Even though you can circumvent technical barriers, this PROTECT IP is a bad idea. It would bring more trouble than benefits.

This idea of PROTECT IP is really bad. As Vixie said, it will bring more trouble than solutions. And in the end, it won't solve anything.

.com, .net, .org are managed by US companies. So, no matter where you have the DNSs

And you need to pay 185 kUSD and a long and expensive approval process. I think the big difference is that not anyone can register a gTLD in the same way that you register a .com or .whatever. Also, new rules apply to the registries, so if you are doing "bad" stuff ICANN can remove your registry and bye bye.

Well, double NAT is here and some pain with it ...

In "Programming Collective Intelligence" there are other examples if someone is interested.

http://oreilly.com/catalog/9780596529321

Another step to the new Internet (what ever that is)

Another reason to stay away from clicking anything inside Facebook. Once I though they were amazing, now sadly I can see that as many other companies it is just money, no matter how.

I believe people here know better, but that should be the advice to anyone who uses Facebook.

I would never had imagined that Batman had so many different batmobiles. I do not want to imagine the amount of different gadgets that he has used.

honestly not many, but:

they have to do it sooner or later, the sooner the better.

it would be an example to other people here deploying their websites (may be this is to late to little but some people really would follow their example)

because it is the right think to do.

because contrary to css vs tables, ipv6 is not backward compatible with ipv4.

and because i could add their website to my experiment, but that it is more in my benefit than in theirs =).