• NekkoDroid@programming.devEnglish
      0·
      10 months ago

      Wouldn’t that need them to get the fu.ck domain itself? I have a feeling that is already used by someone else, but there currently isn’t any website at that domain (doesn’t mean it isnt used)

      • Lvxferre@lemmy.mlEnglish
        0·
        10 months ago

        Worst hypothesis they just need to mess around a bit. For example I don’t think that queerasfu.ck would be registered.

    • Adam@doomscroll.n8e.devEnglish
      0·
      10 months ago

      Activitypub makes it next to impossible to “move” an instance to a new domain.

      Every post/comment/and user is uniquely identified using the domain. In the eyes of ActivityPub changing the domain just makes each of those things a completely new thing.

      You can set up a new service at your new domain and potentially get most all your users to migrate but they’ll be leaving behind their entire histories and as a “new” fediverse user they’ll only be discoverable via the historical posts for as long as the original server is reachable.

      • NekuSoul@lemmy.nekusoul.deEnglish
        0·
        10 months ago

        Not sure how well this would actually work, but couldn’t the admins “copy” the instance to the new domain and then initiate an account migration from the old to the new instance for every account? That should both push out the account transfer to all the other instances and preserve the post history as well.

      • nintendiator@feddit.clEnglish
        0·
        10 months ago

        Thats IMO one of the worst engineering decisions in the protocol, besides all the others, but this one (making identity depend on domains, meaning on third parties antithetical to decentralization) is… laughable. Who was responsible for it?

        • Adam@doomscroll.n8e.devEnglish
          0·
          10 months ago

          But, the theory goes, you’re not supposed to be reliant on third parties as you should be in control of your own domain (or within a few degrees of the person who is).

          Large instances are what are antithetical to decentralisation.

          Of course, the reality of it is that, it just hasn’t worked out like that.

  • Balinares@pawb.socialEnglish
    0·
    10 months ago

    Could we, like, leave the clickbait headlines to reddit? Thanks. The queer.af admins just decided – wisely – not to renew the domain considering who the fee would go to.

    • Hal-5700X@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      0·
      10 months ago

      The queer.af admins just decided – wisely – not to renew the domain considering who the fee would go to.

      So the Taliban being in control of the .af domain. Made the admins not to renew the instance. To put in away, “The instance has been killed by the Taliban.”.

      • FlickOfTheBean@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        10 months ago

        No. The instance being killed by the taliban is the opposite of that is happening here.

        The taliban has done nothing, in this case. The admins of the instance have chosen not to keep the instance due to not wanting to fund the taliban in anyway.

        This phrasing fucks up which way the action flows, which is important for a headline to get right to remain accurate to the story. Does that make sense?

  • CrypticCoffee@lemmy.mlEnglish
    0·
    10 months ago

    If you’re on the country code, you open yourself up to risk. ml has been a risk before.

    Your headline is misleading though. Taliban didn’t kill it. Admin did.

  • gianni@lemmy.caEnglish
    0·
    10 months ago

    That’s quite an intentionally misleading headline @hal_5700X@lemmy.world

    • Skull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nlEnglish
      0·
      10 months ago

      There’s nothing wrong with ccTLDs as long as you pick the ccTLD of a country you trust.

      Vanity ccTLDs (.ly, .af, .io) are almost always a terrible idea, but I don’t see why I would trust a megacorp backed TLD like .coffee any more than I trust .dk or .fi. The same goes for de facto American ccTLDs like .com/.info/.net.

      • iso@lemy.lolEnglish
        0·
        10 months ago

        Yeah that’s true. We just need to research who owns the TLD before long-term site and everything is ok.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.ukEnglish
        0·
        10 months ago

        .io is the British Indian ocean’s territory, probably not really a risk i doubt anything’s going to happen there.

        • Skull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nlEnglish
          0·
          10 months ago

          Many people don’t know it’s not a generic TLD.

          There was some drama about the TLD a while back by people who disagree with the British occupation of the territories, and with the state of the world right now, I don’t think it’s entirely unimaginable that the TLD will be redelegated. We’ve seen the death and redelegation of .tk and other Freenom domains already, which was partially because of a lawsuit, but also because the locals wanted control of their TLD back (because none of the TLD money was flowing into the local economy).

          I think the TLD isn’t at great risk at the moment, but if you’re going to build your business, you may want to pick a generic TLD just in case.

        • Skull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nlEnglish
          0·
          10 months ago

          You can just buy a brand TLD for 100k, like Google did with .google and .youtube. Of course, even Google only seems to use blog.google (and I don’t think they even use .youtube) but they could!

    • Quokka@quokk.auEnglish
      0·
      10 months ago

      If the Taliban take over Australia I’ve got bigger issues to worry about than my domain name.

    • radix@lemm.eeEnglish
      0·
      10 months ago

      What alternatives are there? Just the big .org, .com, .net ones?

  • Fizz@lemmy.nzEnglish
    0·
    10 months ago

    Reading that headline scared me. For a moment I thought the instance owner was killed by the Taliban.