Content
@
0 reply
20 recasts
20 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
A reminder on channels - Channels are *not* decentralized yet - Do not squat channel names with the intention to sell them to brands later; this is extractive behavior - When channels are decentralized and incorporated into the protocol later this year (likely onchain!), then you can do what you want! Just like FIDs
0 reply
29 recasts
287 reactions
Brenner
@brenner.eth
What’s your take on incorporating a mechanic like this into channels? I think this provides a solution to the downsides of squatting while generating protocol revenue, and being configurable on an ongoing basis https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gsDO67VVxyhIyz2p8XyHfEKwYWjMgG6_NsFN3jcy5Vs/edit
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Possibly. I'm more in favor of doing the work to remove value from squatters. You can't get 100% but I view squatting as immoral. You're benefitting from someone else's (in this case the protocol's) hard work for personal gain with minimal work or financial risk.
4 replies
1 recast
12 reactions
Brenner
@brenner.eth
I think another piece here could be that channels (and fnames) have an original sale price based on something like Page Rank
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Kate
@wildkate
Land Value Tax ftw
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Tony
@0xt0ny
It's in the same category as patent trolls, trying to extract without doing the work
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
sno
@on
Certainly not fair considering effort and gain, but I wonder whether that should be morally policed.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
