Re: Reform TLDs, tax email, stop spam - TCP-IP

This is a discussion on Re: Reform TLDs, tax email, stop spam - TCP-IP ; Diginomics wrote: [long, preposterous proposal, of which I'm only choosing to respond to a handful of minor points; this shouldn't be construed as implying that I agree with any of the other stuff in it] > It introduces the rule ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Re: Reform TLDs, tax email, stop spam

  1. Re: Reform TLDs, tax email, stop spam

    Diginomics wrote:

    [long, preposterous proposal, of which I'm only choosing to respond to a
    handful of minor points; this shouldn't be construed as implying that I
    agree with any of the other stuff in it]

    > It introduces the rule "dot 3 of anything but dot 3 in all cases".


    ....and you mention abolishing country code domains in furtherance of
    this (there's no way the sovereign countries presently in control of
    their ccTLD would ever in a million years approve that), but seem to
    forget that there are also some ICANN-approved TLDs of more than three
    letters, such as .info and .name; there would be some pretty big
    lawsuits from the registries and registrants there if a crackpotted
    proposal like yours took them away. I, for one, would be willing to
    join a class action to ensure my .info and .name domains aren't confiscated.

    > Microsoft's DOS operating system operated with 3 letter file
    > extensions,


    ....an idea swiped from CP/M, though other operating systems like that of
    the DEC-10 mainframes had it even earlier (it's very rare for Microsoft
    to ever come up with an independent idea of their own, good or bad), but
    eliminated in newer operating systems which permit longer extensions.

    > the abolition of 2 letter TLDs. However these compensation payments
    > would not be for any country specific TLDs but for loss of income or
    > asset value for a non-country and non-sex TLD such as .TV


    ..TV is actually country-specific, to Tuvalu, though it's presently being
    abused by people who think it means "Television".

    > Without TLD reform we are needlessly running the risk of exposing our
    > children to content well beyond their legal age permits.


    In what country? Standards of what material is legal for children, and
    what age they must be to access "adult" material, varies by place and time.

    > The concerned parent would only have to maintain an up-to-date list of
    > FOUR categories under this elemental proposal.
    >
    > 1. Children only (Under 18 years of age only).
    > 2. Children (or education).
    > 3. Adult (or general business)
    > 4. Adult only (Over 18 only).


    And who is to be the judge of what material belongs in each category?

    > Ideally exposed breasts would not
    > be allowed in the regular .COM business category and all respective
    > TLDs in the adult category.


    ....or on the Super Bowl?

    > phasing out all non 3 letter TLDs (such as .es or co.uk)


    ..co.uk is a second-level domain, not a TLD. .uk is the TLD it is
    contained within, alongside .org.uk, .gov.uk, and others. There seem to
    be a lot of people in the mistaken impression that ".co.uk" is a single
    domain label and is the "country code for the UK", when actually it's
    merely the second-level domain under which commercial sites in the UK
    are intended to register third-level domains.

    --
    == Dan ==
    Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/
    Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/
    Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/

  2. Re: Reform TLDs, tax email, stop spam

    >> It introduces the rule "dot 3 of anything but dot 3 in all cases".
    >
    >...and you mention abolishing country code domains in furtherance of
    >this (there's no way the sovereign countries presently in control of
    >


    What about arpa?


    >> Microsoft's DOS operating system operated with 3 letter file
    >> extensions,

    >
    >...an idea swiped from CP/M, though other operating systems like that of
    >the DEC-10 mainframes had it even earlier (it's very rare for Microsoft
    >to ever come up with an independent idea of their own, good or bad), but
    >eliminated in newer operating systems which permit longer extensions.


    If memory serves, Gary Kildall who wrote CP/M didn't
    have access to a DEC 10 ,he had access to a PDP-11
    running RT-11 whihc might explani why it and CP/M look
    similar.

    RT-11 -> CP/M -> MSDOS.

    --
    Usenet special: on cases of any filters for BMW: http://u.bmwz.org
    http://www.mbz.org | Mailing lists: http://lists.mbz.org
    633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | Orkut:RS79 Classifieds: http://ads.mbz.org
    2 X 280SE | Watches list: http://watches.list.mbz.org

  3. Re: Reform TLDs, tax email, stop spam

    In article , Richard Sexton
    wrote:

    > >> Microsoft's DOS operating system operated with 3 letter file
    > >> extensions,

    > >
    > >...an idea swiped from CP/M, though other operating systems like that of
    > >the DEC-10 mainframes had it even earlier (it's very rare for Microsoft
    > >to ever come up with an independent idea of their own, good or bad), but
    > >eliminated in newer operating systems which permit longer extensions.

    >
    > If memory serves, Gary Kildall who wrote CP/M didn't
    > have access to a DEC 10 ,he had access to a PDP-11
    > running RT-11 whihc might explani why it and CP/M look
    > similar.
    >
    > RT-11 -> CP/M -> MSDOS.


    In about 1984 I remember reading in a DEC magazine about the guy who'd
    just moved from managing the release of RT-11 v4 to managing the DEC
    Rainbow team. He described CP/M 86 in nostalgic terms as "just like
    RT-11 v1 but without all the utilities".

    Sam

  4. Re: Reform TLDs, tax email, stop spam

    On Fri, 23 Apr 2004, Richard Sexton wrote:
    > If memory serves, Gary Kildall who wrote CP/M didn't
    > have access to a DEC 10 ,he had access to a PDP-11
    > running RT-11 whihc might explani why it and CP/M look
    > similar.
    >
    > RT-11 -> CP/M -> MSDOS.


    Indeed, but there was certainly a lot of cross-pollenation between DEC's
    operating systems in the good old days before DEC became Digital.

    The 36-bit PDP-6 (predecessor to the PDP-10, a.k.a. "DEC-10") operating
    system used 6 character file names and 3 character extensions in 1964.
    Using SIXBIT ASCII (shifting 0x20 - 0x5f to 0x00 - 0x3f), a filename was
    one word and an extension was a halfword. The other half of the word
    holding the extension had a pointer to the equivalent of the inode.

    Even after some PDP-10 operating systems (Tenex and TOPS-20) broke free of
    this 6.3 model to use ASCII filenames, it was still conventional to use 3
    character extensions to indicate file types.

    I don't know what the early 18-bit systems (PDP-1/4/7/9) used. That was
    before my time. I'm pretty sure the PDP-15 used 6.3 as well.

    The 12-bit PDP-8 used 6.2, which made more sense on a 12-bit machine.

    There's no reason, other than inheritance from other systems, that the
    16-bit PDP-11 used 3 character extensions. 2 or 4 would have made more
    sense. At least (AFAIK) they used 8.3 instead of 6.3.

    Ditto CP/M and MSDOS. It was just old habit to use 3 character
    extensions, even though the reason (a word or halfword of 18-bits) had
    long ceased to be the case.

    -- Mark --

    http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
    Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

  5. Re: Reform TLDs, tax email, stop spam

    In article <230420041554359636%Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk>,
    Sam Wilson wrote:
    >> If memory serves, Gary Kildall who wrote CP/M didn't
    >> have access to a DEC 10 ,he had access to a PDP-11
    >> running RT-11 whihc might explani why it and CP/M look
    >> similar.
    >>
    >> RT-11 -> CP/M -> MSDOS.

    >
    >In about 1984 I remember reading in a DEC magazine about the guy who'd
    >just moved from managing the release of RT-11 v4 to managing the DEC
    >Rainbow team. He described CP/M 86 in nostalgic terms as "just like
    >RT-11 v1 but without all the utilities".


    Hah! That's about right. But, the software for CP/M was easier to use;
    the RT11 stuff was pretty miserable. Fortunatly I only had to use
    it for about a year; after that we used RSX-11M, which was pretty
    nice. The first thing I did on RSX was beta test Dave Conroys
    C compiler. Dave and I worked at the same place.

    I'm still beta testing it although these days that compiler
    is now called "gcc". I realy miss the PDP-11 instruction set.

    --
    Usenet special: on cases of any filters for BMW: http://u.bmwz.org
    http://www.mbz.org | Mailing lists: http://lists.mbz.org
    633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | Orkut:RS79 Classifieds: http://ads.mbz.org
    2 X 280SE | Watches list: http://watches.list.mbz.org

  6. Re: Reform TLDs, tax email, stop spam

    Mark Crispin wrote:

    (snip)

    > There's no reason, other than inheritance from other systems, that the
    > 16-bit PDP-11 used 3 character extensions. 2 or 4 would have made more
    > sense. At least (AFAIK) they used 8.3 instead of 6.3.


    Well, except that they came up with a code called RAD50 with
    40 different characters that would store three in 16 bits.
    40 is enough for letters, digits, three special characters,
    and blank for less than three character extensions.

    I don't know which came first, though. They may have just been lucky.

    > Ditto CP/M and MSDOS. It was just old habit to use 3 character
    > extensions, even though the reason (a word or halfword of 18-bits) had
    > long ceased to be the case.


    Consider that CMS uses eight character extensions, probably from
    about the same time frame. It is a little more expressive, but
    if it indicates a file type it may just be more than necessary.

    ..FOR indicates Fortran files about as well as .FORTRAN

    -- glen


  7. Re: Reform TLDs, tax email, stop spam

    On 2004-04-23, Richard Sexton wrote:
    >
    > RT-11 -> CP/M -> MSDOS.


    ObNitPick: between CP/M and MSDOS there's a copycat link called QDOS.
    IE there was no direct connection, but there was a programmer doing
    unholy things to a CP/M manual, the produce of which wound up serving
    as base for MSDOS 1.0.


    --
    j p d (at) d s b (dot) t u d e l f t (dot) n l .

  8. Re: Reform TLDs, tax email, stop spam

    In article <1082790509.423200@ente.ipberlin.com>,
    jpd wrote:
    >On 2004-04-23, Richard Sexton wrote:
    >>
    >> RT-11 -> CP/M -> MSDOS.

    >
    >ObNitPick: between CP/M and MSDOS there's a copycat link called QDOS.
    >IE there was no direct connection, but there was a programmer doing
    >unholy things to a CP/M manual, the produce of which wound up serving
    >as base for MSDOS 1.0.


    That sounds about right. IIRC Seattle Computer Works were the
    first bright sparks to say "hey we should write a version
    of that for the IBM PC" and cloned CP/M and sold it as QDOS;
    and if it were not for bad move by Kildall MSDOS would have
    been based on CP/M-86 insetad of QDOS. Not that it would
    have made much different mind you.

    The point is they all look and feel the same, thatwas just
    how things were then if if you think that sucks try using
    pucnhed cards or worse, paper tape... there are worse things
    than that, too, by a longshot but I feel old enough just
    saying "paper tape".

    We call this period in time "the dark and evil days";
    it truly was the dark ages in computing.

    --
    Usenet special: on cases of any filters for BMW: http://u.bmwz.org
    http://www.mbz.org | Mailing lists: http://lists.mbz.org
    633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | Orkut:RS79 Classifieds: http://ads.mbz.org
    2 X 280SE | Watches list: http://watches.list.mbz.org

+ Reply to Thread