M
mole
Guest
DOTCOM was a quirk in internet history. An easily recognised way in for first time internet users. That happened in 1995, when getting a friggin dial-up connection to the internet was such a pain, and the speed.... ahhhhh.. ., let alone the friggin address. I remember when jpgs rendered line by line, literally. It took 2 mins for just one pic to render fully, seriously.
Today, I am on 1.5mbps broadband, and jpgs render instantanteously. And search engines, picks sites irregardless of extension. And Microsoft IE address bar, no longer recognises .com as the "default" extension.
Today, I am in a world where my country domain is mentioned 70% of the time on local media as a landing point.
Today, I am in a world where business leaders scorn the past, if only for their own survival.
Today, I am in a world that somehow embraces change, reluctantly but willingly, because people can understand that change is always for the better.
Today, I live by the month and accept I will lose my job in that same period (no more bludy life-long employment like the Japanese had post 1980), because if I don't, I become lazy to what I must do to survive in this world. Which is to predict and succesfully navigate the next turn ahead of competition.
Today, I spit at this artifical dotcom euphoria, at companies like DoubleClick.com, who retrenched many close friends in my industry. Thousand upon thousands learnt the dotcom lesson.
Today, I will continue to observe and learn. I will continue to see the pre 2000 values (imagined) of dotcom inventories shrink from 100% to 10%, then 5%, then 2%, then free, of original dotcom hype era.
Today and tomorrow, I will continue to hear the tired mantra that dotcom is king. I understand that human beings are clustered psychologically into different belief systems. On the one scale, the traditionalist, on the other extreme, the modernist. It is built into our makeup of how we see life through our upbringing. And it is pointless, to type opinions to those whose paradigms are programmed to reject opposing points like water off a duck's back.
To defend a sinking island like Tuvalu, people resort to contorted and magnified statements like :-
Oh, the American's should give us billions to build an elevated wall all around our island since they are primarily responsible for global warming (source: CNN)
To defend a sinking inventory like dotcom, people resort to contorted and magnified statements like :-
I earn good money from my .com sites because of all the natural type-ins they bring. Sure, show us the books and show us the trends from 1998 onwards. It is too easy to lie on sites like this.
Just remember this, for those who have bothered to read thus far - The future, is without evidence. Nor researchable. If it was, we would all be rich.
To all those dotcom advocates naturally stuck to their seats with melting toffee - I agree, to disagree. *wink* since its no sweat off my back whatever you think. Simply put so it is clear, I have alway worked off a next turn anticipation model (speculator, if you will), and you have always worked off a show-me-the-money model.
Evidentially, dotcom is not what it was. The question remains, will the rationalisation of gTLD choices succeed, post 17 year old dotcom? My guess, is YES. Obviously, you need scientific evidence for my IMHO. I will give none. So.... I guess you win.
Today, I am on 1.5mbps broadband, and jpgs render instantanteously. And search engines, picks sites irregardless of extension. And Microsoft IE address bar, no longer recognises .com as the "default" extension.
Today, I am in a world where my country domain is mentioned 70% of the time on local media as a landing point.
Today, I am in a world where business leaders scorn the past, if only for their own survival.
Today, I am in a world that somehow embraces change, reluctantly but willingly, because people can understand that change is always for the better.
Today, I live by the month and accept I will lose my job in that same period (no more bludy life-long employment like the Japanese had post 1980), because if I don't, I become lazy to what I must do to survive in this world. Which is to predict and succesfully navigate the next turn ahead of competition.
Today, I spit at this artifical dotcom euphoria, at companies like DoubleClick.com, who retrenched many close friends in my industry. Thousand upon thousands learnt the dotcom lesson.
Today, I will continue to observe and learn. I will continue to see the pre 2000 values (imagined) of dotcom inventories shrink from 100% to 10%, then 5%, then 2%, then free, of original dotcom hype era.
Today and tomorrow, I will continue to hear the tired mantra that dotcom is king. I understand that human beings are clustered psychologically into different belief systems. On the one scale, the traditionalist, on the other extreme, the modernist. It is built into our makeup of how we see life through our upbringing. And it is pointless, to type opinions to those whose paradigms are programmed to reject opposing points like water off a duck's back.
To defend a sinking island like Tuvalu, people resort to contorted and magnified statements like :-
Oh, the American's should give us billions to build an elevated wall all around our island since they are primarily responsible for global warming (source: CNN)
To defend a sinking inventory like dotcom, people resort to contorted and magnified statements like :-
I earn good money from my .com sites because of all the natural type-ins they bring. Sure, show us the books and show us the trends from 1998 onwards. It is too easy to lie on sites like this.
Just remember this, for those who have bothered to read thus far - The future, is without evidence. Nor researchable. If it was, we would all be rich.
To all those dotcom advocates naturally stuck to their seats with melting toffee - I agree, to disagree. *wink* since its no sweat off my back whatever you think. Simply put so it is clear, I have alway worked off a next turn anticipation model (speculator, if you will), and you have always worked off a show-me-the-money model.
Evidentially, dotcom is not what it was. The question remains, will the rationalisation of gTLD choices succeed, post 17 year old dotcom? My guess, is YES. Obviously, you need scientific evidence for my IMHO. I will give none. So.... I guess you win.
