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

I get that you don't like it.

That still doesn't make it weird or misleading or "renting". It's straightforward and clear and ownership.

You're correct in that it's not exactly the same as previous models. It's a somewhat new innovation. And isn't it great to try new things?

Perhaps you'd prefer to think of it as more like a transaction tax, which exists in many localities when you sell real estate. E.g. NYC has a 1% transaction tax on sales over $1MM. But here the tax goes to the creator rather than the government.



Sure. Its an interesting new idea. I can see that it might have reasonable use cases, but its not clear to me whether its actually an improvement over other kinds of contracts. It would also have technical problems in the case of key change - if the owner has their keys compromised and needs to transfer the record to a new address, do they pay a fee to the original creator for that? And this happens in perpetuity?




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

Search: