Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I think this would make the squatting problem that we already have way worse. There would be bots buying every single remotely usable domain, and there would be no incentive for them to sell it unless they get an absurdly large offer.

I bought tombert.com in 2014 and forgot to renew it in 2015, and it was auctioned off by GoDaddy. For like six years, it was owned by squatters, and they wanted thousands of dollars for the domain [1]. I called offering the $100 for it, and they claimed that they can't go below $1400 because this domain is in "extremely high demand". I finally was able to buy it back in 2021, presumably because the squatter purged out domains that hadn't been purchased for N years and they wanted to save money.

Now, you could argue "see! You wouldn't have had to worry about it expiring if it were permanent on the blockchain", and that's true, but if someone else had gotten to that domain first, then I would also never get it. I think the only thing that keeps the internet even remotely fair in this regard is that domain names cost some amount of money to keep.

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20160219161720/http://www.hugedo...



Yes, having some cost disincentivies some abuses that completely free attracts. If email cost a few cents to send there would probably be a lot less spam around


I'm pretty sure that is why Something Awful was successful. Since an account cost $10, and any abuse could lead to a ban, you very quickly filter out spam and people who are solely there to shitpost.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: