Domain names have gotten more and more difficult to register with companies and individuals hijacking sites before the popularity of their content has been established. For example, a personal domain from one of our staff members was once being sold by one of these hijack organizations for $2500 and the domain for our sister company was purchased for a little over $500. One way to eliminate this problem is to offer more specialized top-level domains.
For those who don't know, top-levels are the suffixes at the end of a domain name, such as .com and .net. ICANN, the organization responsible for moderating the Internet domain, has been taking suggestions for new top-levels over the past few months. As of the closing of the requests, 1930 applications were submitted, including .cloud, .music and .lol. Personally I really like .lol and would consider purchasing one just for laughs.
Not all of the applications have been well-received, however. A panel of officials from 50 countries have given a list of 50 of these applications that they believe to be concerning either globally or regionally. For example, .patagonia has been contested because of being a name of a region and the problems that could come from assigning it to a private company. Also, some intolerant countries, such as Saudi Arabia, have protested the use of .gay because of their collective dislike of the people and the fear it might encourage more gay people to be born, I suppose.
This Government Advisory Committee (GAC) has submitted 242 "early warnings," which equate to concerns over usage. Some of the concerns are of the type mentioned above, while others are over registrations by companies that might end up owning a top-level, such as Google or Microsoft owning .search or amazon owning .book. The applicants have 21 days to respond to the warnings and, if no response or no application withdraw happens, then the GAC can lodge a formal complaint to ICANN in April.
We know that formal complaints do not always equate to canceled top-level domains. At the beginning of 2011,
ICANN approved .xxx, even through massive complaints. My guess is that some of these top-levels will be approved, such as .gay, despite protest, and others, like .book, will not because of Amazon's possibility to register one for every book ever (not really, of course - that would be insane).
We probably have another six months before any of these are available to register, but if you would like to be prepared, you can check out the list
here and the ones that have been marked as warnings here.
Obviously the "Sponsored Stores" aren't exactly opt-in, and they aren't exactly not. Until recently, the Sponsored Stories would only show up for companies you or your friends had liked, but now that isn't exactly the case. When it was, it was easy to justify opt-in status - you friended a person who liked the page voluntarily, you can always remove them from your friends list if you don't like the things they do. In the new world, it is a little harder to justify to the Scandinavian governments.
It is not impossible, however. This is not email where, without it life on the Internet is impossible. This is a free, opt-in social networking site who needs to make money somehow to keep providing their free service to consumers. If you are not happy with the service you are receiving, or you believe the ads are too hard for you to live with, you are always able to opt-out of receiving them by deleting your Facebook account. I hear
Myspace is looking for users again.
In reality, advertising on a social networking site is no different that advertising on any other free site. Why would Facebook's Sponsored Stores be any different than the
SMS Audio and Microsoft Store ads on this site? Is it because the news on Facebook belongs to the user? No, that can't be it because anything that is posted on Facebook becomes the property of Facebook, they merely give you easy access to it. So what if they want to add a little more data in there between the other content?
Everyone is coming to the realization that
Facebook advertising doesn't work, so why not let them burn out this business model while they look for the next one? No, that isn't how it is going to work - instead there will be a lawsuit filed and, once again, we will be forced to follow a suit between one group that doesn't understand technology and one that is trying to stay afloat. Hopefully either the governments will back off and let Facebook try and make money in one of the last ways they know how or Facebook can pull a Google and shut its service down in those countries. It seemed to work for Google, except for those 2 times this month.
What do you think? Should Facebook be forced to stop showing Sponsored Stories because they make some government officials uncomfortable or should they back off and leave things as they are? Let us know in the comments.
It's official - Korean pop sensation Psy has taken the top watched video spot from Justin Bieber this week. We kind of all knew this was coming - when
Gangnam Style hit 800 million views it was clear that it would not be long before it overtook "Baby", which has held the top spot for a very long time. The difference here is that Bieber has had since 2010 to reach the 806 million views he has, while Psy has managed to accomplish the same goal in only five months.
YouTube trends manager, Kevin Allocca, said,
The velocity of popularity for Psy's outlandish video is unprecedented. Each day, 'Gangnam Style' is still being watched between 7 and 10 million times.
Coverage, like ours, in addition to
Psy's official tweet and YouTube's blog post about the topic certainly won't slow down that trend. In fact, ChannelMeter, a video data tracker, believes that not only will Psy own this title for a while to come, he will blow past Bieber like he was standing still. At his current rate, increased by the news of his record breaking week, they believe Gangnam Style will become the virst ever YouTube video to receive 1 billion views.
Yes, the very catchy galloping song will become the first ever 1 billion view video on YouTube. Congratulations, Internet, you win. You have officially unified the world under one song that most of the world cannot understand but a few words of.
Following last week's news that Xbox Live members broke the record of hours logged for a week, with 442 million from November 6th through 13th, some rumors leave the Redmond office this week. If the rumors are true, it would surely put any doubt to rest that
Xbox really is synonymous with entertainment. Word on the street is that there is an Xbox TV coming, that would directly compete with traditional set-top boxes, as well as the Apple TV, Roku, Boxee Box and others. Sources say that it will be a watered-down iteration of the existing Xbox 360 that would be completely designed with a focus to play all types of media using the same frame that Windows 8 operates on. If all goes according to plan, reports are saying we should see the Xbox TV hit stores right before holiday 2013, along with the Xbox 3, or whatever you'd like to call it.
Putting aside if a year from now is too little, too late for Microsoft, moving into this space makes sense. Xbox Live already delivers a ton of content, and now with the addition of Windows 8/Windows Phone 8, your Windows experience is able to be carried from your PC, to your gaming console, to your smartphone. While
SmartGlass may enhance the second-screen experience for movies and TV shows on the 360, it doesn't really replace your existing cable or satellite subscription. Xbox TV could be the thing that allows consumers to finally have their entire digital life revolve around Microsoft manufactured-products.
I'd also like to point out a rather interesting thing we're expecting to see in the next family of Xbox's. It appears that the next-gen Microsoft systems will be "always on," in that the company will be including a chipset that will allow fast startup times, as well as the ability to come out of sleep mode in an instant to allow users to access their TV and other media content as quick as possible.
Microsoft was asked to comment on plans for an Xbox TV or set-top box, to which they replied,
Xbox 360 has found new ways to extend the console lifecycle by introducing controller-free experiences with Kinect and re-inventing the console with a new dashboard and new entertainment content partnerships. We are always thinking about what is next for our platform and how to continue to defy the lifecycle convention.
So now with that question not answered and out of the way, the only question is how much would Microsoft charge for Xbox TV? Google and Apple have both priced their boxes at $99, while Roku and Boxee play around in the $79 to $129 range depending on the day. Because of this, it would be natural for Microsoft to not overprice their product, especially against Apple. All I know for now is that the rumor mill is spinning and if this comes true, I'd love to cut my cord and go the way of Xbox TV, as Xbox Live already lets FiOS, Comcast and U-Verse customers connect to their entertainment without the need for another box in the living room.