[HN Gopher] Find a good available .com domain
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Find a good available .com domain
        
       Author : Tomte
       Score  : 593 points
       Date   : 2022-06-08 07:39 UTC (15 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (sive.rs)
 (TXT) w3m dump (sive.rs)
        
       | paxys wrote:
       | My advice for those looking to name a company/product is to think
       | of a single distinct word that is _not_ in the dictionary.
        
       | economist420 wrote:
       | Make .com domain $200 a year, then this won't be as much of a
       | problem.
        
       | _andrei_ wrote:
       | But is it a good one? There are better methods for finding an
       | actually good domain name, you just have to think outside the box
       | and come up with new ideas constantly.
       | 
       | For example these domains should be available _wink_ _wink_ :
       | editormag.com geekyglossary.com infiniteiterator.com
       | infographics365.com minutequestions.com museumology.com
       | onlinehistorian.com webdesigndaily.com
       | donateyourcomputerpower.com lazysites.com scorchingearth.com
       | thechronoscope.com 24hourdigitalclock.com adfunkr.com
       | aircontroltower.com aracina.com artistreferences.com
       | athletelite.com askaboutamerica.com audiofeedr.com australers.com
       | babysnooker.com beercounting.com bipabit.com bonfirekids.com
       | bookinthebag.com cactusportal.com californiculture.com
       | cheerfulservices.com complimentopia.com crocotin.com
       | dreadpirateradio.com egoarbitrage.com firsttimebuyeralert.com
       | gardenomat.com gigaspeakers.com hipsterian.com kateke.com
       | messingwithyourmind.com myfitnessdoctor.com mypassword123.com
       | orgasmatron5000.com panonyx.com propmakerz.com ricefactor.com
       | thrillerdomains.com ulugulu.com
        
         | mdrzn wrote:
         | Literally all already squatted.
        
           | mritchie712 wrote:
           | I think OP owns these which is why they posted this
        
             | _andrei_ wrote:
             | Not true at all.
        
           | ntoskrnl wrote:
           | Not all -- orgasmatron5000.com is still available! I'm
           | surprised, I thought that would be the first one to go.
        
         | alainchabat wrote:
         | Love your creativity!
         | 
         | Requesting a domain name just in case: would love a domain name
         | for a side project:
         | 
         | It will allow users to list what they own (maybe a photo or
         | video, idk yet), and they'll be able to consult it, but other
         | people can also check what they have.
        
           | pwdisswordfish9 wrote:
           | yawnshoppe
        
           | SamBam wrote:
           | Is this just for bragging rights, or like a sharing website?
           | The site neighborgoods used to do that, for sharing tools,
           | kayaks, whatever.
        
           | Loughla wrote:
           | >but other people can also check what they have.
           | 
           | breakingandentering.com or ilovereplacingmybrokenwindows.com
           | or anentirecatalogueoffreestufftosteal.com?
           | 
           | What would be the purpose of your side project? I'm very
           | confused by it. Not trying to be disrespectful, but it just
           | sounds like an easy way to case a home for a burglary.
        
             | ldoughty wrote:
             | Not the parent poster .. but...
             | 
             | I have over a hundred board and card games... Total value
             | on resell market is not that great (especially factoring
             | the value per trip into the house, and relative low value
             | per cubic foot of storage it claims in your car/van)... but
             | having such a list outside google sheets would be helpful..
             | tells people what we already have if they want to gift
             | items, could have running discussions on games, etc.
        
               | _andrei_ wrote:
               | Well, then these could work:                 -
               | collectiblesquare.com       - mystuffpage.com       -
               | sellsomecrap.com
        
           | Tyr42 wrote:
           | Boardgamegeek lets you mark your collection, including "Want
           | to trade"
        
         | Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
         | All taken by squatters in 3.. 2.. 1...
        
         | xingped wrote:
         | Dang dude, love your creativity! Let me know if I can contact
         | you for some personalized domain suggestions for ideas I have
         | but cannot come up with domain names for?
        
           | _andrei_ wrote:
           | Hey, sure! Check my profile for contact.
        
         | _andrei_ wrote:
         | *Dropped some more (~120) here:*
         | https://gist.github.com/3rd/b2d0b2b26493de07ebb2a5ad5e67db1e
         | 
         | Maybe someone finds a name for their blog/project/something.
        
           | andai wrote:
           | Did you make these manually, ie. with your imagination? Good
           | stuff.
        
             | _andrei_ wrote:
             | I'd say 50% of it is manual work.
        
           | valleyjo wrote:
           | yucktastic.com - wonder what would be on such a site ha
        
             | addandsubtract wrote:
             | /r/TIHI (Thanks, I hate it)
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | a web forum for Amazon users to discuss the products they
             | received instead of the product the ordered
        
             | bell-cot wrote:
             | Products that were inspired by Nickelodeon's green slime?
        
               | Izkata wrote:
               | Green slime twinkies: https://img.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeed-
               | static/static/2016-06/2/14...
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | CodeSgt wrote:
         | > you just have to think outside the box and come up with new
         | ideas constantly.
         | 
         | This is something that, to my great shame, I've always
         | struggled with. Any recommendations for improving in this area?
        
           | chillfox wrote:
           | Buy a thesaurus, then use it.
        
             | airstrike wrote:
             | or visit thesaurus.com
        
           | coffeeblack wrote:
           | On YouTube search "John Cleese on creativity in management"
        
             | latexr wrote:
             | Or check out his book "Creativity: A Short and Cheerful
             | Guide". It's pretty short and the contents are pretty much
             | that video.
        
           | rileyphone wrote:
           | https://jamesaltucher.com/blog/the-ultimate-guide-for-
           | becomi...
        
           | dj_mc_merlin wrote:
           | Drugs. Bad for generating ideas, but makes your ability to
           | generate them when you're sober better.
        
             | dspillett wrote:
             | Sometimes now, if you are careful about dose. It can free
             | the doubts and writers block. Hence the phrase a few
             | write-y friends of mine like to repeat: write drunk, edit
             | sober. Or to put it a little more prosaically: you can edit
             | a bad page, you can't edit a blank page.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | foobarbecue wrote:
           | Take long showers or baths and let your mind wander. Do
           | sports where you're alone for a long time, like running or
           | surfing.
        
           | anticristi wrote:
           | I can't find a good reference, but there was a "standard"
           | process for being creative:
           | 
           | Step 0: Get yourself in front of a paper or whiteboard.
           | Eliminate distractions.
           | 
           | Step 1: Get all of the BS out of your head. Whatever comes
           | out. Do not try to discuss, assess, etc., just get it out of
           | your head.
           | 
           | Step 2: Take a step back and start assessing. Is there
           | anything valuable? What if you pair things together?
           | 
           | I heard people applying this to ideate on a new start-up,
           | brand, domain name, etc.
        
             | Cthulhu_ wrote:
             | That's brainstorming, basically; just come out with ideas
             | and say "yes and" instead of "but", save any judgments and
             | but what ifs for later.
        
         | xcambar wrote:
         | > you just have to think outside the box and come up with new
         | ideas constantly.
         | 
         | This is the problem, not the solution.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | sillysaurusx wrote:
         | Thought no one would notice the orgasmatron5000 eh? I'm onto
         | you.
         | 
         | My family once manufactured a sex toy that was popular enough
         | for someone to quit their job, so that brought back memories.
         | Sadly the popularity dried up when their YouTube video stopped
         | being recommended as much.
         | 
         | It was a real DaVinci-workshop type operation. I'm still amazed
         | how much logistics went into it. Also art ability and
         | sculpting. You have to be able to make molds, which are the
         | inverse of the shape you want to cast. It's really difficult.
        
           | dtgriscom wrote:
           | Are you saying that the product sold enough so that someone
           | involved could quit their job to produce it, or that someone
           | enjoyed the product enough that they decided to go all in on
           | using it?
        
             | sillysaurusx wrote:
             | The former. They were a single-income household at the
             | time, so it was a big decision. But they sensed that it was
             | their only chance to get wealthy, so they went for it. I
             | really respect that.
             | 
             | It's unfortunate it didn't work out, but that's life. They
             | regretted leaving their job and ended up losing the family
             | house, but they recovered after a time. They're now in a
             | job they like renting a house they like.
             | 
             | The molds were the heart and soul of the project, since
             | they were the only irreplaceable component. They ended up
             | throwing those into a dumpster. As a final twist, a family
             | friend happened to be _working at the trash center_ and
             | spotted the molds as they were coming through. So even when
             | they were trying to get rid of it like it was a monkey 's
             | paw, it still didn't go out without being noticed one last
             | time.
             | 
             | One of ya'll should try your hand at it. As with
             | programming, the problems are tough but solvable
             | (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31667798) and as far
             | as I know there's still nothing like it on the market, with
             | plenty of demand.
             | 
             | At one point they were selling multiple color varieties,
             | and people would buy all three colors. I asked if there was
             | any other difference, and he said nope, just color added
             | via dye. So there's a real opportunity for an enterprising
             | sculptor that happens to be reading this.
             | 
             | (I don't know much else and I do ML nowadays, so good luck!
             | But feel free to DM for advice I guess. https://www.smooth-
             | on.com/product-line/dragon-skin/ was part of the materials
             | they used, but apparently it was too rigid for the skin. It
             | was for internal support.)
        
           | dash2 wrote:
           | I now have a clear image of the Family Sillysaurusx. Dad is
           | hard at work designing dildos. Mum and the kids have got a
           | production line going. The littlest sculpts the wavy lines on
           | the Cliterminator Pro. Finally, Benjy the dog carries the
           | finished product over to the delivery parcel (unmarked brown
           | paper) and drops it in. Mmmm! What's that cooking in the
           | oven? Do I smell cherry pie?
        
             | rendall wrote:
             | _The retailer, clearly at a loss for words manages to gasp,
             | "That's quite a company. What do you call yourselves?"_
             | 
             |  _The staff all strike a pose and shout "The
             | Aristocrats!!!"_
        
               | latexr wrote:
               | For those unfamiliar with the reference:
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Aristocrats
        
             | sillysaurusx wrote:
             | It was actually for guys, not a dildo. Basically a silicone
             | bag you could fill with water. Getting the shape right was
             | the hardest part, since if you think about how to mold
             | something like that you'll run into a bunch of problems.
             | 
             | Your description wasn't far off, by the way! Thanks for the
             | laugh.
        
               | dotancohen wrote:
               | > Getting the shape right was the hardest part, since if
               | you think about       > how to mold something like that
               | you'll run into a bunch of problems.
               | 
               | Shape of the part that interfaces with the guy's anatomy?
               | I wonder what types of problems?
               | 
               | How pliable is the silicone bag? Human women and men come
               | in a variety of interface shapes yet it usually works
               | out. Could different size bags be manufactured?
        
               | sillysaurusx wrote:
               | Bingo.
               | 
               | I wasn't involved directly, so unfortunately this is a
               | game of telephone. This was also back in 2012 through
               | 2015, so it's been some time. But here's my understanding
               | of it.
               | 
               | Suppose the problem is to make a silicone bag that you
               | can fill with warm water. That wouldn't be _easy_ , but
               | it'd be much easier.
               | 
               | To make something like that out of silicone, you have to
               | pour some material into a mold, and let it sit. (I think
               | the material was called Dragon Skin, but I'm not sure.)
               | Think of it like cooking pancakes: You could imagine
               | pouring this silicone into a frying pan and letting it
               | sit, and you'd end up with a flat disc of silicone. So to
               | make a bag, you'd want it to be a bowl. But of course if
               | you pour it into a bowl, you'll end up with a spherical-
               | ish disc of silicone that's flat on top, because it all
               | pools to the bottom.
               | 
               | So your next attempt might be to put one bowl into
               | another bowl, and then pour the silicone between the two
               | bowls. That way the top bowl fixes the problem of it
               | coming out like a flat disc. The silicone is sandwiched
               | between the two bowls, and so you end up getting a shape
               | that looks like the bowl on the bottom. Progress! That's
               | closer to something that can hold water.
               | 
               | (Someone just told me that the shape wasn't actually the
               | hardest part. The hardest part was materials. Dragon Skin
               | was just one component. She said it was for the spine,
               | whatever that means. But it wasn't the primary material,
               | which needed to feel right and be easy to work with. I'll
               | just note that here and continue on where I left off
               | above. Basically, it needs to feel like skin, not
               | rubber.)
               | 
               | But to get something that can actually hold water, you
               | need it to be something closer to a flask shape. You
               | could imagine a bowling ball inside another, smaller
               | bowling ball, and then pouring the silicone inbetween the
               | two and letting it sit.
               | 
               | Question: How do you get the silicone out? The silicone
               | is now wrapped around the inner bowling ball. Hmm.
               | 
               | Once you solve all of those problems, _then_ you start to
               | focus on the dynamics of man-woman interaction and
               | anatomy. That requires a mold which you can shape very
               | precisely. I believe they ended up sculpting the molds
               | out of clay, then turning it into something stronger
               | through a process I don 't understand.
               | 
               | To get the silicone out of the damn molds, they needed to
               | invent a whole contraption that was like a giant lever.
               | It would hook onto the inner mold and pull real hard on
               | it, and pop! The whole thing comes out. It'd be totally
               | impossible to pull it out with your bare hands.
               | 
               | Then you run into problems like, there are bubbles in the
               | material, so this needs to be done inside a vacuum
               | chamber to get all the bubbles out.
               | 
               | Finally there's the whole problem of putting a bow on it
               | and making it look nice. You need packaging, a manual,
               | and a reliable velcro strap that won't leak water. It
               | needs to look professional. And all of this needs to be
               | scalable so that when you suddenly get 200 orders because
               | your vagina hot water bag went viral, you can fulfill
               | those orders in a reasonable timeframe and get paid.
               | 
               | There's a bunch of funny stories from that era. The
               | postal delivery people got super curious about what we
               | were up to. (At this point they'd moved into an actual
               | building, not the family house.) One day he found an
               | excuse to come in, strutting around with a big smirk on
               | his face. Then next time they went to drop off the
               | packages for delivery at the post office, the lady there
               | was like oh, you're the people that make the sex toys!
               | They were like yeahhh, that's us.
               | 
               | It was a very interesting experience. It's a shame the
               | business ended up folding due to lack of financing for
               | all the production issues.
        
               | _andrei_ wrote:
               | This is why I love HN, stories like this.
        
           | LegitShady wrote:
           | the orgasmotron5000 developed from their previous invention,
           | babysnooker.com
        
           | KineticLensman wrote:
           | "orgasmatron5000 cannot be reached"
        
         | rdrey wrote:
         | Your domain ideas are pretty good. You could sell your
         | creativity as a service. 50 bucks for 3-5 name options for
         | someone's side project, if you're that good at coming up with
         | them you'd save everyone some time.
        
         | dannyw wrote:
         | > messingwithyourmind.com
         | 
         | Yoink, thank you. Seems perfect for my new email.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | nuker wrote:
       | Author please put domains.db file on torrent.
        
       | indigodaddy wrote:
       | Imo, .net domains are also just fine, and often just
       | look/feel/sound better than the .com counterpart. They also kind
       | of feel more personal. For my personal domain name I chose .net
       | even though the .com was available because the .net just felt and
       | sounded right, and more personal.
        
       | slackfan wrote:
       | Why would I trust a service promoting finding "good" .com domains
       | that uses .rs as its domain? Were they unable to find one for
       | themselves?
        
         | rapfaria wrote:
         | This is quintessential HN, rushing to comment before opening a
         | blog post by someone called Sivers
        
         | smlacy wrote:
         | This isn't a "service", it's someone's personal blog.
        
         | matyasrichter wrote:
         | Is it so hard to open the link before posting a snarky comment?
         | It takes five seconds and you'll avoid looking like a fool.
         | Peak HN.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | ahnick wrote:
       | Something similar that we created a while back is Mashword
       | (https://mashword.com). It enables you to create word mashups of
       | two words or find unique spellings of one word quickly. It will
       | also do its best to determine domain name availability. We are
       | currently in the process of improving the speed of the algorithm,
       | so apologies if it takes a while to return.
        
       | grifball wrote:
       | $ cat com.txt | sed 's/^\(\S*\.com\)\.\s.*/\1/' | sort | uniq
       | 
       | A bit easier than a ruby script
        
         | gouggoug wrote:
         | cat com.txt | cut -d' ' -f1 | sort | uniq
         | 
         | Would work as well since there's no whitespace in the first
         | column
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | bitpow wrote:
       | reminds me of how ninite came up with their name:
       | https://ninite.tumblr.com/post/620277259/how-ninite-was-name...
        
       | kulor wrote:
       | I find nameql.com great for this task of finding a good available
       | dotcom but you have to have a seed word.
        
         | aembleton wrote:
         | I've never seen that before, but it has a great way of letting
         | you visualise how it is has come up with its suggestions.
        
       | jjnoakes wrote:
       | I stumbled across namy.ai on HN a while back and found it quite
       | useful. No affiliation, it just worked well for me.
        
       | karlerss wrote:
       | I wish someone just distributed a recent .com zone file.
        
         | superasn wrote:
         | Hopefully with a way to patch it from the last download so you
         | don't have to download the whole thing over and over. I
         | wouldn't mind paying $5 / month for a service like this - for
         | helping me avoid the red tape.
        
       | dontbenebby wrote:
       | I appreciate the craftmanship, but domains should be ideated on
       | offline, and only after years of thought, not crawled by machines
       | to by hoarded by those with more wealth than others.
       | 
       | I own two domains right now -- one for this nym, one for my legal
       | name. I actually put off getting the .org and .net for the
       | former, because hackers used to have a sense of honor.
       | 
       | (But some might argue I was never a hacker, just a phone
       | phreak[1] that was very late to the scene.)
       | 
       | [1] I'm from the generation that "Redbox" meant something...
       | different https://phonelosers.com/redbox/tonedialer/
        
       | thunderbong wrote:
       | One of the best things I like about Derek Sivers' blog is the URL
       | is always short and very memorable!
        
         | admp wrote:
         | He wrote about this recently: https://sive.rs/su
        
       | the_duke wrote:
       | Under what license is that file?
       | 
       | Could one make a webservice based on the data?
       | 
       | Edit to clarify: I'm envisioning a open source service that uses
       | an in-browser sqlite database [1] so you don't have to worry
       | about a predatory middle party reserving the domains you searched
       | for.
       | 
       | [1] https://sql.js.org/#/
        
         | marban wrote:
         | You can, but you're ~25 years too late.
        
           | the_duke wrote:
           | Sure, I'm aware that there are lots of domain search sites.
           | 
           | I edited my comment to clarify what I envisioned.
        
         | infinityio wrote:
         | You might struggle to use an in-browser service with a database
         | that big? Not sure though
        
       | waplot wrote:
       | I just use dig or whois to see if the domain exists
        
       | dochtman wrote:
       | Alternatively, use instantdomainsearch.com (disclosure, I'm the
       | CTO), which packages most of these things up in a fast web
       | interface and also enables searching in a bunch of other TLDs.
        
         | ghoomketu wrote:
         | Your site is really great.
         | 
         | Please consider creating an API with possibly a free tier.
         | Right now I have to use godaddy api and it's so darn slow (plus
         | I don't like using godaddy for many of the reasons for which
         | they are so infamous).
        
         | dotancohen wrote:
         | I just tried the site. In Firefox I searched for "led lighting"
         | and this is the page I saw:
         | 
         | https://il.godaddy.com/en/domainsearch/find?checkAvail=1&tms...
         | 
         | However, I did notice the flash of something else loading and a
         | redirect, so I hit the browser's back button and this is where
         | it took me:
         | 
         | https://instantdomainsearch.com/?q=led+lighting
         | 
         | Something on that page is causing an immediate redirect to
         | Godaddy.
         | 
         | I just tested on Google Chrome and had slightly different
         | results. Instead of a redirect, the Godaddy page opened in a
         | new tab (which was focused) yet the instantdomainsearch.com
         | page remained in another tab.
        
           | dochtman wrote:
           | I think that's what happens if you hit enter from within the
           | search bar. We search as you type, so no need to hit enter in
           | order to search. Not our finest bit of UI, will bring that
           | back to the team to see if we can improve on it.
        
         | NKosmatos wrote:
         | Wow, blazing fast search with many options and very light/clean
         | interface. Well done ;-)
        
         | isthisnametaken wrote:
         | Why is it offering up .gb domains, when you can't register
         | them?
        
         | Cd00d wrote:
         | I like your site, but are you marking prices up massively?
         | 
         | A url in the domain search took me to a purchase page for
         | $99/yr. I see the same domain on Hover for $14.... Are you
         | bundling a bunch of additional services or something?
        
         | ecornflak wrote:
         | I genuinely thought instantdomainsearch had been consumed by
         | GoDaddy
        
           | dochtman wrote:
           | Nope! In fact, we've started work on our own ICANN-accredited
           | registrar under the Instant Domains brand.
        
         | ajonit wrote:
         | Just wanted to say thank you for this service. Have been using
         | this site for several years now. Perhaps the first place I
         | visit whenever I need to research a domain name, have
         | recommended it to tons of people already.
         | 
         | Do you have any write up on its tech stack?
        
           | dochtman wrote:
           | It's running on GCP, the backend is written in Rust (with a
           | smattering of legacy Go) and the frontend is written in React
           | + Next. Any other questions?
        
       | night-rider wrote:
       | RIP Domains for the Rest of Us
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24538758
        
       | Tabular-Iceberg wrote:
       | What bad things would happen if the zone file was made available
       | for everyone without any approval?
        
         | jacquesm wrote:
         | Whatever marketeers can come up with.
        
         | srmarm wrote:
         | You can compare to get newly registered domain names so it's
         | sometimes used for Spam to target new companies - I've not
         | noticed that so much lately though.
         | 
         | I suppose you could identify recent NS changes to create a list
         | of servers/hosting that might not have been locked down or
         | secured yet.
         | 
         | But on the whole I can't personally think of anything too bad.
        
         | phgn wrote:
         | I believe you have to sign an agreement to not use the domain
         | names list for DDoS attacks, specifically against WHOIS
         | services. Not saying that this stops anyone, but that's what
         | they probably had in mind.
        
       | mysterydip wrote:
       | I've found some good available .coms for some of my projects, the
       | problem is they're all "premium" and cost thousands of dollars to
       | register.
        
       | joshstrange wrote:
       | Honestly I think domain names should be the least of your worries
       | when building something. You can always add a "get" prefix or
       | "app" suffix (or a bunch of other options). If you are sold on a
       | company name then by all means, grab the domain but don't confuse
       | "buying a domain" with "making actual progress".
       | 
       | When I was younger I used to snap up domain names for every
       | little idea I had. I executed on less than 1% of those ideas and
       | ended up letting the domain expire 1-2 years later when I could
       | finally admit to myself I was never going to pursue it. Literally
       | hundreds of dollars flushed down the toilet all to get a
       | temporary rush.
       | 
       | I know that I have issues with thinking "spending money" ===
       | "making progress" (be it on home improvement projects or web
       | apps) and I know I'm not alone. If all you need is a domain to
       | launch your product then go ahead and start looking, otherwise
       | it's just a dopamine distraction.
        
         | omoikane wrote:
         | See also: "Change Your Name" -
         | http://www.paulgraham.com/name.html
        
           | tmp_anon_22 wrote:
           | > The problem with not having the .com of your name is that
           | it signals weakness.
           | 
           | Spending money on trivialities is not how you project
           | strength. If your business is so fragile it rests on the
           | reputation of its TLD, you are already weak.
        
           | yieldcrv wrote:
           | > The problem with not having the .com of your name is that
           | it signals weakness.
           | 
           | That was wrong in 2015 and it is wrong now.
           | 
           | What is seen as validation to users in Europe is different to
           | North America is different to Asia. You can run a whole
           | business in a group chat back then, and North America is just
           | catching on to that, barely moving off of the concept of a
           | .com presence and being okay that other TLD's are good enough
           | too. When you don't even need a website.
           | 
           | Do the thing that makes revenue.
           | 
           | At this point its simple to me: if you are relying on an
           | audience that instinctively types .com or if you think you
           | need a .com for a search result or ad campaign, _that 's_
           | what you're doing wrong. Like, are you intentionally selling
           | to pensioners? Is that the audience you want? People that had
           | the same 30 years as you did to figure out to use a computer
           | but made 30 years of excuses instead?
        
             | 867-5309 wrote:
             | it doesn't change the fact that .com is and will forever be
             | the de facto TLD
             | 
             | even if you succeed with appthatslaps.millennial, you're
             | still going to redirect appthatslaps.com to it
        
               | yieldcrv wrote:
               | its more like an optional tld that wont do anything for
               | your engagement, actual revenue, or air of legitimacy
        
               | 867-5309 wrote:
               | it will help all of those, by the people who couldn't
               | remember your novelty tld autonomically trying .com
        
               | picture wrote:
               | The default for people who couldn't remember seems to
               | have become typing it into google. It helps that most
               | browsers support omnibox type search
        
               | yieldcrv wrote:
               | people reach your site by clicking through on social
               | media and chatting apps - and referencing those places
               | again if they cant remember
               | 
               | unless you specifically have targeted and proven that an
               | audience is going to bring value to you, and they use
               | .com and search engines to find you, then there is no
               | reason to cater to these luddite and elderly people. Its
               | a deprecated assumption only relevant to deprecated
               | people.
        
         | ivan888 wrote:
         | I have been doing the same thing for years, and just last week
         | I finally executed a personal project I had been thinking about
         | for months, and I just used the free subdomain that came with
         | the hosting provider I used. Also, https://freedns.afraid.org/
         | is a great source for interesting names
        
         | codegeek wrote:
         | I pretty much stopped obsessing over domain names after seeing
         | the success of "google". Ultimately it is the
         | product/service/business that matters. Sure, we all try to get
         | a domain name that we want/like but no need obsessing over it.
         | It sucks that most of us didn't know what to do in 1994 when
         | lot of dictionary words were available. But it is what it is.
        
           | BbzzbB wrote:
           | What's wrong with Google? I'm sure the origin (googolplex) is
           | lost on most people, but it seems like a decent brand name to
           | me. On top of which, consider if Yahoo! had won the search
           | market, i don't think their brand would've become a universal
           | verb.
           | 
           | Granted, I don't believe it was an explicit choice to have a
           | "verbale" brand-name.
           | 
           | But you (and many others in this thread) are right that names
           | often don't matter that much. A better product will normally
           | win regardless of the name, and once it does it's name will
           | become "normalized". Duckduckgo might be such an example..
           | terrible name (IMO), yet respected by many as a Google-
           | alternative.
           | 
           | Your product likely won't fail because of a bad name, but it
           | doesn't hurt to have a good one.
        
             | jackblemming wrote:
             | The OP didn't say anything was wrong with Google and you
             | repeated exactly what they were getting at.
        
         | rco8786 wrote:
         | Everything you say is generally reasonable (though business and
         | domain names can very much matter) but
         | 
         | > Literally hundreds of dollars flushed down the toilet all to
         | get a temporary rush.
         | 
         | Is that really so bad? We pay hundreds of dollars for temporary
         | rushes all the time.
        
         | aliswe wrote:
         | I am making an Open Source CMS optimized for the cloud, in
         | .NET. I got the domain cloudy.net. Needless to say I'm pretty
         | stoked!
        
         | bhartzer wrote:
         | >> You can always add a "get" prefix or "app" suffix (or a
         | bunch of other options). If you are sold on a company name then
         | by all means, grab the domain.
         | 
         | I totally agree, you can always "upgrade" later to a better,
         | shorter, or more appropriate domain later. The TLD doesn't
         | matter, either. The only potential exception to this would be
         | if you're building something "local", whereas you'd want to get
         | the ccTLD domain if you're targeting users in one particular
         | country.
        
           | TAForObvReasons wrote:
           | That assumes such a domain is available. There's an entire
           | cottage industry around snapping up short or interesting
           | domains and renting them to customers. https://venture.com/
           | it looks like their entire business model involves squatting
           | on domains and renting to interested people.
        
         | l5870uoo9y wrote:
         | Having the actual .com domain for your business signalise
         | quality and authenticity, difficult to imagine Amazon having
         | getamazon.com.
         | 
         | That being said, I also spend many (good hours) dreaming away
         | while buying all sorts of domain names for my fictitious
         | startups. I found that when using the startup niche as suffix
         | or prefix, the domain is sometimes available. Had plenty of
         | luck buying "git-what-ever".com domains, like git18n.com
         | (though I am not sure how clever that naming really is).
        
           | tspike wrote:
           | Facebook used to be thefacebook.com. It only changed after
           | they were already successful.
        
             | fndex wrote:
             | But Facebook was actually called theFacebook back then, so
             | not sure if this is a valid comparison.
        
           | runjake wrote:
           | Step 1: Obtain gethotdogs.com
           | 
           | Step 2: Make billions.
           | 
           | Step 3: Buy hotdogs.com with your massive amounts of VC
           | funds^W^Wcash.
           | 
           | This is what Facebook (thefacebook.com), Dropbox
           | (getdropbox.com), etc did.
        
             | johndough wrote:
             | Counterpoint 1: Steam could not buy steam.com.
             | 
             | Counterpoint 2: Domain scalpers will demand ridiculous
             | prices if they believe that you are affiliated with a
             | similar-sounding domain or company.
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | Steam hasn't been really slowed down by not having
               | steam.com however - even Valve itself doesn't have
               | valve.com
               | 
               | Ever since URL bars defaulted to a web search instead of
               | just adding www.com to the word the value of a one word
               | dot com has dropped.
        
               | xmprt wrote:
               | Valve isn't buying steam.com because they don't want to,
               | not because they can't.
               | 
               | > Domain scalpers will demand ridiculous prices if they
               | believe that you are affiliated with a similar-sounding
               | domain or company
               | 
               | Anyone sitting on steam.com right now, thinking that
               | Valve is more likely to buy it tomorrow than they are
               | today is delusional. Domain names and TLDs are becoming
               | less relevant day by day and especially with
               | Valve/Steam's computer savvy, gamer userbase, I don't
               | think they really need steam.com. It could be helpful but
               | if they've already decided they don't want it today then
               | they probably won't change their minds tomorrow.
        
             | nwiswell wrote:
             | This only works if you are trying to go hyperscale. Most
             | side projects do not qualify.
        
           | durpleDrank wrote:
           | steampowered.com
        
           | nicwolff wrote:
           | Do only us old farts remember the canonical example of having
           | to buy your .com after you've made it very valuable? [0]
           | 
           | [0] https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/compaq-
           | buys-...
        
             | bombcar wrote:
             | I remember altavista.digital.com from back when people
             | thought subdomains were really going to matter - but
             | eventually they went away and Google took over.
             | 
             | Ha! The current owners still have altavista.digital.com -
             | it has some history thing.
        
         | jszymborski wrote:
         | Wordle is a pretty good example of how much success you can
         | have with an unremarkable and unmemorable domain name.
        
           | Jack000 wrote:
           | Wordle is a great name - it's short, only two syllables and
           | relates directly to the product.
           | 
           | A better example of a bad name might be Ycombinator. It's not
           | immediately obvious what it means, and if you say it aloud it
           | sounds like a question. Doesn't seem to matter much if you're
           | successful enough though.
        
             | daemontus wrote:
             | Wordle is a great name. But strictly speaking, at no point
             | there was `wordle.com` or anything similar. Wordle always
             | lived as a humble page on a larger domain. Which I believe
             | was the point of the original comment: That if your product
             | (name) is good, domain is secondary. The vast majority of
             | users can just google at this point (which might not have
             | been true 20 years ago).
        
           | gregmac wrote:
           | For context, the original URL was
           | http://www.powerlanguage.co.uk/wordle
           | 
           | Now it's https://www.nytimes.com/games/wordle/index.html
           | 
           | It's never been wordle.com (or even at any TLD), and despite
           | that:
           | 
           | > Over 300,000 people played Wordle on January 2, 2022, up
           | from 90 players on November 1, 2021, a figure that rose to
           | over 2 million a week later. [1]
           | 
           | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wordle#Rise_in_popularity
        
         | paulpauper wrote:
         | Agree 100% about domain names. The only exceptions could be for
         | a personal blog perhaps or a brand.
        
           | ryan29 wrote:
           | Something brandable is worth holding on to IMO, especially if
           | it's distinctive enough to trademark which likely means there
           | isn't a lot of search competition either.
        
         | mark_l_watson wrote:
         | re: "When I was younger I used to snap up domain names for
         | every little idea I had.":
         | 
         | I am 71 years old and I am still do this. Good for you
         | stopping!
         | 
         | Concerning the article: a clever idea but I think it is better
         | manually thinking of words that match your idea and searching
         | for similar free domain names - that doesn't take much time.
        
         | olivermarks wrote:
         | Agree.
         | 
         | I have a couple of fairly high value domains I've kept I'm
         | interested in selling, but there isn't a great market I've
         | found for this instead of letting them go?
        
       | 256DEV wrote:
       | One of my hobbies is the diametric opposite of this approach, I
       | enjoy trawling domain auctions for short .coms that don't include
       | any dictionary words but still sound fun. I love names like Quora
       | that are meaningless but still somehow feel like they should be a
       | real word! I believe the academic category for these is "lexical
       | gap". During the pandemic I got a little too much into it and so
       | now I'm actually busy working on a site to list them for sale -
       | https://wuzmo.com - the plan is to make it essentially a cheap
       | brandbucket.
        
         | Tepix wrote:
         | how is this not squatting and thus deplorable?
        
           | halJordan wrote:
           | Squatting has an intention behind it. You don't call ancient
           | coin collectors deplorable squatters because they are taking
           | limited stock off the market.
        
             | lijogdfljk wrote:
             | But they're not collecting or w/e, they're searching and
             | buying for the purpose of reselling. Which.. is squatting,
             | no?
        
               | halJordan wrote:
               | No they're collecting interesting domains, and then they
               | said it got out of hand during the pandemic, and now
               | theyre selling their collection.
        
         | cupofpython wrote:
         | so you're squatting domains, cool
        
         | almog wrote:
         | > _I believe the academic category for these is "lexical gap"_
         | 
         | Lexical gap refers to potential words that, with regards to the
         | language morphology or semantic rules, could have been part of
         | the language.
         | 
         | I think it's systematic gap that might apply to some of the
         | domains you're squatting.
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accidental_gap
        
         | ntoskrnl wrote:
         | I think DALL-E would be a good way to come up with these. The
         | nonsense text it adds to images is usually pronouncable and
         | somehow always seems to match the theme you give it.
         | GilaWhamm.com, anyone?
        
           | cxr wrote:
           | Domains for the Rest of Us. September 2020. 347 points. 200
           | comments. <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24538758>
           | 
           | Now dead.
        
         | overthemoon wrote:
         | Has it ever turned out that one of these words means something
         | dirty or profane or something in another language?
        
           | 256DEV wrote:
           | Interesting question! Well no one has complained so far, but
           | I should definitely run them all through Google Translate to
           | see. I could see this happening quite easily.
           | 
           | The one issue I did have was buying a domain on Namecheap
           | auctions only to find it had been used _very_ aggressively by
           | spammers before going to auction. It made me think of the
           | recent top HN post about how you could push a suspect domain
           | to someone within a registrar and then implicate them without
           | their knowledge. The Namecheap auction system happily let me
           | buy the domain, but then as soon as it was in my account it
           | got suspended and I got various emails from their security
           | team about how many blocklists it was on and how I 'd have to
           | submit extensive documentation to get it unsuspended etc.
           | Thankfully the support was helpful and now I check domains
           | more thoroughly before I buy them...
        
           | darrenkopp wrote:
           | Yeah. At my last job we made a pivot table tool feature into
           | our project and we named it Pito after Pito Salas, thinking
           | we were so clever and finally came up with a slick little
           | branding for a feature. But that's slang for penis in
           | Spanish... name lasted for a couple of years before it was
           | replaced.
        
         | eterm wrote:
         | Quora is a real word, it is the plural of Quorum.
        
           | belter wrote:
           | It seems it's not how the site got the name:
           | 
           | https://www.quora.com/Does-Quora-come-from-the-plural-
           | versio...
        
             | saint-loup wrote:
             | The most upvoted answer seems totally made up.
             | 
             | https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-
             | b-d&q=%22Quora+...
        
           | 256DEV wrote:
           | Well well, I did not know that.. Thanks for expanding my
           | vocab! Maybe a better example would have been the similar
           | Zuora!
        
             | duffyjp wrote:
             | Actually, Zuora is the plural of Zuorum (according to many
             | poorly OCR'd PDFs I found on google). :D
        
       | rexreed wrote:
       | Do .com domains still matter? Especially expensive "good" ones?
       | Does a mortgage company really need to be known as "better.com"?
       | Does a screen recorder really need to be known as "loom.com"? Yes
       | these are short and expensive English words, but they are also
       | unintuitive and honestly as a result unmemorable. There are times
       | I see a company with englishword.com and it has nothing to do
       | with their company and therefore I can't remember it.
       | Lemonade.com? Oh yeah, insurance.
        
         | wcedmisten wrote:
         | Does choice of TLD affect SEO? Some articles claim it shouldn't
         | matter, but I do wonder if less common TLDs get penalized.
        
         | paulsutter wrote:
         | Domain name requirements depend on your customer base and the
         | business that you're in (eg, enterprise software, crypto, or
         | developer tools? completely different expectations). There are
         | no general rules
        
       | jreynoldsdev wrote:
       | Do registrars still hike up the price/purchase domain names they
       | notice people searching? I feel like I haven't seen any reports
       | on that in awhile. If it's still happening this could be a nice
       | way to avoid that.
        
         | teaearlgraycold wrote:
         | This seems more for bulk searches than secrecy.
        
       | rootsudo wrote:
       | Everyone beat me with the one liners :) surprised someone had a
       | file.open loop while cat and awk would work. More surprised to
       | see Ruby used.
        
         | julianeon wrote:
         | Sometimes performance considerations are irrelevant, because if
         | your data is small enough, slow mainstream programming
         | languages can blaze through the workload in an instant. This is
         | one of those cases.
        
       | sideproject wrote:
       | Domainy.io - lets you search (and monitor) for domain names that
       | either become available or registered.
       | 
       | It also lets you quickly search for available domain names
       | related to
       | 
       | - baby names - animal names - planet names etc etc via templates.
       | 
       | https://domainy.io
        
         | santa_boy wrote:
         | Is there a good API to check for domain name availability and
         | expiration?
        
       | phgn wrote:
       | Unfortunately not every domain that has no DNS record is
       | available for purchase: some people configure no records, others
       | are reserved by the registry (many short words for nTLDs). If
       | something isn't in the DNS zone you can do a live DNS and WHOIS
       | check to be more certain.
       | 
       | A while back I tied together this DNS zone + live false positive
       | check into a website (for all TLDs and with price info):
       | 
       | https://domain.garden
       | 
       | AWS credits are still paying for this, so feel free to use it!
        
         | colejohnson66 wrote:
         | Great website, but it spammed by back button history. If you're
         | using pushState, I'd recommend changing it to replaceState.
        
         | edumucelli wrote:
         | Congrats! The interface is just super neat, how it gets updated
         | when you hover (I imagine it caches the information about that
         | specific domain for the next user).
        
           | phgn wrote:
           | Yep, the more people use the website the more accurate the
           | database gets.
        
       | pyryt wrote:
       | Would the same process work for other tlds?
        
         | AndrewStephens wrote:
         | It does. Here is someone who lists all of the .horse domains
         | just in case you would want such a thing [0]
         | 
         | https://every.horse/
        
         | m00dy wrote:
         | yes, but you need to request it
        
         | samwhiteUK wrote:
         | Why wouldn't it?
        
           | paulgb wrote:
           | Because different tlds are operated somewhat differently and
           | afaict this seems to be a secondary service that isn't
           | fundamental to routing or other required operations of a
           | registrar.
           | 
           | In this case it seems to work with "participating tlds",
           | whichever those are.
        
             | phgn wrote:
             | All DNS zones on CZDS have the same format, and AFAIK all
             | nTLDs are required to use it.
             | 
             | But you're right for ccTLDs -- everyone uses their own
             | format and most don't even allow you to get the zone file.
             | There are some companies though that provide similar lists
             | from crawling data (e.g. https://zonefiles.io/).
        
       | ramraj07 wrote:
       | A tip I discovered - use hyphens, and suddenly very small nice
       | domains become available. No one types domains anyway.
       | 
       | Also does anyone know how to get a shady domain parking service
       | to give up on a domain they've been holding for decades? I'm
       | actually happy to pay 500 but not thousands and it's not even a
       | domain that a company or commercial interest would want to
       | purchase.
        
         | wartijn_ wrote:
         | By offering them a low amount. They'll counter with a
         | ridiculously high amount. Make clear that there's no way you'll
         | ever pay anything close to that amount and stop with
         | negotiating if they don't come up with a reasonable price.
         | 
         | They might come back to you in a few months with a better
         | offer. Or they might not, but it has worked for me two times.
        
         | Termitiono wrote:
         | You get a good and potentially expensive com domain for easy of
         | use and not landing in spam folders.
         | 
         | I prefer *.io domains for non critical things.
        
           | koolba wrote:
           | The renewal fees for .io domains are a scamola. Last I
           | checked it was $50+/year.
        
             | Termitiono wrote:
             | I was referring to the initial price of a good .com domain.
             | 
             | That will cost you a few thousand dollars if you are not
             | lucky, which you are not if you need to use a hyphen
             | 
             | But a renewal price for 50$/year for a business doesn't
             | matter.
        
         | helloguillecl wrote:
         | I've done just that.
         | 
         | I own currency-calc.com, which I find even better than the non
         | hypen version of the name name.
         | 
         | I think for generic name domains are fantastic, but maybe not
         | for a brand.
        
