Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Airbnb Adopts Rules in Effort to Fight Discrimination by Its Hosts

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 403 posts

Re: Airbnb Adopts Rules in Effort to Fight Discrimination by Its Hosts

#361

Post by davidgay »

spaceflunky wrote: post #109
dilap wrote: post #6

I don't know if this is really a tractable problem. At the end of the day, either airbnb lets hosts decide who stays or doesn't. If they don't let hosts decide, they'll likely lose a ton of hosts, since having someone stay in your home is a very personal thing and a huge risk. If they do, then they're going to have significant discrimination problems as long as people are discriminatory, i.e., basically forever.

I did Airbnb for my personal residence for a few years, I was a "Super Host" three years in a row. These policies, while officially new, have been slowly edged in for a while and is the reason why I no longer use Airbnb. Why? 1.) Airbnb is still a new concept to a lot of people. Hosts need to time to work with a guest to make sure they know how the arrangement is suppose to work. Airbnb use to have a 'respond within…

The thing that confuses me about AirBnB "vetting" is that I used VRBO for many years without any sign of vetting required. It was only on my first AirBnB that I had to fill in a "profile", explain why I was a "good" renter, etc.

Why do AirBnB hosts need all this when VRBO hosts did not?

Re: Airbnb Adopts Rules in Effort to Fight Discrimination by Its Hosts

#362

Post by dmichulke »

rayiner wrote: post #285
hackuser wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree with how the question is framed, around whether someone can do these things: People can do all sorts of bad things; they can mentally abuse their children, they can gamble away all their family's assets, cheat their co-workers and customers, they can hate and do many other things to ruin their lives, their family's, their neighbor's, their country's and the world's. People have the right to turn the U.S. i…

I'll put a sharper point on it: People must be governed.[1] People have an enormous capacity to be violent, racist, sexist, small minded, paranoid, greedy, and dishonest, and the whole point of government is to collectively overcome these failings. Obviously government cannot stop discrimination just as it cannot stop murder, theft, etc. But it can dramatically reduce it by imposing the proper social norms. [1] https…

So you're saying that people are really bad, so let's have a few people in positions of power to address that problem?

Re: Airbnb Adopts Rules in Effort to Fight Discrimination by Its Hosts

#364

Post by im4w1l »

tptacek wrote: post #207
Unklejoe wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[If you have personal preferences about whom you conduct business with, you shouldn't be allowed to conduct business with anyone.] Why? If someone chooses to discriminate, why not let them suffer the consequences of lost potential revenue naturally? It gives people who don't discriminate a chance to step in and gain market share. It reminds me of the story of the bakery who wouldn't make a wedding cake for a gay coup…

Because we tried that and it didn't work. It wasn't a single decision that resulted in redlining that forced all the black people in cities to under-served slums. It was an aggregation of millions of personal decisions, many of them by otherwise reasonable people who were simply responding to the very powerful human cognitive bias of loss aversion. So, as a society, we decided to do what can to foreclose on that path…

Are you saying that if black people live in one society and white people live in one society, then the black one will necessarily be hundreds times worse than the white one?

Because that's what it sounds like you are saying.

Re: Airbnb Adopts Rules in Effort to Fight Discrimination by Its Hosts

#365

Post by dmichulke »

URSpider94 wrote: post #321
spaceflunky wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Screening guests =/= racism I, personally, am not arguing that discrimination isn't wrong (though some other threads have clarified the actual legality). I'm just saying that the methods Airbnb has chosen to prevent said discrimination also make it impossible for me to host and those methods are shaky at best.

It may not be racism, but it's certainly discrimination, in the sense that you are selecting who gets to conduct business with you based upon subjective criteria.

Whenever you

- book a flight,

- buy bread or milk, or

- get a girl friend

you discrimate in favor of one and against all others.

Subjective discrimination is the only way to choose, discrimination is the sure consequence of your every choice.

