

There are 160 million registered .com domain names.

I understand that operating root servers isn't free, but surely they don't cost $1.5 billion per year! Wikipedia's hosting costs are $3 million per year, for comparison.


Only $0.18 goes to ICANN, the non-profit. The rest goes to the Verisign which is a publicly traded for-profit company which ultimately gets that $9.59. I bring this up because it of course _doesn't_ cost that much. Incidentally, Verisign posted $1.56 billion in revenue last year and spent about $1.21 billion on stock buybacks in the same time.


As I understand it, Verisign doesn't own the .com TLD, they are just a contracted service provider to ICANN.

Which begs the question, why doesn't ICANN just replace Verisign them with a different authoritative register that charges much less?


Because that doesn’t solve the problem. The demand doesn’t go away if you charge less – if you charge $1/yr for .COMs, they will all be permanently squatted. (Well, like now, but worse!)

We could use anti-scalping techniques, but that’s non-trivial to implement. Perhaps some name squatting policy? No idea how to enforce it though, especially without money.


Fair enough, but even we use a floor price to disincentivise squatting, I'm not sure why we should gift those excess margins to a private company?

Shouldn't ICANN collect that margin and use it for charitable purposes instead?


Yeah, that’s a good point. Then again, you can also that for any other gTLD (why should Google get the proceeds from .dev?), and that would be a valid question.

I think the current system is inherently flawed... but it kinda works, and nobody wants to figure out the politics of fixing it – so I guess we’re stuck with it for a while.


> nobody wants to figure out the politics of fixing it

The vast majority of people in the world have $0 on the line and no clue how these systems work.

The majority who have an interest in fixing it have something like N×$10 per year on the line for a fairly small N.

Those who don't want it fixed have billions on the line.

It's not getting fixed anytime soon.


That’s a “$1.56 billion” question…


Because it's a natural monopoly. Nobody ever got taken seriously with a .biz address.

(.com is basically price-regulated because of this, FWIW, Verisign can't just raise prices whenever or however it wants. But obviously it's still a pretty sweet deal for them, I'd imagine.)


Hell, even .net will lose you traffic. If someone has your desired name with .com so that you use any other TLD, you will lose traffic. If your .com is taken by someone in the same line of work and not just a coincidental use of the same domain, then you'd be insane to not change the domain. I'm not sure how many people manually type domains in any more (I do though), and .com is muscle memory.


If a system is built in a way that creates a monopoly I'm not sure it's legitimate to refer to it as "natural". The characteristic that defines natural monopolies is that there's no realistic (at least known) alternative way to go about things which isn't also a monopoly.


Sure, it's a natural monopoly, but it's owned by a non-profit (ICAAN), so where is all the money going?


Of those 160 million, what percentage of them are on the 1-year renewal plans, and how many of them are on multi-year plans. I'm guessing the vast majority are yearly. It would be interesting how many of them never get re-registered after the first year


Headline number trend is what matters. Yeah lots of failed projects but then lots of new projects to make up for it!


I agree that it's ridiculous, but absent some sort of regulation, things are not priced based on how much they cost the provider, but based on how much people are willing to pay. Even if they're unhappy about it.


The thing is there are supposed to be regulations. .com is not privately owned but a public good that is supposed to be regulated by ICANN with the interests of the public in mind.


Just in case: you can get a .com for less than that nowadays, sometimes $3 for the first year (then transfer it back and forth for $5–7). Here are some price comparisons: https://tldes.com/com, https://tld-list.com/tld/com

I assume some registrars sell these at a loss and expect to offset that by selling you WordPress Supreme Ultra Enterprise hosting for... $40/yr? No idea how this works.




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

Search: