4 ms·

I don't quite understand your question, but I'll take a stab at it. When art prints are limited to 1 of 10, does it mean the 11th person is SOL? I'd say yes, u

by _eht 8y ago

I don't quite understand your question, but I'll take a stab at it. When art prints are limited to 1 of 10, does it mean the 11th person is SOL? I'd say yes, unless one of the 10 relinquishes ownership in one way or another.

pritambaral 8y ago
You're only stretching already over-stretched analogies. Art prints are not, by their nature, limited resources, nor do they hold important inherent value. Housing, public transportation, land etc. are better analogies to specific domain names. The ethical ramifications of a person hoarding a specific piece of art and a person reserving and not using seats on public transportation are quite different.
- _eht 8y ago
  You’re really going to compare domains with their near infinite options in both Tld and address characters to a seat on public transportation and affordable housing? I’m just embarrassed for the argument at this point.
  - pritambaral 8y ago
    1. I'm not comparing domain name availability to anything. Rather, I'm pointing out flaws in your analogy, comparing your analogy to other things, and trying to show you a wide spectrum of resource availability. 2. Domain names are not random addresses, they're identity, and thus severely constrained. Yes, if one wanted a random domain name, they have near-infinite options; but not every domain use-case is such. Not even the dominant use-case is such. Squatting on a domain name is an effective way of squatting on the online version of a real-life identity. Compared to trademark squatting, domain name squatting is trivial. Needless to say, both practices are extortionary.
    - _eht 8y ago
      I want to continue this conversation because it is actually of interest to me, and you seem equally as passionate. Let's find some common ground first. I get really annoyed when I am domain hunting for a service/app idea and the domain is not in use, has never been (from what I can tell) and has a huge 'BUY THIS DOMAIN' banner waving about. So then it's up to me to determine how badly I want it, and if I want to participate in the ecosystem that is domain name resale. I think we can agree on that. I don't, however feel like I'm entitled to it just because I may have a better use case for the domain. At risk of being too analogous, I'll take the example x.com. I would love to own x.com and I believe my business 'X Industries' would greatly benefit from having it, and a room full of people could probably agree that my use case would be better than what the domain has served for most of it's life (a 200HTTP status and an 'x'). What is the solution? Is stricter domain regulation the key? And if so, how do we backstep that to the creation of DNS and domain registration? On top of that, who enforces it? The US, or some other neutral entity? I think you know where I'm going here. I guess rather than saying collecting/squatting/holding is bad, and people are entitled to domains they can put to use, what do you imagine in the perfect domain market? You also mention 'online version of a real-life identity'. Do you imagine this extends to account handles on Twitter, Instagram, et al? If I own username.com, and someone else owns @username, is that similarly an issue?

by _eht 8y ago

pritambaral 8y ago

You're only stretching already over-stretched analogies. Art prints are not, by their nature, limited resources, nor do they hold important inherent value. Housing, public transportation, land etc. are better analogies to specific domain names. The ethical ramifications of a person hoarding a specific piece of art and a person reserving and not using seats on public transportation are quite different.

_eht 8y ago
You’re really going to compare domains with their near infinite options in both Tld and address characters to a seat on public transportation and affordable housing? I’m just embarrassed for the argument at this point.
- pritambaral 8y ago
  1. I'm not comparing domain name availability to anything. Rather, I'm pointing out flaws in your analogy, comparing your analogy to other things, and trying to show you a wide spectrum of resource availability. 2. Domain names are not random addresses, they're identity, and thus severely constrained. Yes, if one wanted a random domain name, they have near-infinite options; but not every domain use-case is such. Not even the dominant use-case is such. Squatting on a domain name is an effective way of squatting on the online version of a real-life identity. Compared to trademark squatting, domain name squatting is trivial. Needless to say, both practices are extortionary.
  - _eht 8y ago
    I want to continue this conversation because it is actually of interest to me, and you seem equally as passionate. Let's find some common ground first. I get really annoyed when I am domain hunting for a service/app idea and the domain is not in use, has never been (from what I can tell) and has a huge 'BUY THIS DOMAIN' banner waving about. So then it's up to me to determine how badly I want it, and if I want to participate in the ecosystem that is domain name resale. I think we can agree on that. I don't, however feel like I'm entitled to it just because I may have a better use case for the domain. At risk of being too analogous, I'll take the example x.com. I would love to own x.com and I believe my business 'X Industries' would greatly benefit from having it, and a room full of people could probably agree that my use case would be better than what the domain has served for most of it's life (a 200HTTP status and an 'x'). What is the solution? Is stricter domain regulation the key? And if so, how do we backstep that to the creation of DNS and domain registration? On top of that, who enforces it? The US, or some other neutral entity? I think you know where I'm going here. I guess rather than saying collecting/squatting/holding is bad, and people are entitled to domains they can put to use, what do you imagine in the perfect domain market? You also mention 'online version of a real-life identity'. Do you imagine this extends to account handles on Twitter, Instagram, et al? If I own username.com, and someone else owns @username, is that similarly an issue?