@ai @cinerion Holy shit it's a topic I disagree with mist about.

The problem with having land function purely as an investment that is just sitting there is that the land could be someone's house, and for whatever reason it isn't. As an example, there is quite a lot of attractive property in California that is being used solely as an investment by foreigners - they come once a year to kick any squatters out, and then just ignore the house forever. This jacks up housing prices and contributes to the homeless problem in California.

"Squatters rights" aren't just there to protect someone from getting kicked out of land they've functionally made "their house" - it's also designed to limit how bad this problem gets. Land that someone wants to use should be used - holding down a spot and not using it keeps this from happening.

Domain name squatters function in the opposite way as land squatters - they flag down a domain name and then do nothing with it. They're investing in something with absolutely no intent to use it. Which is bad, and which we agree is bad.