         | amelius wrote:
         | > use hyphens, and suddenly very small nice domains become
         | available.
         | 
         | Bad idea. The owner of the corresponding domain without hyphens
         | might steal your visitors.
        
           | Beltalowda wrote:
           | By accidentally forgetting a "-" is how I once ended up on a
           | porn site in front of the entire company, since that's what
           | the version without a "-" was.
           | 
           | It wasn't a big deal, but I was very young, and I had a very
           | red head.
        
             | bradstewart wrote:
             | Oh man, I did something similar in class. In 4th grade (+/-
             | a year). whitehouse.com (I don't know what it is now, but
             | it was a porn site) instead of whitehouse.gov.
        
         | probably_wrong wrote:
         | > _No one types domains anyway._
         | 
         | Only as long as you don't plan to offer e-mail under that
         | domain.
        
           | paxys wrote:
           | My company's email domain has a hyphen in it (xyz@company-
           | corp.com). Works perfectly fine.
        
         | beardyw wrote:
         | That begs the question do you need a .com anyway?
        
           | dsr_ wrote:
           | No, you just need something that has reasonable management
           | and reputation and is familiar-enough for your potential
           | users.
           | 
           | Some country codes are happy to have unrelated users, and
           | some are not. .ninja was polluted by spammers so fast that
           | many email servers just drop the entire TLD on sight. If most
           | of your users speak something other than English, you might
           | find any number of good words going unused.
        
         | DeathArrow wrote:
         | >No one types domains anyway.
         | 
         | I do, at least the first letters until the browser completes
         | the rest.
         | 
         | And if no one types domains, why do you need a short domain
         | name anyway?
        
           | gtirloni wrote:
           | Aesthetics.
        
         | weird-eye-issue wrote:
         | The very fact you want to buy it and are willing to pay $500+
         | means there is a commercial interest in it. That's like saying
         | no company wants to own a house because they won't live in it.
         | True, but they rent them out.
        
           | ramraj07 wrote:
           | It's my first name, and unfortunately there's an underwear
           | company of the sAme name, but I know for a fact they're
           | misers (I know, I get their emails sometime).
        
             | weird-eye-issue wrote:
             | Any company of sufficient size will get negative emails.
             | The only companies that don't simply aren't big enough
        
       | subpar wrote:
       | using zomba* domains as an example is a real missed opportunity
       | to feature zombo.com
        
       | stevenjgarner wrote:
       | Left out two very important steps:
       | 
       | a) which of those available names are already trademarked and in
       | which industrial classification [1]. I am amazed at the number of
       | LIVE trademarks that have no registered domain (or worse the
       | registered domain is not held by the trademark registrant).
       | 
       | b) which of those available names has the lowest search engine
       | competition and/or the highest organic search traffic [2]
       | 
       | Also, stripping off the top level domain (TLD) during the search
       | process means one does not find good/great available domain names
       | that may be available on alternative TLD's (that are also not
       | trademarked etc).
       | 
       | [1] https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/search
       | 
       | [2] https://ads.google.com/intl/en_au/home/tools/keyword-
       | planner...
        
         | stevenjgarner wrote:
         | Not affiliated with Ryan Stout's bustaname domain search site
         | [1], but I love using the word combiner and thesaurus features.
         | Also has good video tutorials [2], including one for his tool
         | "for making fake words that sound like they could be real" [3]
         | 
         | [1] http://www.bustaname.com/
         | 
         | [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmhSgMXwUQY
         | 
         | [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQYaUkNxT7A
        
       | iampivot wrote:
       | What about those edgy names with a spelling mistake?
        
         | akmittal wrote:
         | Let's create a dictionary with all the edgy words.
        
           | Noughmad wrote:
           | I call dibs on dikshnr.io
        
       | mouzogu wrote:
       | maybe stupid question. but don't some registration services front
       | run you?
       | 
       | also isn't the value of a domain related to how closely it
       | matches search queries.
        
       | productceo wrote:
       | Programmatic land grabs like this is why people today must suffer
       | from lack of remaining .com domain names.
       | 
       | Nothing wrong with the writer of this post. I think this is a
       | rational behavior that should be considered "expected". Whoever
       | designed domain name registration/ownership model is to blame for
       | failing to create a system which can efficiently give right
       | domain names to people who actually need them and can use them
       | for good (aka actually hosting businesses or contents instead of
       | scalping).
        
         | jliptzin wrote:
         | Domains should cost $500/yr
        
           | revolvingocelot wrote:
           | Some years afterward:
           | 
           | "Human-readable domains should not be the sole province of
           | the rich! Sign the petition at, *sigh*,
           | c12a:d1e0:ae77:dff5:2260:c017:26a9:b447"
        
           | rileyphone wrote:
           | .ai costs $70 a year and that seems to be enough to keep most
           | squatting from happening. Some available domains:
           | 
           | thirty.ai topsy.ai hierarch.ai bisect.ai branching.ai
           | saline.ai spume.ai cadr.ai
           | 
           | I'm sure using the dictionary method you could find a ton
           | more.
        
         | ahnick wrote:
         | The inability to find any available domain names was one of the
         | primary reasons for us to create Mashword.
         | (https://mashword.com) You can enter the name you are looking
         | for and it will quickly suggest similarly spelled or sounding
         | names to the one you entered.
        
         | 256DEV wrote:
         | Some newer TLDs like .dev or .app have a tiered pricing
         | structure. So it becomes less economically feasible to squat
         | the best names. They also released them in stages when the TLD
         | first went live.
         | 
         | This guy (https://medium.com/@amd_2793/my-million-dollar-
         | domain-hobby-...) actually used Google's rankings of domain
         | value from .app to then squat domains on two other flat priced
         | TLDs - io and ai!
        
           | moffkalast wrote:
           | Realistically this problem will never be solved while we only
           | support fixed domain extensions and act like some are more
           | legit than others. Like what gives DNS providers the right to
           | say what's a valid extension or not? Just support any string
           | ffs.
           | 
           | Not to mention the country restricted ones that you can only
           | get if you're a resident, like bruh.
        
             | donohoe wrote:
             | There are pros to the current system.
             | 
             | That said, part of the issue you flag is just perception.
             | It's like going with a financial services firm that has a
             | Wall Street or "Fifth Avenue" address in New York City
             | versus a firm that has an address in Hoboken, New Jersey.
             | 
             | Both might be fine but we often attach significance to an
             | address (even if its just a mailbox).
             | 
             | To your last point, I think its ultimately good that (many)
             | Country restricted TLDs have geographic restrictions.
        
           | platz wrote:
           | OP says you want .com
           | 
           | What's wrong with .org?
        
             | dspillett wrote:
             | Nothing inherently, it doesn't have the "full of spammers"
             | stigma of .xyz and so forth, though some seem to think it
             | inherently means non-profit/non-commercial (sort of true,
             | it was defined as for organisations not fitting in other
             | tlds where .com was one of those and intended for
             | commercial use) and think .com therefor looks more serious.
             | 
             | Also: if you take the .org and the .com is already in use,
             | be ready to have the name taken off you if they get
             | successful, or for some of your users to mistakenly go to
             | the wrong place. To avoid one of those things happening
             | later if the .com is available now you could buy both, but
             | then the availability of the .com becomes the deciding
             | factor again not the .org and you are paying for two
             | domains.
        
       | rmdoss wrote:
       | Most new companies now are on generic TLDs ( or .nets, .orgs,
       | etc). Don't think .com matters as much anymore
        
       | vintaclectic wrote:
       | I just bought boxyfans.com...goig to sell a bunch of box fans.
       | Kthx.
        
       | dubswithus wrote:
       | Should be possible to expand the gz file a bit at a time in the
       | Ruby script? Would prefer that since I don't have the space
       | available.
        
       | TowerTall wrote:
       | > If you're on Mac, Linux, or BSD, you should have a dictionary
       | of words at /usr/share/dict/words
       | 
       | Why do they come with a dictionary of words?
        
         | jacquesm wrote:
         | Password generators, spell checkers, password crackers, textual
         | analysis, the 'look' program. Probably more than that!
        
         | CydeWeys wrote:
         | Spell checker is an obvious use case. You can then add terms to
         | the system dictionary and now they're valid systemwide in all
         | apps that use the dictionary for spell checking!
        
         | StreamBright wrote:
         | There are some legit use cases:                   words is a
         | standard file on Unix and Unix-like operating systems, and is
         | simply a newline-delimited list of dictionary words. It is
         | used, for instance, by spell-checking programs. The words file
         | is usually stored in /usr/share/dict/words or /usr/dict/words.
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Words_(Unix)
        
           | Tempest1981 wrote:
           | Are there other languages besides English and British?
        
