When I saw this, I added the Horizon.com domain name to my DomainTools Whois monitor and kept an eye on it to see if any Whois changes …
Source: domainers mag
Horizon Dairy Upgrades to Horizon.com
Sunday, 31 July 2016
Horizon Dairy Upgrades to Horizon.com
Horizon Dairy Upgrades to Horizon.com
Apple Sells Its Billionth iPhone and Buys Its Billionth iPhone Name License From Cisco (World’s Most EXPENSIVE Name Ever!)
The post Apple Sells Its Billionth iPhone and Buys Its Billionth iPhone Name License From Cisco (World’s Most EXPENSIVE Name Ever!) appeared first on iGoldRush Domain News and Resources.
Source: domainers mag
Apple Sells Its Billionth iPhone and Buys Its Billionth iPhone Name License From Cisco (World’s Most EXPENSIVE Name Ever!)
Father Domainicus : The Evil Church of dot .Web
Greetings and salutations, my beloved brothers and sisters in domaining; this is Father Domainicus, on a rather hot and humid Sunday afternoon. Many a domain investor asked me recently, Father Domainicus, what is the future of the Domain Church? A rather profound question. At first, this appears to be a question of anxiety over the […]
Copyright DomainGang
Source: domainers mag
Father Domainicus : The Evil Church of dot .Web
Apple Sells Its Billionth iPhone and Buys Its Billionth iPhone Name License From Cisco (World’s Most EXPENSIVE Name Ever!)
The post Apple Sells Its Billionth iPhone and Buys Its Billionth iPhone Name License From Cisco (World’s Most EXPENSIVE Name Ever!) appeared first on iGoldRush Domain News and Resources.
Source: domainers mag
Apple Sells Its Billionth iPhone and Buys Its Billionth iPhone Name License From Cisco (World’s Most EXPENSIVE Name Ever!)
Obama’s Surrenders Control of the Internet
The key to the control America has over the Internet is through the management of the Domain Name System (DNS) and the giant servers that service …
Source: domainers mag
Obama’s Surrenders Control of the Internet
Casi 100 nuevos gTLD en los últimos 2 meses
The post Casi 100 nuevos gTLD en los últimos 2 meses appeared first on iGoldRush Domain News and Resources.
Source: domainers mag
Casi 100 nuevos gTLD en los últimos 2 meses
Link this slide not changing the domain name
hi again. i migrated the site from one domain to another one and use a script to change every instance of the old domain to the new one. except the …
Source: domainers mag
Link this slide not changing the domain name
Thoughts About Verisign’s $135 Million Dollar .Web Acquisition & What It Means For Domainers
The post Thoughts About Verisign’s $135 Million Dollar .Web Acquisition & What It Means For Domainers appeared first on TheDomains.com.
The post Thoughts About Verisign’s $135 Million Dollar .Web Acquisition & What It Means For Domainers appeared first on iGoldRush Domain News and Resources.
Source: domainers mag
Thoughts About Verisign’s $135 Million Dollar .Web Acquisition & What It Means For Domainers
Thoughts About Verisign’s $135 Million Dollar .Web Acquisition & What It Means For Domainers
Donuts offered just $70 Million for all of Rightside’s (NAME) strings which at … For domain investors who participate in auction for domain names its …
Source: domainers mag
Thoughts About Verisign’s $135 Million Dollar .Web Acquisition & What It Means For Domainers
Acknowledgments
This report is made possible by the Pew Charitable Trusts. This report is a collaborative effort based on the input and analysis of the following individuals. Find related reports online at pewresearch.org/science
Primary research team
Lee Rainie, Director, Internet, Science, Technology Research
Alan Cooperman, Director, Religion Research
Cary Funk, Associate Director, Research
Greg Smith, Associate Director, Research
Brian Kennedy, Research Associate
Elizabeth Sciupac, Research Associate
Meg Hefferon, Research Assistant
Monica Anderson, Research Associate
Collaborating research team
Claudia Deane, Vice President, Research
Courtney Kennedy, Director, Survey Research
Kyley McGeeney, Research Methodologist
Andrew Mercer, Research Methodologist
Nick Hatley, Research Assistant
Editorial and graphic design
Sandra Stencel, Associate Director of Editorial
Michael Lipka, Senior Editor
Aleksandra Sandstrom, Copy Editor
Margaret Porteus, Information Graphics Designer
Communications and web publishing
Dana Page, Senior Communications Manager
Shannon Greenwood, Associate Digital Producer
Outside advisers
A number of outside experts helped guide the research in this report. We received valuable advice from Nick Allum, professor of sociology, University of Essex; E. Christian Brugger, professor of moral theology, St. John Vianney Theological Seminary; Anne M. Dijkstra, assistant professor of science communication, University of Twente; Kevin T. FitzGerald, chair in Catholic Health Care Ethics, Georgetown University Medical Center; Patrick Sturgis, professor of research methodology, University of Southampton. We also benefited from conversations with James Hughes, executive director of the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies during the development of the project. While the design and analysis of the project was guided by our consultations with these advisers, the Pew Research Center is solely responsible for the design, interpretation and reporting of the data.
