think the .xxx domains will be worth something? - GoFuckYourself.com

cash69 · 05-18-2003, 11:49 PM

i sure as fuck hope so.. i spent like 2,000$ and i bought a fuck load

EscortBiz · 05-18-2003, 11:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by cash69
i sure as fuck hope so.. i spent like 2,000$ and i bought a fuck load

Well you can always put them up on ebay for a week and ask $7,000,000.00 if you ill get $1 is a different story

asuna · 05-18-2003, 11:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by EscortBiz

Well you can always put them up on ebay for a week and ask $7,000,000.00 if you ill get $1 is a different story

if you i'll get $1?

DatingGold · 05-18-2003, 11:54 PM

i bet they'll all be blocked by filters..

greentea · 05-18-2003, 11:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by cash69
i sure as fuck hope so.. i spent like 2,000$ and i bought a fuck load

wasted money

asuna · 05-18-2003, 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DatingGold
i bet they'll all be blocked by filters..

exactly

cash69 · 05-18-2003, 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by greentea

wasted money

if anything... i think they will place very well on search engines.. i got shit like www.amateurs.xxx www.lesbians.xxx

hybrid · 05-19-2003, 12:00 AM

When did these become available?

Smith · 05-19-2003, 12:03 AM

Is the .xxx a scam like the .sex was?

arg · 05-19-2003, 12:05 AM

It depends on which company's .xxx domains you're talking about, but I'd guess that all of them are pretty worthless. Several different companies sell incompatible .xxx domains (or used to sell them and then folded), but until ICANN sanctions one of them, they won't have the universal reliability of .com and other recognized top level domains. Further, ICANN is unlikely to sanction a company that would "grandfather in" their prior .xxx registrations...they consider the method of name distribution when considering applications, and as I recall, a few .xxx applications were previously submitted, so there are likely to be a few to choose from if ICANN ever decides to okay the idea.

hybrid · 05-19-2003, 12:07 AM

Somebody debabalize this, please:

"New.net bases its estimate of total users with access on two numbers: 1) the number of ISP accounts with access as reported by New.net activated ISP partners (for free ISP partners, New.net uses the ISP?s reported 30 day active number); and 2) users who can access New.net domain name extensions because they have activated their browsers by downloading our plug-in. These raw numbers, which represent either ISP accounts or PCs with access, are adjusted to reflect a conservative estimate of the actual number of people accessing the Internet via these sources. In the case of ISP accounts the number is adjusted based on information from the Department of Commerce study Falling Through the Net: Toward Digital Inclusion, A Report on Americans? Access to Technology Tools and other sources which estimate 2.1 users per household. For our calculation we conservatively assume all ISP accounts are residential accounts despite the fact that in reality many accounts are corporate accounts with much higher numbers of users per account. In the case of client downloads in the US, the number is also adjusted based upon information from the same Department of Commerce study, but only by a factor of 1.5 to account for the likelihood that some people are using these PCs from work only and therefore have a lower average number of users per PC. For clients downloaded outside the U.S. there is no adjustment made due to lack of any reliable information for our international markets despite the fact that one could assume much higher use per computer numbers. Finally, the number is also reduced to account for the likelihood that some of the users who download our plug-in access the Internet via an ISP that already recognizes New.net domain names."

cash69 · 05-19-2003, 12:10 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by hybrid
Somebody debabalize this, please:

"New.net bases its estimate of total users with access on two numbers: 1) the number of ISP accounts with access as reported by New.net activated ISP partners (for free ISP partners, New.net uses the ISP?s reported 30 day active number); and 2) users who can access New.net domain name extensions because they have activated their browsers by downloading our plug-in. These raw numbers, which represent either ISP accounts or PCs with access, are adjusted to reflect a conservative estimate of the actual number of people accessing the Internet via these sources. In the case of ISP accounts the number is adjusted based on information from the Department of Commerce study Falling Through the Net: Toward Digital Inclusion, A Report on Americans? Access to Technology Tools and other sources which estimate 2.1 users per household. For our calculation we conservatively assume all ISP accounts are residential accounts despite the fact that in reality many accounts are corporate accounts with much higher numbers of users per account. In the case of client downloads in the US, the number is also adjusted based upon information from the same Department of Commerce study, but only by a factor of 1.5 to account for the likelihood that some people are using these PCs from work only and therefore have a lower average number of users per PC. For clients downloaded outside the U.S. there is no adjustment made due to lack of any reliable information for our international markets despite the fact that one could assume much higher use per computer numbers. Finally, the number is also reduced to account for the likelihood that some of the users who download our plug-in access the Internet via an ISP that already recognizes New.net domain names."

means only 5 isp's can view the .xxx domains... becuase their dns isn't globcal like .com or .net or .org yet.. earthlink.. juno.. and 3 other isp's can view these.. or if they have the plugin to let them view them... SOON anyone should be able to view .xxx domains on the whole internet

hybrid · 05-19-2003, 12:12 AM

Hmm, I hate it when shit like this comes along, and you know if u miss it, it's gonna blow up, but if you spend your cash, it's gonna tank.

