-
Get ready for .confusion
This week’s CBC tech column is all about ICANN’s vote on new generic top-level domains. A copy is up at cbc.ca/tech, and below, for posterity. You can also listen to the podcast version below, which includes my interview with Jacob Malthouse of .eco, a Vancouver-based organization that plans to apply for a new gTLD in January. [audio:http://podcast.cbc.ca/mp3/podcasts/misenerontech_20110621_42807.mp3]
[mp3 download] Also, I’d sure appreciate it if you’d subscribe to the Misener on Tech podcast in iTunes.
===
Get ready for dot-this, dot-that, and dot-anythingelseyoucanthinkof.
This week, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) voted to open up the internet’s generic top-level domain (gTLD) system, paving the way for domain suffixes beyond the familiar .com, .net, .org, and so on.
Starting January 2012, anyone with an idea, an appetite for paperwork, and the $185,000 application fee can apply for a new top-level domain.
Additionally, the gTLD restriction on non-Latin characters, such as Cyrillic, Arabic, and Chinese script, will be lifted.
Back in January on CBC Radio’s Spark, gTLD-watcher Kieren McCarthy offered a few examples of companies that might apply for new domains. “I know Canon have said that they’re looking at getting .canon. We could easily see .apple, or .facebook, or .google, because it provides all sorts of advantages, to be able to control that bit of the internet.”
Though I’m personally intrigued by the possibility of .dan, I feel that initially these new domains will be confusing. For many Internet users, the almost infinite number of new suffixes will undoubtedly be more difficult to keep track of than the 22 existing generic top-level domains, plus a number of country-specific ones (like Canada’s .ca).
But I suspect that the real headaches will come in January, when ICANN opens the gTLD application process, the land grab begins, and the first disputes arise. Deciding who gets to own what will be tricky.
For example, if I had an extra $185,000 lying around, I might have a pretty reasonable claim on .danmisener. But who gets .cbc? Will it be the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation? Or Capital Blue Cross? Or the Colorado Beef Council? Or maybe the Chicago Building Congress?
Things get even trickier with more general domains. Who gets .radio? Who gets .travel? Who gets .cars?
ICANN says it plans to auction off domains if more than one party has a legitimate claim, and I bet those auctions will get pricey for the most sought-after names.
So far, the reaction to ICANN’s decision has been mixed. Some people — particularly those in the marketing and branding world — are pleased. They see real value in these new domains in terms of offering an opportunity for companies and brands to define themselves online. They also think the domains could help prevent online problems such as domain squatters and spoof sites.
More broadly, I think there’s a recognition that the existing domain name system is built on a model of artificial scarcity. The idea of removing this scarcity in favour of digital abundance is very “of the net.”
But, not surprisingly, others aren’t so happy about ICANN’s decision. One of the big concerns has to do with the high cost of entry: a $185,000 application fee, and an ongoing yearly cost of $25,000.
And that’s where I start to wonder: is it worth the price?
But I’m not so sure that owning a really great domain name is as valuable as it once was. Personally, I very rarely type web addresses into my browser anymore. I bookmark the sites I like. I follow links from social networking sites. And when I’m looking for something specific, I usually find it through a search engine. For better or for worse, Google has become my gateway to much of the web.
So then, given current browsing habits, is it more important to own a piece of the internet by buying your own top-level domain, or is it more important to be easily findable by appearing at the top of search results? If I was looking to spend $185,000, that’s a question I’d think long and hard about.
Beyond business, I have concerns about end-user confusion and the security implications that go along with that confusion. Over the past few decades, the relatively static domain name has conditioned many internet users. Many of us know that a .edu address usually corresponds to an educational institution. Many of us know that .gov denotes a U.S. government website.
My concern with these new top level domains is that scammers and phishers might exploit any confusion that accompanies this massive change to the domain name system. For example, I feel relatively safe visiting PayPal.com. But what happens if I receive an email asking me to visit PayPal.bank, or PayPal.money, or PayPal.6aHK?
ICANN’s decision to open up the gTLD space represents a massive change for the Internet.
And, like any large-scale change, it’ll come with its own set of growing pains.
-
The CRTC’s CBC online consultation has an RSS feed
CBC’s radio and television licenses are up for renewal, and as part of the process, the CRTC has launched an online consultation. They’re asking eight questions:
- How can the CBC be relevant and meaningful in the future?
- How can the CBC best deliver content to all Canadians?
- Should the CBC only provide different programs and services than private broadcasters?
- Does the CBC’s programming meet all of its objectives?
- What more (or less) should it be doing?
- What should it do differently?
- Do you feel the CBC reflects your specific Canadian interests and needs?
- Does the CBC fill your need for reliable and authoritative news and information?
Interestingly, the CRTC is using the third-party commenting service Disqus to collect submissions. That means, even though they don’t publicize it, there’s an Atom feed for all submissions:
Worth following.
Also, because they’re using Disqus, you can display things like who’s commenting the most (the top commenters are very active):
-
“The atomic element is the story”
A little while ago, I wrote about why I think segmentation matters for on-demand radio. In an interview with the Nieman Journalism Lab, This American Life production manager Seth Lind agrees:
[U]sers often don’t want the whole show. “Right now people often share an episode, but they’ll say, ‘Act 3!’ Or, ‘Fast-forward to this time!’” Lind told me. For users, he discovered, “the atomic element is the story, rather than the episode.” That might seem kind of obvious to web publishers, but it doesn’t necessarily fit with the narrative philosophy of the show — a handcrafted hour of storytelling, woven together by a common theme. “I think we’re sort of purists, in terms of wanting people to get the entire episode and to encourage them to listen to it as a whole,” Lind said.
Soon, each TAL story will have its own page, with its own URL and a full transcript.
CBC, please, start your photocopiers.
-
The Trouble with “Hackers”
This week, on my weekly CBC tech column, I explain what bothers me about the word “hacker.”
And for the podcast version this week, I tried something a little different. In addition to the 6-7 minute hit I do with CBC afternoon shows, I included tape from two (much) longer interviews: one with Steve Hoefer, and one with Site3’s Jonathan Guberman. I’d love it if you’d have a listen and let me know what you think of this expanded format. [audio:http://podcast.cbc.ca/mp3/podcasts/misenerontech_20110614_99386.mp3]
[MP3 download] Also, I’d sure appreciate it if you’d subscribe to the Misener on Tech podcast in iTunes.
-
Work at CBC
About a year ago, frustrated by the CBC’s terrible online job board, I used Yahoo Pipes to jerry-rig an unofficial CBC Jobs RSS feed and Twitter account. The feeds chugged along just fine (and largely unattended) for almost a year. Then, CBC HR asked to take over the Twitter account. So I handed it over to them. The very next day, automatic posting stopped.
Today, after receiving two (two!) separate comments about how crummy the new, official CBC Jobs Twitter feed is, I set to jerry-rigging again. I was delighted to learn that Yahoo Pipes has reasonably adequate screen-scraping tools built-in.
The result: working, automatic CBC job posts, with permalinks, as an RSS feed and Twitter account. Submitted for your approval:
- Work at CBC Yahoo Pipe: http://pipes.yahoo.com/misener/workatcbc
- Work at CBC RSS feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/workatcbc/
- Work at CBC on Twitter: http://twitter.com/workatcbc/
Again, this would be way, way, easier if CBC’s online job board just had native RSS feeds. Seriously.