Source: http://www.pewresearch.org/feed/
Acknowledgments
Methodology
Data in this report are drawn primarily from the March wave of the panel, conducted March 2-28, 2016, among 4,726 respondents (4,243 by web and 483 by mail). The margin of sampling error for the full sample of 4,726 respondents from the March wave is plus or minus 2.2 percentage points.
Members of the American Trends Panel were recruited from two large, national landline and cellphone random-digit dial (RDD) surveys conducted in English and Spanish. At the end of each survey, respondents were invited to join the panel. The first group of panelists were recruited from the 2014 Political Polarization and Typology Survey, conducted Jan. 23 to March 16, 2014. Of the 10,013 adults interviewed, 9,809 were invited to take part in the panel and a total of 5,338 agreed to participate.15 The second group of panelists were recruited from the 2015 Survey on Government, conducted Aug. 27 to Oct. 4, 2015. Of the 6,004 adults interviewed, all were invited to join the panel, and 2,976 agreed to participate.16
The ATP data were weighted in a multistep process that begins with a base weight incorporating the respondents’ original survey selection probability and the fact that in 2014 some panelists were subsampled for invitation to the panel. Next, an adjustment was made for the fact that the propensity to join the panel and remain an active panelist varied across different groups in the sample. The final step in the weighting uses an iterative technique that matches gender, age, education, race, Hispanic origin and region to parameters from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2014 American Community Survey. Population density is weighted to match the 2010 U.S. Decennial Census.
Telephone service is weighted to estimates of telephone coverage for 2016 that were projected from the January-June 2015 National Health Interview Survey. Volunteerism is weighted to match the 2013 Current Population Survey Volunteer Supplement. Internet access is adjusted using a measure from the 2015 Survey on Government. Frequency of internet use is weighted to an estimate of daily internet use projected to 2016 from the 2013 Current Population Survey Computer and Internet Use Supplement. It also adjusts for party affiliation using an average of the three most recent Pew Research Center general public telephone surveys. Sampling errors and statistical tests of significance take into account the effect of weighting. Interviews are conducted in both English and Spanish, but the Hispanic sample in the American Trends Panel is predominantly native born and English speaking.
The margins of error tables show the unweighted sample sizes and the error attributable to sampling that would be expected at the 95% level of confidence for different groups in the survey. Sample sizes and sampling errors for other subgroups are available upon request.
In addition to sampling error, one should bear in mind that question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of opinion polls.
The web component of the March wave had a response rate of 68% (4,243 responses among 6,267 web-based individuals in the panel); the mail component had a response rate of 68% (483 responses among 710 non-web individuals in the panel). Taking account of the combined, weighted response rate for the recruitment surveys (10.0%) and attrition from panel members who were removed at their request or for inactivity, the cumulative response rate for the March ATP wave is 3%.17
Additional survey data
Some data in this report are also drawn from the April wave of the same panel, conducted April 5-May 2, 2016 among 4,685 respondents (4,207 by web and 478 by mail). The margin of sampling error for the full sample of 4,685 respondents from the April wave is plus or minus 2.2 percentage points. Sample sizes and sampling errors for subgroups in this wave are available upon request.
The web component of the April wave had a response rate of 83% (4,207 responses among 5,091 web-based individuals in the panel); the mail component had a response rate of 77% (478 responses among 625 non-web individuals in the panel). Taking account of the combined, weighted response rate for the recruitment surveys (10.0%) and attrition from panel members who were removed at their request or for inactivity, the cumulative response rate for the April ATP wave is 3%.18
Questionnaire development and testing
Pew Research Center developed the questionnaire for this study. The design of the questionnaire was informed by the results of six focus groups and additional pretests with a non-probability sample, as well as input from Pew Research Center staff and six external advisers on the project.
Focus groups. Pew Research Center conducted a series of six focus groups around the country from Jan. 19-Feb. 4, 2016, designed to gain insight into Americans’ reasoning about the possibility of human enhancements. The groups focused on longer versions of the three scenarios that were presented in the national adult survey: gene editing to reduce disease risk, brain chip implants to improve cognitive abilities and synthetic blood substitutes to improve physical abilities. This is not an exhaustive list of potential human enhancements. The focus group discussions focused on the kinds of moral and practical considerations people bring to bear in thinking about these issues. The focus group moderators asked participants to consider the potential use of these enhancements for healthy people, not those who are sick or in need. See “American Voices on Ways Human Enhancement Could Shape Our Future” for further details on the focus groups. [LINK TK]
Pilot testing questions. Pew Research Center conducted 17 online, nonprobability surveys to test question wording options for the questionnaire. These pilot tests were also used to test the information presented about each of the three types of human enhancement. The pilot tests were completed from January through February, 2016. Each survey had an average of 100 respondents, ages 18 and older, and was conducted entirely online. Each individual pilot test covered a single type human enhancement (e.g., gene editing) and covered only a short set of about 10 questions.
