Move along now, ‘sun’ (sic) adults are speaking.
We have a chance, albeit a “radical” one in a “far out way.” Just read the PATRIOT and its successors and you’ll start to understand the gravity of our current situation.
Subdomains are simply a naming convention.
Say again?
A website without the “www” is the same domain. Whether you can assess it with/without the www depends upon how the server is setup and to a lesser extent on your browser.
WWW is just a convention that allows the user to easily identify a given host as a web server. It’s absolutely no difference, from the computer’s point of view, than having XYZ or 123 as the host name.
aahala, it’s certainly possible for a lookup on the domain (yahoo.com) to resolve to a different address than a host on that network (www.yahoo.com) so it’s not fair to say that yahoo.com is short for www.yahoo.com.
Bill H., I find it’s interesting that you mention CIDR as something that alleviates the IPv4 shortage and them shrug off any gains IPv6 will have in routing. A larger address space may very well bring about the need for fewer networks (less subnetting) and therefore make routing tables less complex. I would classify simpler routing tables as making “routing easier.” It also ends the need for NAT, as no user would be assigned simply one address. This too makes routing, in total, easier.
bugg wrote
Technically, that is true. But…
You’re describing two advantages: fewer routing table entries, and removal of NAT devices.
Fewer routing table entries: Where this really comes into play is inside the NAPs. At even large edge areas, they don’t deal with very massive amounts of routes. But even inside the NAPs, with their massive routing tables, the current system works fine today. But even if that was a problem, let’s face it: if we implemented IPv6 this weekend, within a few months, the size of the address space would likely double, just as when they increase the size of a freeway, more people fill it up. Every Palm, Phone and Toaster would have an address. So, very quickly the advantage of smaller routing tables would actually reverse to larger routing tables.
NAT devices: It’s true that one of the big reasons for the invention and deployment of NAT was the lack of space. But it’s not the only reason, and any more not even the main reason. The big reason any more is security. NAT is a cheap, easy firewall. And the fact that most addresses behind a NAT device don’t need a publicly accessible address makes giving them one a bad idea from a security perspective. So, even after IPv6 is put in place, most NAT devices will remain where they are.
www.menwholooklikekennyrogers.com
Is a long name 
One can reasonably assume that this same thing was said somewhere by someone at the dawn of IPv4 technology. 
Just wait until all our blenders can update their firmware to support that new serrated blade type and need their own IP addresses to do it.