             | capableweb wrote:
             | There is indeed. Usually you chose what lists to install as
             | part of installation, otherwise it's just one package
             | install away.
        
             | chipaca wrote:
             | $ apt-cache search 'words for /usr/share/dict' | sed -e
             | 's/^[^ ]* - //; s/ dictionary words.*//' | sort -u
             | American English         British English         Bulgarian
             | Canadian English         Catalan         Esperanto
             | French         German medical         Irish (Gaeilge)
             | Italian         Manx Gaelic         Polish         Spanish
             | Swedish         Ukrainian
        
               | jwilk wrote:
               | Not every word list package has "words for
               | /usr/share/dict" in the description.                 $
               | grep-aptavail -wF Provides wordlist -s
               | Package,Description | tbl-dctrl        +=================
               | ==+======================================================
               | =+       | Package           | Description
               | |       +-------------------+----------------------------
               | ---------------------------+       | wbulgarian        |
               | Bulgarian dictionary words for /usr/share/dict        |
               | | wbrazilian        | Brazilian Portuguese wordlist
               | |       | wdanish           | The Comprehensive Danish
               | Dictionary (DSDO) - wordlist |       | wdutch
               | | list of Dutch words                                   |
               | | wesperanto        | Esperanto dictionary words for
               | /usr/share/dict        |       | wogerman          |
               | Traditional German wordlist                           |
               | | wngerman          | New German orthography wordlist
               | |       | wswiss            | Swiss (German) orthography
               | wordlist                   |       | wpolish           |
               | Polish dictionary words for /usr/share/dict           |
               | | wfaroese          | Faroese dictionary / wordlist
               | |       | wgalician-minimos | Wordlist for Galician
               | (minimos)                       |       | wukrainian
               | | Ukrainian dictionary words for /usr/share/dict        |
               | | wportuguese       | European Portuguese wordlist
               | |       | wgerman-medical   | German medical dictionary
               | words for /usr/share/dict   |       | miscfiles         |
               | Dictionaries and other interesting files              |
               | | wnorwegian        | Norwegian word list
               | |       | wamerican         | American English dictionary
               | words for /usr/share/dict |       | wamerican-huge    |
               | American English dictionary words for /usr/share/dict |
               | | wamerican-insane  | American English dictionary words
               | for /usr/share/dict |       | wamerican-large   |
               | American English dictionary words for /usr/share/dict |
               | | wamerican-small   | American English dictionary words
               | for /usr/share/dict |       | wbritish          | British
               | English dictionary words for /usr/share/dict  |       |
               | wbritish-huge     | British English dictionary words for
               | /usr/share/dict  |       | wbritish-insane   | British
               | English dictionary words for /usr/share/dict  |       |
               | wbritish-large    | British English dictionary words for
               | /usr/share/dict  |       | wbritish-small    | British
               | English dictionary words for /usr/share/dict  |       |
               | wcanadian         | Canadian English dictionary words for
               | /usr/share/dict |       | wcanadian-huge    | Canadian
               | English dictionary words for /usr/share/dict |       |
               | wcanadian-insane  | Canadian English dictionary words for
               | /usr/share/dict |       | wcanadian-large   | Canadian
               | English dictionary words for /usr/share/dict |       |
               | wcanadian-small   | Canadian English dictionary words for
               | /usr/share/dict |       | wcatalan          | Catalan
               | dictionary words for /usr/share/dict          |       |
               | wswedish          | Swedish dictionary words for
               | /usr/share/dict          |       | wfrench           |
               | French dictionary words for /usr/share/dict           |
               | | witalian          | Italian dictionary words for
               | /usr/share/dict/         |       | wspanish          |
               | Spanish dictionary words for /usr/share/dict          |
               | +===================+====================================
               | ===================+
        
         | Gigachad wrote:
         | Not sure the origin but I have seen it used several times where
         | random words are needed. So it certainly is handy.
        
       | andrewla wrote:
       | These accounts are indeed free, but not without burdens. You need
       | to give your address and agree to a bunch of terms in order to
       | gain access at all, and then each time you request access to a
       | specific piece of data you need to provide a justification and
       | agree to another set of terms.
       | 
       | Interestingly, among those terms are:
       | 
       | > 1.3. not to use this Data, nor permit this Data to be used for
       | any marketing purposes whatsoever.
       | 
       | I think the intent is to prevent the data being used for bulk
       | mailing, but there's another section, 1.1 that specifically bans
       | this. Choosing a domain name for a business is arguably
       | marketing, so it seems that a close reading would disallow this.
       | 
       | I mean, of course, this is all unenforceable BS anyway. I'm
       | surprised that someone hasn't gone ahead and taken this data and
       | put it up on github or something; it all feels very theatrical.
        
         | timdavila wrote:
         | > I'm surprised that someone hasn't gone ahead and taken this
         | data and put it up on github or something; it all feels very
         | theatrical.
         | 
         | It would be out of date the minute you post it.
        
         | julianeon wrote:
         | Choosing a domain name is arguably one of the core use cases
         | here; I don't think they were looking for extremely creative
         | readings here. What they don't want people to do is take these
         | results and slap them in an ad to drive business. But using
         | these results to pick your own domain name, which you
         | personally plan to use, is fine and good.
        
       | openplatypus wrote:
       | Here is dirty little secret: Barely anyone types addresses
       | manually these days.
       | 
       | Don't stress about it that much :)
        
       | logifail wrote:
       | Q: Do we (still?) think that dictionary words make good choices
       | for domain names?
        
         | capableweb wrote:
         | A: No, random combination of characters (ideally with some
         | numbers too) both are easier to remember, looks more secure and
         | is easier to pronounce.
        
           | logifail wrote:
           | :)
           | 
           | I'm thinking of branding - think Google, Pepsi, Adidas, Nike,
           | Starbucks
           | 
           | You'd really prefer to attempt build a brand around
           | SearchEngine.tld or RunningShoe.tld ?
        
             | hnbad wrote:
             | Booking.com would like to disagree.
        
               | rjh29 wrote:
               | and Hotels.com
        
               | logifail wrote:
               | which is ironically owned by ... Expedia Group
        
               | rodnim wrote:
               | And Apple.
        
               | logifail wrote:
               | > Apple
               | 
               | Indeed, although the Beatles got there first with Apple
               | Corps[0] way back in 1968, the resulting dispute with
               | what became Apple Inc[1] took decades[2] and must have
               | eaten up $deity only knows how much in legal fees.
               | 
               | Some might say that one actually backs up my suggestion
               | that a made-up name is easier to build a brand around!
               | 
               | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps [1]
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc. [2] https://en.w
               | ikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer
        
               | dreilide wrote:
               | as well as
               | 
               | hotels.com trip.com
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | sillycube wrote:
        
       | DarrenDev wrote:
       | Or, pick two words that are not connected in any way. If you
       | Google them as a phrase search you get nothing or close to
       | nothing back: "word1 word2". Examples from 2 minutes on Godaddy:
       | 
       | martianpenguins.com
       | 
       | sallylabs.com
       | 
       | mountainmondays.com
       | 
       | bottlesound.com
       | 
       | Meaningless but all available. Turn those 2 minutes into 2 hours
       | and you'll turn up a gem.
        
         | brycewray wrote:
         | Now I understand why PostCSS comes from people at
         | evilmartians.com.
        
           | DarrenDev wrote:
           | You could respond from goodmartian.com. Available.
        
       | aftbit wrote:
       | Last I checked, this list only includes domains with a DNS
       | server. It excludes plenty of registered .com domains that have
       | no domain server configured.
        
       | gtsnexp wrote:
       | I love the comment that someone dropped on the post. One could
       | replace the first Ruby script by a one-liner: "cat /tmp/com.txt |
       | awk '{ print substr($1, 1, length($1) -5) }' | uniq >
       | domains.txt"
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | kouteiheika wrote:
         | One could replace the first Ruby script by a Ruby one-liner
         | too:
         | 
         | ruby -e "puts File.read('/tmp/com.txt').scan(/^[^.]+/).uniq"
         | 
         | Personally I almost never use any of the standard Unix tools
         | like `awk` etc. since an equivalent Ruby script is almost
         | always shorter and easier to write. (There are exceptions of
         | course; and in _really_ simple cases the standard tools will
         | obviously still win.)
         | 
         | I think it's a shame that Ruby never really got popular as a
         | general purpose scripting language, since it has that nice
         | property that it's often as short as Perl while still being
         | readable.
        