Outside advisers. Pew Research Center also consulted with a number of expert advisers, listed in the acknowledgements section above, to inform the development of the questionnaire, including the scenarios or vignettes describing each type of human enhancement. We are grateful to this group for their input, but Pew Research Center bears full responsibility for the questionnaire design and analysis.
Religious commitment index
Survey respondents were classified into high, medium and low levels of religious commitment based on three indicators: frequency of religious service attendance, self-reported importance of religion in their lives and frequency of prayer. Those who attend worship services at least weekly, pray at least once a day and say religion is very important in their lives are classified as high in religious commitment. Those low in commitment say religion is not too or not at all important in their lives, that they seldom or never attend worship services and seldom or never pray. All others are classified as exhibiting a medium level of religious commitment.
- When data collection for the 2014 Political Polarization and Typology Survey began, non-internet users were subsampled at a rate of 25%, but a decision was made shortly thereafter to invite all non-internet users to join. In total, 83% of non-internet users were invited to join the panel. ↩
- Respondents to the 2014 Political Polarization and Typology Survey who indicated that they are internet users but refused to provide an email address were initially permitted to participate in the American Trends Panel by mail, but were no longer permitted to join the panel after Feb. 6, 2014. Internet users from the 2015 Survey on Government who refused to provide an email address were not permitted to join the panel. ↩
- Approximately once per year, panelists who have not participated in multiple consecutive waves are removed from the panel. These cases are counted in the denominator of cumulative response rates. ↩
- Approximately once per year, panelists who have not participated in multiple consecutive waves are removed from the panel. These cases are counted in the denominator of cumulative response rates. ↩
Source: http://www.pewresearch.org/feed/
Methodology
TRA holds talks on Bahrain domain name
TRA director of technical and operations, Engineer Mohammed Alnoaimi, said: “Developing the framework to enable Bahrain’s domain name to be …
Source: domainers mag
TRA holds talks on Bahrain domain name
Methodology
Data in this report are drawn primarily from the March wave of the panel, conducted March 2-28, 2016, among 4,726 respondents (4,243 by web and 483 by mail). The margin of sampling error for the full sample of 4,726 respondents from the March wave is plus or minus 2.2 percentage points.
Members of the American Trends Panel were recruited from two large, national landline and cellphone random-digit dial (RDD) surveys conducted in English and Spanish. At the end of each survey, respondents were invited to join the panel. The first group of panelists were recruited from the 2014 Political Polarization and Typology Survey, conducted Jan. 23 to March 16, 2014. Of the 10,013 adults interviewed, 9,809 were invited to take part in the panel and a total of 5,338 agreed to participate.15 The second group of panelists were recruited from the 2015 Survey on Government, conducted Aug. 27 to Oct. 4, 2015. Of the 6,004 adults interviewed, all were invited to join the panel, and 2,976 agreed to participate.16
The ATP data were weighted in a multistep process that begins with a base weight incorporating the respondents’ original survey selection probability and the fact that in 2014 some panelists were subsampled for invitation to the panel. Next, an adjustment was made for the fact that the propensity to join the panel and remain an active panelist varied across different groups in the sample. The final step in the weighting uses an iterative technique that matches gender, age, education, race, Hispanic origin and region to parameters from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2014 American Community Survey. Population density is weighted to match the 2010 U.S. Decennial Census.
Telephone service is weighted to estimates of telephone coverage for 2016 that were projected from the January-June 2015 National Health Interview Survey. Volunteerism is weighted to match the 2013 Current Population Survey Volunteer Supplement. Internet access is adjusted using a measure from the 2015 Survey on Government. Frequency of internet use is weighted to an estimate of daily internet use projected to 2016 from the 2013 Current Population Survey Computer and Internet Use Supplement. It also adjusts for party affiliation using an average of the three most recent Pew Research Center general public telephone surveys. Sampling errors and statistical tests of significance take into account the effect of weighting. Interviews are conducted in both English and Spanish, but the Hispanic sample in the American Trends Panel is predominantly native born and English speaking.
The margins of error tables show the unweighted sample sizes and the error attributable to sampling that would be expected at the 95% level of confidence for different groups in the survey. Sample sizes and sampling errors for other subgroups are available upon request.
In addition to sampling error, one should bear in mind that question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of opinion polls.
The web component of the March wave had a response rate of 68% (4,243 responses among 6,267 web-based individuals in the panel); the mail component had a response rate of 68% (483 responses among 710 non-web individuals in the panel). Taking account of the combined, weighted response rate for the recruitment surveys (10.0%) and attrition from panel members who were removed at their request or for inactivity, the cumulative response rate for the March ATP wave is 3%.17
Additional survey data
Some data in this report are also drawn from the April wave of the same panel, conducted April 5-May 2, 2016 among 4,685 respondents (4,207 by web and 478 by mail). The margin of sampling error for the full sample of 4,685 respondents from the April wave is plus or minus 2.2 percentage points. Sample sizes and sampling errors for subgroups in this wave are available upon request.
The web component of the April wave had a response rate of 83% (4,207 responses among 5,091 web-based individuals in the panel); the mail component had a response rate of 77% (478 responses among 625 non-web individuals in the panel). Taking account of the combined, weighted response rate for the recruitment surveys (10.0%) and attrition from panel members who were removed at their request or for inactivity, the cumulative response rate for the April ATP wave is 3%.18
Questionnaire development and testing
Pew Research Center developed the questionnaire for this study. The design of the questionnaire was informed by the results of six focus groups and additional pretests with a non-probability sample, as well as input from Pew Research Center staff and six external advisers on the project.
Focus groups. Pew Research Center conducted a series of six focus groups around the country from Jan. 19-Feb. 4, 2016, designed to gain insight into Americans’ reasoning about the possibility of human enhancements. The groups focused on longer versions of the three scenarios that were presented in the national adult survey: gene editing to reduce disease risk, brain chip implants to improve cognitive abilities and synthetic blood substitutes to improve physical abilities. This is not an exhaustive list of potential human enhancements. The focus group discussions focused on the kinds of moral and practical considerations people bring to bear in thinking about these issues. The focus group moderators asked participants to consider the potential use of these enhancements for healthy people, not those who are sick or in need. See “American Voices on Ways Human Enhancement Could Shape Our Future” for further details on the focus groups. [LINK TK]
Pilot testing questions. Pew Research Center conducted 17 online, nonprobability surveys to test question wording options for the questionnaire. These pilot tests were also used to test the information presented about each of the three types of human enhancement. The pilot tests were completed from January through February, 2016. Each survey had an average of 100 respondents, ages 18 and older, and was conducted entirely online. Each individual pilot test covered a single type human enhancement (e.g., gene editing) and covered only a short set of about 10 questions.
Outside advisers. Pew Research Center also consulted with a number of expert advisers, listed in the acknowledgements section above, to inform the development of the questionnaire, including the scenarios or vignettes describing each type of human enhancement. We are grateful to this group for their input, but Pew Research Center bears full responsibility for the questionnaire design and analysis.
Religious commitment index
Survey respondents were classified into high, medium and low levels of religious commitment based on three indicators: frequency of religious service attendance, self-reported importance of religion in their lives and frequency of prayer. Those who attend worship services at least weekly, pray at least once a day and say religion is very important in their lives are classified as high in religious commitment. Those low in commitment say religion is not too or not at all important in their lives, that they seldom or never attend worship services and seldom or never pray. All others are classified as exhibiting a medium level of religious commitment.
- When data collection for the 2014 Political Polarization and Typology Survey began, non-internet users were subsampled at a rate of 25%, but a decision was made shortly thereafter to invite all non-internet users to join. In total, 83% of non-internet users were invited to join the panel. ↩
- Respondents to the 2014 Political Polarization and Typology Survey who indicated that they are internet users but refused to provide an email address were initially permitted to participate in the American Trends Panel by mail, but were no longer permitted to join the panel after Feb. 6, 2014. Internet users from the 2015 Survey on Government who refused to provide an email address were not permitted to join the panel. ↩
- Approximately once per year, panelists who have not participated in multiple consecutive waves are removed from the panel. These cases are counted in the denominator of cumulative response rates. ↩
- Approximately once per year, panelists who have not participated in multiple consecutive waves are removed from the panel. These cases are counted in the denominator of cumulative response rates. ↩
Source: http://www.pewresearch.org/feed/
Methodology
How Namepros Became The Wholesale Platform for BrandBucket
About a year ago a new sales trend started on Namepros. The largest forum in the industry became the wholesale trading platform for BrandBucket.
Without discussing it in the BrandBucket experience thread on Namepros, a couple of members Brand Pluck and Crocodile Dundee started a new kind of auction. They were auctioning off brandable domain names that had been accepted by BrandBucket.
These names were not published yet, that would imply that the $10 listing fee was paid, the logo fee set and the domain live on the BrandBucket website.
