24 ms·

"I stole something from someone, but I benefitted so all is good!" Could you elaborate please? Who do you mean stole anything from anyone?

IncRnd 6y ago
The comment literally devoted a paragraph to that.
- madsbuch 6y ago
  He does not explain the link the parent comment, no. But one could guess that he thinks of domains as private ownership and something you can steal. However, that view on domain is very problematic, as you have to renew it which indicates a right to use under specific terms, even for .com domains. The terms are just different for different domains, which is not too controversial. Private ownership becomes more and more challenged these years. The original comment is set in Denmark. I am also Danish, and I can verify that we have another view on ownership than what you experience in the US.
  - IncRnd 6y ago
    Yet, the poster did devote a paragraph to the topic. That different people draw the line of theft at different places is immaterial to the actual discussion existing in the comment.
    - madsbuch 6y ago
      He did not. It might be subtle, but the paragraph your refer to explains his view on the people in question, not the link between domains and stealing.
  - pistolpeteDK 6y ago
    "But one could guess that he thinks of domains as private ownership and something you can steal." - I think you're right, also about the view on ownership. I'd argue that, since there's a limited amount of useful - domain-wise - words in the English dictionary, the number of available domains are bound to run dry faster if domainparking is not discouraged somehow. One might argue that the new TLD's are merely a 'bandaid' on a systemic problem with domains not being released properly, when no longer in proper use.
mdpopescu 6y ago
Someone else had the right to use a domain. They had paid for that right. You appealed to some people with guns, they decided to use the threat of force to revoke that right, and you benefitted. What exactly is difficult to understand here?
- disgruntledphd2 6y ago
  > You appealed to some people with guns Actually, the whole set of up all laws derives from people with guns. Like, if there was no government, then we probably wouldn't have the internet, so domain names couldn't be taken away. Like, are you saying that rights of property are more fundemental than government? That seems like an odd argument, given that rights to property would seem to derive from government, at least in the modern world.
  - mdpopescu 6y ago
    > ... rights to property would seem to derive from government... Yeah, this is the fundamental disconnect I have with (apparently) most people. Rights come from God. The idea that they come from governments is, in the words of a famous person, "not even wrong". Anyway, this was an informative exchange. I learned that I'm in a minority, at least in this corner of the world :)
    - krapp 6y ago
      >Yeah, this is the fundamental disconnect I have with (apparently) most people. Rights come from God. Please objectively prove the existence of the specific God from which you assert that all rights derive.
      - mdpopescu 6y ago
        This [1] is by far the best answer I have ever seen to that question / request. Since it is quite long, I will attempt to summarize: that is what I start from. I am more certain of the existence of God than I am of my own existence - the first one is an axiom, the second one is a theorem ("I think, therefore I am"). "The answer is that a reasonable person is a person who believes what Augustine believes and who, like Augustine, can only hear assertions contrary to that belief as absurd." I genuinely see opinions different from mine as absurd. As in, "you cannot possibly believe this, which means you are lying" absurd. It's why I generally dismiss the common saying "do not attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence". NOBODY is that incompetent, and therefore whatever I disagree with is in fact malice. I realize it's a minority opinion. I am fine with that situation, though I continue to be surprised when people disagree :) [1] https://www.firstthings.com/article/1996/02/001-why-we-cant-all-just-get-along https://www.firstthings.com/article/1996/02/001-why-we-cant-...

IncRnd 6y ago

The comment literally devoted a paragraph to that.

madsbuch 6y ago
He does not explain the link the parent comment, no. But one could guess that he thinks of domains as private ownership and something you can steal. However, that view on domain is very problematic, as you have to renew it which indicates a right to use under specific terms, even for .com domains. The terms are just different for different domains, which is not too controversial. Private ownership becomes more and more challenged these years. The original comment is set in Denmark. I am also Danish, and I can verify that we have another view on ownership than what you experience in the US.
- IncRnd 6y ago
  Yet, the poster did devote a paragraph to the topic. That different people draw the line of theft at different places is immaterial to the actual discussion existing in the comment.
  - madsbuch 6y ago
    He did not. It might be subtle, but the paragraph your refer to explains his view on the people in question, not the link between domains and stealing.
- pistolpeteDK 6y ago
  "But one could guess that he thinks of domains as private ownership and something you can steal." - I think you're right, also about the view on ownership. I'd argue that, since there's a limited amount of useful - domain-wise - words in the English dictionary, the number of available domains are bound to run dry faster if domainparking is not discouraged somehow. One might argue that the new TLD's are merely a 'bandaid' on a systemic problem with domains not being released properly, when no longer in proper use.

mdpopescu 6y ago

Someone else had the right to use a domain. They had paid for that right. You appealed to some people with guns, they decided to use the threat of force to revoke that right, and you benefitted. What exactly is difficult to understand here?

disgruntledphd2 6y ago
> You appealed to some people with guns Actually, the whole set of up all laws derives from people with guns. Like, if there was no government, then we probably wouldn't have the internet, so domain names couldn't be taken away. Like, are you saying that rights of property are more fundemental than government? That seems like an odd argument, given that rights to property would seem to derive from government, at least in the modern world.
- mdpopescu 6y ago
  > ... rights to property would seem to derive from government... Yeah, this is the fundamental disconnect I have with (apparently) most people. Rights come from God. The idea that they come from governments is, in the words of a famous person, "not even wrong". Anyway, this was an informative exchange. I learned that I'm in a minority, at least in this corner of the world :)
  - krapp 6y ago
    >Yeah, this is the fundamental disconnect I have with (apparently) most people. Rights come from God. Please objectively prove the existence of the specific God from which you assert that all rights derive.
    - mdpopescu 6y ago
      This [1] is by far the best answer I have ever seen to that question / request. Since it is quite long, I will attempt to summarize: that is what I start from. I am more certain of the existence of God than I am of my own existence - the first one is an axiom, the second one is a theorem ("I think, therefore I am"). "The answer is that a reasonable person is a person who believes what Augustine believes and who, like Augustine, can only hear assertions contrary to that belief as absurd." I genuinely see opinions different from mine as absurd. As in, "you cannot possibly believe this, which means you are lying" absurd. It's why I generally dismiss the common saying "do not attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence". NOBODY is that incompetent, and therefore whatever I disagree with is in fact malice. I realize it's a minority opinion. I am fine with that situation, though I continue to be surprised when people disagree :) [1] https://www.firstthings.com/article/1996/02/001-why-we-cant-all-just-get-along https://www.firstthings.com/article/1996/02/001-why-we-cant-...