Re: Airbnb Adopts Rules in Effort to Fight Discrimination by Its Hosts

#366

Post by nicolas_t »

stale2002 wrote: post #348
ndarilek wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm blind. Would you not rent this property to me because you fear for my safety therein? Would it make a difference if I've said I've skied, biked solo, rock-climbed? If so, why should I have to do so when others don't, and are trusted to make up their own minds as to whether your property works for them? Do you feel more confident than I am in determining my own limits? Disclosure: I've been denied many opportuniti…

It is not about your safetly alone. It is about his liability. If there is something unsafe in his apartment, and you get hurt, you can sue him. He just doesn't want to get sued.

Exactly, that's why before I accept, I'd call my insurance to make sure that I do not have any legal risks in accepting him. If I accept him and then there's an accident and the insurance tells me that I'm not covered because my apartment doesn't have x safety features then it's a huge issue for me.

Re: Airbnb Adopts Rules in Effort to Fight Discrimination by Its Hosts

#367

Post by MarkMc »

simonsarris wrote: post #106
dilap wrote: post #6

I don't know if this is really a tractable problem. At the end of the day, either airbnb lets hosts decide who stays or doesn't. If they don't let hosts decide, they'll likely lose a ton of hosts, since having someone stay in your home is a very personal thing and a huge risk. If they do, then they're going to have significant discrimination problems as long as people are discriminatory, i.e., basically forever.

I can think of one way AirBNB could attempt to persuade hosts: publish data showing that there is no correlation between any of [race, religion, national origin, disability, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, age] and the likelihood of a guest being a poor guest (ending in an insurance claim, or maybe just a very bad review). If the data shows that there is no correlation, they can prove hosts have no reason t…

> If data does show a correlation, don't hosts have good reason to discriminate, just as insurers do?

Well, they have an incentive to discriminate, but not necessarily a morally good reason. Regarding insurance: Being middle-aged is something we all get a chance at. Being white or female is not.

If a restaurant owner can show that blacks do not tip as well as whites, is it acceptable for him to always seat blacks at the back of the restaurant?

Re: Airbnb Adopts Rules in Effort to Fight Discrimination by Its Hosts

#368

Post by MarkMc »

oh_sigh wrote: post #155
dilap wrote: post #6

I don't know if this is really a tractable problem. At the end of the day, either airbnb lets hosts decide who stays or doesn't. If they don't let hosts decide, they'll likely lose a ton of hosts, since having someone stay in your home is a very personal thing and a huge risk. If they do, then they're going to have significant discrimination problems as long as people are discriminatory, i.e., basically forever.

You could easily deny racists/sexists/whateverists this information by not forwarding the name or pictures of the person trying to book. You get to see all their reviews, but not what they look like.

This comment needs to be higher up. Sure, AirBnB will lose a ton of hosts, but the solution is pretty simple.

Re: Airbnb Adopts Rules in Effort to Fight Discrimination by Its Hosts

#369

Post by aminok »

MarkMc wrote: post #354
aminok wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm okay with threats of government violence against would-be violators of human rights, like slavers and murderers. I'm not okay with using such threats to deter private discrimination in who people interact and do business with. Violence is only an acceptable response in cases when a person initiates a violation of another's person or property.

Why is it only acceptable in those cases? Why not treat 'right to live free of racial discrimination' as a human right?

>Why not treat 'right to live free of racial discrimination' as a human right?

Because I don't have a right to dictate how other people use their person and property, except to prevent them from violating my person or property.

Re: Airbnb Adopts Rules in Effort to Fight Discrimination by Its Hosts

#370

Post by MarkMc »

aminok wrote: post #369
MarkMc wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it only acceptable in those cases? Why not treat 'right to live free of racial discrimination' as a human right?

>Why not treat 'right to live free of racial discrimination' as a human right? Because I don't have a right to dictate how other people use their person and property, except to prevent them from violating my person or property.

It seems you are simply asserting the truth of your position, as though it is axiomatic that property rights trump all other rights.

Person A says, "I don't have a right to dictate how other people use their person and property, except to prevent them from violating my person or property"

Person B says, "I don't have a right to dictate how other people use their person and property, except to prevent them from violating my person or property or my right to be treated equally".

How do I know who is correct?

Post reply on HN