So around July 10, 2015 the first auctions went up, (I want to make clear I went back 900 pages of old sales threads, if someone else did this first, I did not find you, so no disrespect intended.)
auctionBrandBucket Accepted Name – BonusStack.com (priced at $1,795)
Around July 20, 2015 came the first mentions of this new selling strategy.
After this a few others took notice, and some others were reporting these threads as a violation of BrandBucket’s TOS.
The auctions saved a step for prospective BrandBucket sellers, they don’t need to worry about being rejected, the name is already approved.
I messaged Michael Krell and he said these auctions were allowed. See in order to participate in the auction and win you must have a BrandBucket account. The name is not only pushed at the registrar but pushed at BrandBucket as well. So BrandBucket keeps their marriage to the name for at least 30 days.
Now there are two kinds of BrandBucket auctions, accepted and published. If it’s accepted you do not have to list it with BrandBucket. You can leave it in your BrandBucket account under things you need to do, like pay $10, change nameservers and set the logo pricing. Technically you can tell the seller to tell BB to delete the name from pending and you never have to deal with BB.
Now if you purchase a domain that’s published, the name will have to be on BrandBucket for 30 days.
You can request the name to be removed right away if you like, that starts the 30 day countdown. BrandBucket gets a 30 day window to make a sale and earn a commission.
Like anything else in domaining, when many see the success of a few everyone jumps into the pool. In July of 2015 a lot of accepted names were finding prices in the $50 to $100 range. Not every name however, some did sell for $25.
July 2015 was a big month for sellers and BrandBucket alike, the voting system was discontinued, Go Daddy .99 coupon codes had dried up, BrandBucket reached 15,000 names.
So the cost of doing business went up and some sellers were just looking for wholesale profits. The dream of turning .99 into $1,500 went out the window. Now it was about turning a $1 or $2 into $50 to $100.
Namepros has experienced quite a few BB related auctions over the last year. Some over the last year have sold their whole portfolio in one auction. I purchased one such portfolio of 28 names. The portfolio I purchased was published.
One thing to remember is that once the fee is paid it’s paid. So you can give 30 days notice, go try to sell somewhere else and come back to BrandBucket later down the road. Michael Krell confirmed that to me in a private message on Namepros.
Lately the new game has been wait for a .com deal on NetFirms,Dotster,Domain.com reg a bunch of domains and submit to BrandBucket. This has made some newer domain investors set their sites low and post BB accepted names with a buy it now of $10 to $12.
The market has been flooded so much that there are a plethora of names up for grabs. The better names can still fetch better pricing, I have sold some of the 28 portfolio buy individually, Reason ? I never wanted them, I like to find bulk buys, sell off what I never wanted and keep the names I wanted.
I think of it as “name arbitrage”, the seller was never going to sell individually so most buyers pass putting out $800 to $1,500. They will however pay $80 to $150 for a name they really want, if the bulk buy results in a price per domain of $20 to $50 you can make a profit. While keeping the names you wanted from the portfolio.
To be fair some names don’t get that much more than the bulk buy breakdown, but the key is to make the overall numbers work.
With all the interest in BrandBucket type names, Namepros has opened a Brandable section in their marketplace.
Source: domainers mag
How Namepros Became The Wholesale Platform for BrandBucket
Happy birthday to .online and .tech
Now that “Happy birthday” is public domain, we can sing “Happy birthday” to two jolly good TLDs with birthdays is this month: .online and .tech.
Source: domainers mag
Happy birthday to .online and .tech
Happy birthday to .online and .tech
Now that “Happy birthday” is public domain, we can sing “Happy birthday” to two jolly good TLDs with birthdays is this month: .online and .tech.
Source: domainers mag
Happy birthday to .online and .tech
Chinese domain market sales : Baby boomer market exploding in China
The policy of having one child per family led China to a contraction in population growth. Although it was mandated by political masterminds that often bent the rule for inner party members, the measure was so effective that India is projected to surpass China, eventually. Currently, the measure has been lifted and the baby boomer […]
Copyright DomainGang
Source: domainers mag
Chinese domain market sales : Baby boomer market exploding in China
What do you do with your unwanted domains?
Today: WANTED : LLLL.com ending in (TZ, LC, DK or JR) – No AEIOUV / Domain names with articles a, an, the / ADA.com Sold for $200,000; NZS.com for €26,499 / And more.
Here are the new discussions and domain news that caught my eye today.
Anyone preregistered .shop yet? – How many of you are investing in this new gTLD? Let’s talk about it!
9o21o.com – What do you think this domain is worth?
Where to find how many times something has been searched? – Anyone have some research tips to offer this investor?
Domain names with articles a, an, the – Do you think investing in domains that “a, the, are, an, so, but, is, it, on, etc.” is a good idea knowing that general search algorithms exclude them?
WANTED : LLLL.com ending in (TZ, LC, DK or JR) – No AEIOUV – Be sure to triple check your portfolio. This investor is ready to buy you out.