         | Grimburger wrote:
         | Classic useless use of cat?
        
           | jacquesm wrote:
           | I don't agree with the whole 'useless use of cat' meme: cat
           | creates an output stream, which in turn allows you to build
           | up the subsequent command bit by bit and allows you to cut
           | and past chunks from useful building blocks you keep in a
           | file.
           | 
           | The first command changes all the time so by using 'cat'
           | those blocks remain reusable, everything will use the piped
           | input that cat sends if there is no preceding program, rather
           | than to have to insert < somefile in the middle of the first
           | command.
        
             | Grimburger wrote:
             | In this particular case why is                   cat
             | /tmp/com.txt | awk '{ print substr($1, 1, length($1) -5) }'
             | | uniq > domains.txt
             | 
             | preferable to:                   awk '{ print substr($1, 1,
             | length($1) -5) }' /tmp/com.txt | uniq > domains.txt
        
             | kevincox wrote:
             | You can do                   <somefile awk ... | ...
             | 
             | The redirect doesn't have to appear "out of order" at the
             | end of the command.
             | 
             | In zsh you can even do just `<somefile` to print it
             | (equivalent to `cat somefile`, very useful for reading
             | files into variables) although in bash that appears to do
             | nothing.
        
             | Grimburger wrote:
             | I'd agree with avoiding the _< somefile_ redirection
             | because it 's sorta annoying to grok in one-liners. But in
             | this case the file would just go after the awk command.
        
             | hddqsb wrote:
             | It's possible to avoid `cat` and still keep the filename
             | separate from the rest of the command by placing the
             | redirection at the start of the command:
             | < /tmp/com.txt awk ...
             | 
             | It might look a little odd, but it's portable.
        
               | monsieurbanana wrote:
               | I don't know about you, but I usually like seeing what's
               | in the file before I spend time writing a awk command on
               | it.                   cat myfile.txt                   #
               | check the file because I'm not even sure that's the
               | correct name         cat myfile.txt | awk blablabla   #
               | no I didn't forget awk syntax, I swear
               | 
               | I would be afraid of any person that after this, goes
               | back and rewrites the beginning of the line to replace
               | cat with a redirection.
               | 
               | Even with "ctrl-a alt-d < alt-f alt-f ctrl-d ctrl-d
               | ctrl-e" that replaces cat with < and removes the pipe,
               | which any emacs user can pull off in it's sleep
        
               | Beltalowda wrote:
               | If you use zsh then just "<myfile.txt" should work too,
               | which opens the file in $PAGER. Doesn't seem to work in
               | bash though, with the default config anyway, but maybe it
               | can be configured.
               | 
               | I don't care if people use "cat" or "<" and the whole
               | "useless use of cat" is stupid >99% of the time, but I've
               | gotten in to the habit of using <file as it's shorter to
               | type ("<file cmd" vs. "cat file | cmd").
        
               | prmoustache wrote:
               | I usually use head or less for that.
               | 
               | Using cat for first look is usually looking for trouble
               | if the file is huge or some binary file.
        
             | cannam wrote:
             | Totally with you there. "Useless use of cat" is usually
             | good practice, not bad.
             | 
             | It's clearer - the structure indicates right at the front
             | what it is going to do, namely read a file and pass it
             | through a pipeline. There is no need to read ahead to find
             | out what the source material is.
             | 
             | It's safer - "cat" is a read-only operation, once you've
             | written that command up-front there is no longer a risk of
             | overwriting the original file with a typo in the rest of
             | the pipeline.
             | 
             | It's simpler to construct and nicely orthogonal to the rest
             | of the pipeline - you can write the "cat" and then season
             | the rest to taste (as you suggested).
             | 
             | I will occasionally remove cat from a very heavily-used
             | loop, but as a default style it's fine.
        
               | yrro wrote:
               | > It's clearer - the structure indicates right at the
               | front what it is going to do, namely read a file and pass
               | it through a pipeline. There is no need to read ahead to
               | find out what the source material is.
               | 
               | I only found this out recently, but this works perfectly
               | fine:
               | 
               | $ < /some/file awk ...
               | 
               | You're not wrong though, where cat improves readability
               | there's no harm in using it.
        
               | pmoriarty wrote:
               | _" It's safer - "cat" is a read-only operation, once
               | you've written that command up-front there is no longer a
               | risk of overwriting the original file with a typo in the
               | rest of the pipeline."_
               | 
               | With zsh you can prevent such accidents by "setopt
               | NO_CLOBBER"
               | 
               | The result is that if you "foo > bar" and "bar" exists,
               | zsh will refuse to overwrite "bar" and give you an error:
               | "zsh: file exists: bar"
               | 
               | This makes constructs such "foo < bar > baz" perfectly
               | safe, because accidentally typing "foo > bar > baz" will
               | error out when "bar" (or "baz") already exists.
               | 
               | (PS: if you want to force zsh to overwrite the file even
               | when NO_CLOBBER is set you can "foo >| bar")
        
               | Beltalowda wrote:
               | > With zsh you can prevent such accidents by "setopt
               | NO_CLOBBER"
               | 
               | Don't even need zsh for this; "set -C" will do the same
               | in any POSIX shell. >| is also in POSIX. csh supports it
               | as well.
        
               | lelanthran wrote:
               | That doesn't help with sed -i and similar things.
               | 
               | Zsh stops redirection errors, it won't help even if cat
               | is in the front.
        
               | pmoriarty wrote:
               | _" That doesn't help with sed -i and similar things."_
               | 
               | Can you give an example? I don't know what you mean.
               | 
               |  _" Zsh stops redirection errors"_
               | 
               | Which is what the post I was answering to was complaining
               | about, wasn't it?
               | 
               |  _" it won't help even if cat is in the front"_
               | 
               | Why not? "cat > foo" will error out if "foo" exists and
               | NO_CLOBBER is set.
        
               | lelanthran wrote:
               | >> "That doesn't help with sed -i and similar things."
               | 
               | > Can you give an example? I don't know what you mean.
               | 
               | Sure. The first line below is dangerous no matter what
               | zsh does to save you from yourself. The second line is
               | safe no matter which shell you are using, and no matter
               | what other commands are in the pipeline:
               | sed $SEDOPTIONS "s/$SEARCHTERM/$REPLACEMENT/g" $FILENAME
               | cat $FILENAME | sed $SEDOPTIONS
               | "s/$SEARCHTERM/$REPLACEMENT/g"
               | 
               | >> "Zsh stops redirection errors"
               | 
               | > Which is what the post I was answering to was
               | complaining about, wasn't it?
               | 
               | That's not how I interpreted _" a typo in the rest of the
               | pipeline."_ Sure, the typo could be a redirection. It
               | could also accidentally set $SEDOPTIONS in the example
               | above to include the '-i' flag.
               | 
               | >> "it won't help even if cat is in the front"
               | 
               | > Why not? "cat > foo" will error out if "foo" exists and
               | NO_CLOBBER is set.
               | 
               | Yes, "cat > foo" will error out, but "cat $FILENAME | sed
               | -i "s/a/b/g" $FILENAME" won't.
        
               | pmoriarty wrote:
               | Yes, in-place editing with tools like sed is dangerous.
               | 
               | But, in your own example you have a useless use of cat:
               | cat $FILENAME | sed $SEDOPTIONS
               | "s/$SEARCHTERM/$REPLACEMENT/g"
               | 
               | could be replaced with:                 sed $SEDOPTIONS
               | "s/$SEARCHTERM/$REPLACEMENT/g" < $FILENAME
        
           | itronitron wrote:
           | my initial reading was that they were adding 'cat' as a
           | prefix to everything...
        
           | SnowHill9902 wrote:
           | You don't always need the shortest pipe.
        
         | dt3ft wrote:
         | This does not use a dictionary, spitting out everything rather
         | than words which exist in said dictionary.
        
       | marketerinland wrote:
       | Making up plausible sounding words for domain names is fairly
       | simple.
       | 
       | A few methods -
       | 
       | - Take a common surname suffix and add a new prefix to it - Make
       | up something that sounds vaguely Japanese, Scandinavian, Spanish
       | etc and you pretty much always find something available - Take a
       | word that already exists and change (or add) one or two letters
       | 
       | Admittedly the results of the above can border on the ludicrous
       | but the idea is to come up with enough names to eliminate those.
        
       | kloch wrote:
       | Engineers are terrible at picking product names. Some of the
       | company/product names (picked by marketing folks) I disliked the
       | most at first turned out to be the most "brandable" and
       | successful.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-06-08 23:01 UTC)