I can understand the fear of governments forcing porn sites to move , and thus bringing us into the realm of “what exactly defines porn”, but if it can stay as optional as choosing a domain, then I don’t see a large downfall. I’m sure others will disagree with me, though, and reply as such. (I welcome this, as someone may talk about a point I haven’t thought of.)
Re: ( Score: 2)
If you want to include sites aimed primarily at adults that aren’t porn, then isn’t the best top-level domain for them. I can think of only a handful of domains that could work,.adult seeming to be an obvious choice, but since can work for those sites as well, why do we need an adult-only domain name again?
Nope ( Score: 3, Insightful)
The problem isn’t filtering content. The problem is that domain names are a terrible way to do it (see RFC 3675 [faqs.org]), and there are better ways of doing it (see PICS [w3.org]).
As for a , the public and legislators will misunderstand its limitations. It’s practically begging for bad law. It’s better not to set it up in the first place.
Auction off rights. ( Score: 2)
Who gets the licensing money for TLD’s anyway? ICANN? Anyway, the company (presumably the one in the article summary) stands to make millions auctioning off the domains. Don’t assume for a second that or is going to sell for $10/year or whatever the going rate for a is today. They will go to the highest bidder, probably for 7 or maybe even 8 figures.
IMHO, I’d leave 
it as it is. You’ll never get ALL the porn sites to move ‘s, and everyone will end up getting the.xx
Damn the puritans ( Score: 5, Insightful)
The idea that the Internet should be made “safe” is offensive to me on so many levels. If parents would do their job and not let their kids roam the Internet unsupervised, this entire argument would disappear. I, for one, want the puritans the hell away from technology legislation. What about you?
The Internet is not a playground for children. It’s not a fun Christian diversion. It’s a network for anyone and everyone to connect to one another electronically. Let’s not turn it into Disneyland or Utah. The last thing society needs is FCC-like regulations on everything they do online. Besides, the responsibility in raising children shouldn’t fall into the hands of people than don’t have any. Parents need to police this issue, not parents AND single individuals.
The “save the children” argument is just a cheap way to achieve the anti-porn agenda. Don’t be fooled. It has nothing to do with kids. It’s been happening for 1,000’s of years and will happen for a thousand more. Humans will do what they’re biologically designed to do. Legislation can’t stop that.
It CAN, however, open the door for more censorship-inspired legislation. How long until the FCC steps in and begins to fine people that use profanity online? I don’t think I’m exaggerating my fears. It’s already ridiculous that you can’t say “Shit” on the radio. After all, how many kids listen to Larry King Live?
Censorship of any kind is fascism. It doesn’t matter what cause it’s attached to. Today it’s porn. Tomorrow it’s anti-Americanism. Just because you may not agree with porn, doesn’t mean that laws should be passed to control it. Look away. Install commercially available filtering products. Don’t let your kids surf unsupervised. For that matter, don’t leave your kids unsupervised near ANYTHING you don’t want them around. Just don’t ask big brother to watch over you. That fucks us all.