ADA.com Sold for $200,000; NZS.com for €26,499 – Some recent sales reports to help keep you motivated.
What do you do with your unwanted domains? – Park, drop, give away free, donate, or other? What do you do with them?
Source: domainers mag
What do you do with your unwanted domains?
Saturday, 30 July 2016
Update on Top 10 Sales from a Year Ago: BOP.com, IGL.com, Arabesq.com, More
Not alot of development love to show this week…..
1. QE.com sold for $554,000
No site resolves, and the owner is under privacy protection.
2. 9595.com sold for $180,000
No site resolves, owned by an individual in China.
3. Tie.com sold for $125,000
No site resolves, owned by an individual in China.
4. BOP.com sold for $80,000
No site resolves, owned by an individual in New York who controls other domains such as FLR.com, JFN.com, Hogs.com, and more.
5. Newy.com sold for $66,000
Domain is parked, and still shows in transfer in Whois records.
6. Arabesq.com sold for $34,000
A seller of sweets, “The etymology of the word ‘Arabesq’ refers to an ‘intricate and an ornamental form of art’ and that is exactly what we believe Arabic Sweets are – ornamental and delicate pieces of art made for everyone’s palate. At Arabesq we offer a wide range of delectable assortment of Arabic Sweets that are fresh and made locally in Countries that include – Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, Oman, UAE, Saudi, and Kuwait.”
7. AHS.ca sold for $30,000
A shortener for AlbertaHealthServices.ca, which is where the LLL is currently redirected. “Alberta Health Services (AHS) is Canada’s first and largest provincewide, fully-integrated health system, responsible for delivering health services to the over four million people living in Alberta, as well as to some residents of Saskatchewan, B.C. and the Northwest Territories.“
8. Donna.com sold for $24,000
Domain is parked, and owned by Telepathy.
9. IGL.com sold for $23,000
Even though it’s parked, this is the traffic leader for the week, with its Alexa rank near 5.6 million. Owned by an individual in St. Louis who controls other names such as BEP.com and OCL.com, and who appears to be a fan of new G’s, as the owner of DotCrap.com.
10. Philae.com sold for $22,000
Domain is parked. It’s owned by an individual in France who also controls the Filae.com domain (which is redirected to Genealogie.com), so perhaps they picked up a typo with a future project in mind.
The post Update on Top 10 Sales from a Year Ago: BOP.com, IGL.com, Arabesq.com, More appeared first on Domain Shane and Accidental Domainer.
The post Update on Top 10 Sales from a Year Ago: BOP.com, IGL.com, Arabesq.com, More appeared first on iGoldRush Domain News and Resources.
Source: domainers mag
Update on Top 10 Sales from a Year Ago: BOP.com, IGL.com, Arabesq.com, More
IP of Ancient Conficker C&C Domains Resurface in New Website Hijacking Scheme
Sucuri soon discovered that all these websites had been registered through NameCheap, a domain name registrar, and were using the company’s …
Source: domainers mag
IP of Ancient Conficker C&C Domains Resurface in New Website Hijacking Scheme
Help buy a beer for the original .Web visionary!
In the dark early days of the Internet, a hard-working man came up with the idea that .com should not be the only commercial option. It was 1995, and programmer Christopher “Chris” Ambler, lobbied ICANN and applied for the .Web TLD. According to Ambler: “I was writing a check for $3,000 to Network Solutions for […]
Copyright DomainGang
Source: domainers mag
Help buy a beer for the original .Web visionary!
We’re Live From Domain Startup Summit And You Can Watch It Live!
Watch Domain Startup Summit Live from the comfort of your own home using the following link: www.facebook.com/domainstartupsummit
Source: domainers mag
We’re Live From Domain Startup Summit And You Can Watch It Live!
Donuts Decreases Pricing for .BUSINESS and .COMPANY
The post Donuts Decreases Pricing for .BUSINESS and .COMPANY appeared first on iGoldRush Domain News and Resources.
Source: domainers mag
Donuts Decreases Pricing for .BUSINESS and .COMPANY
EURid Wants You To Nominate Your Favourite .EU Website Today!
The post EURid Wants You To Nominate Your Favourite .EU Website Today! appeared first on iGoldRush Domain News and Resources.
Source: domainers mag
EURid Wants You To Nominate Your Favourite .EU Website Today!
TNT’s Best of the Drop List for 7/30/2016
I hope everyone is have a great start to their weekend! I want to wish a Happy Birthday to my Wife Sabrina! Happy Birthday Baby!
Here is today’s TNTNames.com Best of the Drop List for 7/30/2016. I will not be back-ordering or bidding on any of these domains myself. I have been getting a lot of positive comments about the lists I have been posting. I appreciate all of your kind words! If you have any thoughts/input please leave a comment below! Good Luck!