What to do...

Bobby Fissure · 05-19-2003, 12:14 AM

They're worth as much as the .nu domains I had back in late 1999 or early 2000.

cash69 · 05-19-2003, 12:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bobby Fissure
They're worth as much as the .nu domains I had back in late 1999 or early 2000.

i don't think so.. becuase these will be USA based... least i hope..

psyko514 · 05-19-2003, 12:20 AM

where can they be registered?

cash69 · 05-19-2003, 12:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by psyko514
where can they be registered?

www.new.net

WendyB · 05-19-2003, 12:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by psyko514
where can they be registered?

Do yourself a favor, and save your money.

There is a real good reason why you were able to walk in and get lesbian.xxx so easily.

05-18-2003, 11:49 PM	#1
cash69 So Fucking Banned Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: chandler, az Posts: 1,052	think the .xxx domains will be worth something? i sure as fuck hope so.. i spent like 2,000$ and i bought a fuck load

05-18-2003, 11:54 PM	#4
DatingGold $6 PER EMAIL JOiN Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: California Posts: 13,185	i bet they'll all be blocked by filters.. __________________ 9 Years of SOLID payouts and conversions! ADULT DATING - $100 PPS LIVE CAMS - $214 PPS WWW.DATINGGOLD.COM ICQ: 27442303

05-19-2003, 12:20 AM	#16
psyko514 See sig. Join Epic Cash. Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Montreal, Quebec. ICQ: 214702014 Posts: 22,366	where can they be registered? __________________ Bad Girl Bucks - 50% Revshare through CCBill. Promote BrandyDDD, Pixie's Pillows, Action Allie and more! Phoenix Forum Pics \| Webmaster Access Montreal pics email: psyko514(a)gmail.com \| icq: 214-702-014

05-19-2003, 12:00 AM	#8
hybrid So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Backseat of a Ford Escort Hatchback Posts: 3,253	When did these become available?

05-19-2003, 12:03 AM	#9
Smith Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 102	Is the .xxx a scam like the .sex was?

05-19-2003, 12:05 AM	#10
arg Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 1,164	It depends on which company's .xxx domains you're talking about, but I'd guess that all of them are pretty worthless. Several different companies sell incompatible .xxx domains (or used to sell them and then folded), but until ICANN sanctions one of them, they won't have the universal reliability of .com and other recognized top level domains. Further, ICANN is unlikely to sanction a company that would "grandfather in" their prior .xxx registrations...they consider the method of name distribution when considering applications, and as I recall, a few .xxx applications were previously submitted, so there are likely to be a few to choose from if ICANN ever decides to okay the idea.

05-19-2003, 12:07 AM	#11
hybrid So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Backseat of a Ford Escort Hatchback Posts: 3,253	Somebody debabalize this, please: "New.net bases its estimate of total users with access on two numbers: 1) the number of ISP accounts with access as reported by New.net activated ISP partners (for free ISP partners, New.net uses the ISP?s reported 30 day active number); and 2) users who can access New.net domain name extensions because they have activated their browsers by downloading our plug-in. These raw numbers, which represent either ISP accounts or PCs with access, are adjusted to reflect a conservative estimate of the actual number of people accessing the Internet via these sources. In the case of ISP accounts the number is adjusted based on information from the Department of Commerce study Falling Through the Net: Toward Digital Inclusion, A Report on Americans? Access to Technology Tools and other sources which estimate 2.1 users per household. For our calculation we conservatively assume all ISP accounts are residential accounts despite the fact that in reality many accounts are corporate accounts with much higher numbers of users per account. In the case of client downloads in the US, the number is also adjusted based upon information from the same Department of Commerce study, but only by a factor of 1.5 to account for the likelihood that some people are using these PCs from work only and therefore have a lower average number of users per PC. For clients downloaded outside the U.S. there is no adjustment made due to lack of any reliable information for our international markets despite the fact that one could assume much higher use per computer numbers. Finally, the number is also reduced to account for the likelihood that some of the users who download our plug-in access the Internet via an ISP that already recognizes New.net domain names."

05-19-2003, 12:12 AM	#13
hybrid So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Backseat of a Ford Escort Hatchback Posts: 3,253	Hmm, I hate it when shit like this comes along, and you know if u miss it, it's gonna blow up, but if you spend your cash, it's gonna tank. What to do...

05-19-2003, 12:14 AM	#14
Bobby Fissure Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 380	They're worth as much as the .nu domains I had back in late 1999 or early 2000.