- .an was the Netherlands Antilles, now replaced by its constituents .cw, .sx and .bq
- .tp was East Timor, now renamed Timor Leste (.tl)
There are plenty more not listed here though, including .su (Soviet Union) and .yu (Yugoslavia).
Namebase is a marketplace atop of the Handshake protocol. Puma Browser supports it natively, as well as NextDNS. If you really want your own TLD (or even to have your own name as a TLD), Namebase is the way to go (for now).
Maybe I should've added this information to my initial comment, I seem to have angered some folks.
Every single one of them has the exact same problem: the purpose of a domain name system is to agree upon naming. Alternate roots break that model, and any attempt to use them seriously immediately runs into massive interoperability problems (e.g. cannot send/receive email, cannot obtain SSL certificates, etc).
However, I can speak to your last points.
Email sending between addresses utlizing Handshake domains has been demonstrated. I am unable to find any tweets but here's a video explaining how to do it[0]. Concerning security certificates, this is possibly via DANE rather than a centralized authority like LetsEncrypt. There is a tutorial[1] for that as well.
Regarding name collisions, Handshake's purpose isn't to replace legacy DNS, but to build atop it. It is for this reason that the Alexa top sites aren't available for bidding on Namebase. Again, I haven't looked at the amateur projects you've listed but it's possibly Handshake's focus is a key distinction.
--
Which fails to solve the problem of being able to interoperate with normal people on normal email servers.
> Concerning security certificates, this is possibly via DANE
DANE is dead. Nothing supports it, and there are no meaningful plans for that to change. Given that DNSSEC is still often dependent on RSA-1024 for security, it's not clear that DANE would even provide an adequate level of security.
> It is for this reason that the Alexa top sites aren't available for bidding on Namebase.
This is a bizarre assertion, given that Handshake is selling access to what are effectively TLDs, not domain names. A more believable explanation is simply that Handshake was attempting to avoid selling trademarked names associated with companies that would object to this.
"believable explanation" is subjective. I don't work for Namebase and am not involved in Handshake development. I just like the project. (:
We're still in the early days so your complaints may be met with solutions.
Come 2091, people will celebrate the 100th anniversary of the fall of the Soviet Union, and .su will still be alive and kicking.
But I'm sure somebody somewhere is going to be celebrating.
America's hawkish (neo)conservatives continue to celebrate the fall of the Soviet Union. "Presidents Reagan and Bush Sr beat the USSR!" (Maybe that is an oversimplification of the truth, but it sounds good to their ears.) In 2091, there is likely to exist some intellectual successor/descendant to that school of thought, eager to mark that centenary.
What do the Russian Orthodox think? They went from an authoritarian regime which officially opposed the Russian Orthodox Church to a (still rather authoritarian, but arguably somewhat less so) regime which wants to be publicly seen currying favour with it. I'm sure some of them view that as an improvement. If that's what some of them think, why wouldn't they celebrate in 2091?
What about the countries which gained their independence through the downfall of the Soviet Union? I think many people in many of those countries will be celebrating the centenary of their independence.
For sure. https://imgur.com/gallery/L9VNpP4
heh
There are probably a lot of firms that serve many of these countries, and having a single unified presence at foo.su is probably more efficient than registering foo.ru, foo.ua, foo.kz, foo.lv, etc.
1. Sites that were created back then and just stayed (a very low number).
2. Sites of organisations operating in most of the ex-USSR or CIS countries.
3. People who are nostalgic or associate themselves more with the Soviet Union than with any of the states that exist in its territory today.
4. Just-for-fun types of people.
.cs was the first removed TLD as far as I was able to find.
In Soviet Russia, top level authority expires you!
Was the first one funny but then people kept making more which aren't funny?
Why is it a joke to use sentence structure from another language?
Also, OPs post was actually clever, which can't be said of 99% of these things
As for the foreign language part, it's probably meant to lean into stereotypes about Russian English speakers to emphasize the "trashiness" of the joke. You could have an ethical discussion about that.
Because the template can be filled with a wide variety of specific nouns and verbs, it has become a bit of a snowclone[1] or a meme in its own right[2], like the "Xzibit Yo Dawg" meme[3].
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Soviet_Russia
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowclone
> and the inverted Soviet form something menacing or dysfunctional, satirizing life under a communist dictatorship
A proper use of the "In Soviet Russia" meme isn't just reversing the words to make it sound like "Russian"; it' supposed to also suddenly construct a sentence that implies something dystopian. (And ideally, somewhat humorously, usually contextually so.)
I think the right ones are generally only at "sensible chuckle" level — you're not going to die laughing usually. I don't think the one above really fits the template though.
- American guy goes to the dentist and says "do it fast!"
- German guy goes to the dentist and says "do it well!"
- Norwegian guy goes to the dentist and says "does it hurt?"
It is a thing in some cultures. Norwegians poke fun at the Swedes (and ourselves), Englishmen make jokes about the Irish and probably the other way around too.
I hope we can agree that it is OK also in the future. I don't want the world to be too dull.
This is true not only for jokes but for pretty much every good idea. More often these are just a reference to something that is (was) funny, like movie reference or quote.
I don't know why you think this references language structure (see next point).
OP may have been clever (or not), but in my reply I sought to assert the canonical form where you take 'A <verb> B' and write 'In Soviet Russia B <verb> A'.