Source: domainers mag
TNT’s Best of the Drop List for 7/30/2016
The Pirate Bay (TPB), Extra Torrent still best alternatives for KickassTorrents (KAT) as Hollywood …
The latest casualty of mirror being taken down, KAT.am, had its domain name suspended after Motion Picture Association (MPA) filed a complaint to …
Source: domainers mag
The Pirate Bay (TPB), Extra Torrent still best alternatives for KickassTorrents (KAT) as Hollywood …
Morgan’s Flippa Five: Brandable domains for startups
The post Morgan’s Flippa Five: Brandable domains for startups appeared first on iGoldRush Domain News and Resources.
Source: domainers mag
Morgan’s Flippa Five: Brandable domains for startups
How the Clinton “Village” Transformed Internet Paradigms: Together Making a Difference
A quarter century ago, another internet together with an array of applications known collectively as OSI were poised to scale to become the global and U.S. national infrastructures. The specifications had been developed by all the major government agencies together with most of the significant telecom and IT industry players and organizations, and coordinated for years internationally. Billions of dollars had been spent and enormous resources consumed for the development of infrastructure and platforms. OSI domain name regulations were promulgated by the Dept. of Commerce’s, NTIA. X.400 email addresses and associated X.500 Directory systems had been rolled out to government agencies. NIST, DOD, GSA — everyone was involved as were counterparts in other countries. Major companies were slowly implementing the new platforms.
There was also an alternative mirror universe of largely academic institution rebels who were pursuing their own internet. It was based on a DARPA TCP/IP protocol rather than OSI’s CLNP. The rebels used something called DNS rather the X.500 OID based naming system. The email was SMTP/POP rather than X.400. The hypertext navigation used HTML rather than OSI’s GSML. The specifications were developed and code written on university campuses and coordinated through a “non-enties” called the Internet Engineering Task Force and Internet Architecture Board rather than the massive international bodies, the ITU CCITT and OSI JTC1, and domestically the powerful Exchange Carriers Standards Association (now ATIS) and American National Standards Institute (ANSI). The secretariat for managing the ragtag academic internet infrastructure consisted of two people at the Information Sciences Institute in Marina del Ray and a few more up at SRI in Menlo Park running a Network Information Center paid for by DARPA spare change — versus huge, well-funded OSI internet secretariats maintained in Washington and around the world that charged thousands of dollars for a domain name.
The underlying DARPA internet infrastructure was cobbled together worldwide on leased lines for academic science purposes out of National Science Foundation and university IT budgets. Called the NREN, it was a T1 national backbone with the capacity of 1.544 Mb/s — versus the virtually limitless capacity of global and national telecommunications networks for the OSI internet.
In 1992, it was the OSI internet that was poised to inherit the world. In official government and corporate circles, mention of the DARPA TCP/IP internet occurred only in disparaging terms out of public view. It was supposed to disappear. Something happened.
In November 1992, Bill Clinton won the U.S. Presidential election with Al Gore as his VP running mate. A few months later they moved into the White House. Along with them came a small team of people who had helped their getting elected by organizing and communicating for the first time using eMail and network technologies. The new staff as well as Clinton, Gore, and even their family and friends had a substantial knowledge and appreciation of the new networking technologies — together with the vision and leadership to drive major change. It also helped that Gore as Senator had a great affection for scientific research and with equally passionate staff had obtained several billion dollars in the late 80s to fund a national NREN TCP/IP internet infrastructure with extensions to other countries worldwide, with additional money for innovators in academic institutions to devise new applications.
One of the most visible first emissaries of the new Administration’s village as it arrived in Washington was a bespectacled man from Vermont with a raspy voice and a closely cropped white beard who bore an impressive White House business card with the simple title: Director of Special Projects. He was a longtime friend of Hillary Clinton and had volunteered to help set up the networks to get her husband elected. He had unbounded passion, energy, and considerable insistence for the Clinton village. His name was Jock Gill and one of his first calls was to the Sprint corporation offices in Reston that had the government network support contract for the White House. He was referred to Sprint’s newly hired Director of Internet business development who also happened to be VP for International at a new startup organization called the Internet Society.
Jock had a simple and very emphatic request — the White House and the President wanted TCP/IP Internet services including eMail for non-classified communication as soon as possible. Sprint — which also provided the White House X.400 email services — cobbled together an arrangement that piped the emails on a 19.6 kB packet link to Merit at Ann Arbor who ran a gateway to the TCP/IP internet. Jock complained that “a snake with the email in its mouth could make it out of the White House faster.” Sprint quickly provided a then high capacity T1 line directly to an internal network of PCs for Clinton staff. That line then was used for a followup project that Gill conceived and led — a White House website. This was all essentially unknown and radical at the time, but Clinton personally demanded at Cabinet meetings that every government agency also establish a Website, and then at meetings with foreign dignitaries, suggested that they follow suit. He wanted to communicate with them using DNS style eMail, not X.400 addresses. Sprint senior staff was even given White House access to load on the TCP/IP stack software required at the time to make Windows PCs internet functional. Clinton’s gutsy, folksy leadership changed everything, and it was followed up in subsequent years with Hillary Clinton’s It Takes a Village conceptualizations to cement the new paradigm in place.
Jock Gill was the vanguard of a team of new White House staff that marshalled considerable resources of the U.S. government and is allies to make the global TCP/IP internet happen. New staff like Mike Nelson and Tom Kalil were brought into the President’s Office of Science and Technology Policy. Key policymakers at the FCC were given Internet briefings, and people like Commissioner Susan Ness became part of the Internet village. The Internet Society’s first Executive Director was tasked in 1994 to conduct countless early morning audio-visual Internet briefings to foreign officials brought to far flung U.S. missions. On one occasion, the USIA radio “global beam” was used to host an Internet Q&A call-in from around the world. One of the ultimately most important events in the history of the TCP/IP Internet occurred when Bill Gates was convinced to build the protocol stack into the Win95 operating system.
The OSI Internet quietly disappeared in the mid-90s about the same time as the President, Vice President, and their staff hosted a gala Internet luncheon for the many people who came together to make it happen. He knew enough to go around mingling and talking with everyone about the technology and their roles. It was quietly impressive.
A book could be written to describe all the people, activities, and events that went into what is described here; and which by any measure was one of the most fundamental transformations in human communication technology and economic development. There were many people who — as Hillary Clinton likes to note — came to work together. However, it ultimately relied on bringing into power, leadership and a surrounding team with vision, policy innovation, the knowledge, and the skills to make it occur.
* The author is the former Sprint Director of Internet Business Development, and VP for International and the Executive Director of the Internet Society.
Written by Anthony Rutkowski, Principal, Netmagic Associates LLCFollow CircleID on TwitterMore under: Internet Governance, Policy & Regulation
The post How the Clinton “Village” Transformed Internet Paradigms: Together Making a Difference appeared first on iGoldRush Domain News and Resources.
Source: domainers mag
How the Clinton “Village” Transformed Internet Paradigms: Together Making a Difference
Morgan’s Flippa Five: Brandable domains for startups
The post Morgan’s Flippa Five: Brandable domains for startups appeared first on iGoldRush Domain News and Resources.
Source: domainers mag
Morgan’s Flippa Five: Brandable domains for startups
Domain name transfers await guidelines
HÀ NỘI — The transferors and the transferees of domain names, still have to wait for guidelines on tax payments from the Ministry of Finance.
Source: domainers mag
Domain name transfers await guidelines
Search in Pics: NBA players at Google, Pokemon Go gamers & Google koolaid
In this week’s Search In Pictures, here are the latest images culled from the web, showing what people eat at the search engine companies, how they play, who they meet, where they speak, what toys they have and more. Google’s Gary Illyes in scary clown mask Source: Twitter Real Google…
Please visit Search Engine Land for the full article.
Source: search engine land
Search in Pics: NBA players at Google, Pokemon Go gamers & Google koolaid
Search in Pics: NBA players at Google, Pokemon Go gamers & Google koolaid
In this week’s Search In Pictures, here are the latest images culled from the web, showing what people eat at the search engine companies, how they play, who they meet, where they speak, what toys they have and more. Google’s Gary Illyes in scary clown mask Source: Twitter Real Google…
Please visit Search Engine Land for the full article.
Source: search engine land
Search in Pics: NBA players at Google, Pokemon Go gamers & Google koolaid
9 things most people don’t understand about SEO
New to the world of search engine optimization (SEO)? Columnist John Lincoln explains some things you might not know about this online marketing discipline.
The post 9 things most people don’t understand about SEO appeared first on Search Engine Land.
Please visit Search Engine Land for the full article.
Source: search engine land
9 things most people don’t understand about SEO
Friday, 29 July 2016
9 things most people don’t understand about SEO
New to the world of search engine optimization (SEO)? Columnist John Lincoln explains some things you might not know about this online marketing discipline.
The post 9 things most people don’t understand about SEO appeared first on Search Engine Land.
Please visit Search Engine Land for the full article.
Source: search engine land
9 things most people don’t understand about SEO
SearchCap: AdWords reports, CTR data & Google Maps ads
Below is what happened in search today, as reported on Search Engine Land and from other places across the web.
The post SearchCap: AdWords reports, CTR data & Google Maps ads appeared first on Search Engine Land.
Please visit Search Engine Land for the full article.
Source: search engine land
SearchCap: AdWords reports, CTR data & Google Maps ads
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)