Violated: A traveler’s lost faith, a difficult lesson learned • Hacker News Board

Re: Violated: A traveler’s lost faith, a difficult lesson learned

#341

Post by ajju » Wed, Jul 27, 2011, 10:03 PM UTC

jeffdavis wrote: post #338

ajays wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But an insurance policy would further cut into their revenue stream. A credit card number doesn't help much when you're dealing with anti-social elements (they'll just use a stolen one).

"But an insurance policy would further cut into their revenue stream." If the value of the service is so low, and the risk so high, that it's essentially uninsurable, then perhaps that's a sign that it's a bad business model.

Or, it just means that the insurance industry has not caught up with a new innovation.

Re: Violated: A traveler’s lost faith, a difficult lesson learned

#342

Post by carbonica » Wed, Jul 27, 2011, 10:03 PM UTC

danenania wrote: post #133

carbonica wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There´s no reason for example to leave valuables anywhere in the residence while strangers are there. So you're saying AirBnB should advocate against rentals while you're away? Or are you saying, if you want to rent while you're gone for a week, that you should get a week's worth of self-storage (which I've never heard of, but might exist in a city), move all your important belongings to the self-storage unit, and…

That or drop them with a friend or relative. Why is that so onerous? I think people should use AirBnB however they see fit, but understand the risks in doing so and take whatever precautions are realistic to lessen them. This situation would still suck, but not be nearly as bad/scary/expensive if the victim hadn't left cash, credit cards, expensive electronics, legal documents etc. in the apartment. I'm just recommen…

It's not onerous until you consider that desktop computers and flat-screen TVs are "valuables".

Re: Violated: A traveler’s lost faith, a difficult lesson learned

#343

Post by earino » Wed, Jul 27, 2011, 10:05 PM UTC

mml wrote: post #154

gojomo wrote: post #51

The guests sound like drug addicts. (Maybe meth? Tweakers do bizarre things like move furniture at odd hours or burn fires without opening the flue.) I've been a happy AirBnb guest on a few occasions; the one time I had someone's whole usual studio apartment I found it a bit strange how much of their life was left on display for me – like the host's prescriptions still in the fridge! – but of course respected their p…

Definitely tweakers. I wouldn't use that sink near open flame for a while.

Dude, did you just predict that AirBNB is going to be used for mobile meth labs?

Re: Violated: A traveler’s lost faith, a difficult lesson learned

#344

Post by aedocw » Wed, Jul 27, 2011, 10:30 PM UTC

cookiecaper wrote: post #331

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> given that we are taught from birth to obey authority figures (parents, family, teachers, policemen) /without question/ One of the important aspects I'm trying to maintain with my kids is a right to reply and express their opinion. My eldest's teacher goes against this, she demands "do it first time" whilst I demand a response - he can refuse but he can't ignore a request, if he can reason his way out/in to somethi…

It's important to teach children to obey authority figures. It's also important to teach them critical thinking skills and learn how to detect when a thing is arbitrary. However, instead of teaching the child to disrupt the authority in place, I think it is preferable to teach the children to obey unless there is a moral imperative against doing so. For instance, while your son's teacher may assign him some silly wor…

It's INCREDIBLY important to teach children to obey authority figures WITHIN REASON. If a teacher, cop or fireman is asking your kid to do something that doesn't seem quite right, their first instinct should be to ignore them, and get help from someone they know. The only people a kid should blindly obey is their own parents.

As far as I know, very few people teach their kids that it's OK to question authority (within reason - and yes, respect authority always. If you're in a teachers classroom, you follow their rules.)

Re: Violated: A traveler’s lost faith, a difficult lesson learned

#345

Post by prayag » Wed, Jul 27, 2011, 11:02 PM UTC

AirBnb is not legally liable. They are however morally liable. Every company does legal. It's the moral compass that differentiates a company and their founders.

Re: Violated: A traveler’s lost faith, a difficult lesson learned

#346

Post by pg » Wed, Jul 27, 2011, 11:07 PM UTC

rkalla wrote: post #289

Why was the title of this post changed? It used to have the name "airbnb" in it earlier this morning, around 400 votes.

When submitters rewrite titles of posts we almost always (if we notice) replace them with the original title. We've done that since HN started. Otherwise submitters compete to make attention-getting titles, and you end up with the frontpage of reddit.

Re: Violated: A traveler’s lost faith, a difficult lesson learned

#347

Post by sukuriant » Wed, Jul 27, 2011, 11:09 PM UTC

mcantelon wrote: post #306

dbingham wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I don't think that means what you think it means." That experiment deals with ability to disobey authority, not with the basic goodness of the people performing the actions. Nearly 100% of the people performing the actions questioned what they were doing. That indicates they knew it was wrong, instinctively and didn't wish to do it. But we are well trained to listen to authority, and the authority figure was telling…

I wouldn't call someone that acts against their conscience "good" (unless their survival is at stake).

Depending on what you're thinking the authority can do, "for survival's stake" may very well be exactly what those people in the Milgram Experiment were experiencing. "No, I-I can't, b-but he's in authority, and I'll be in trouble if I don't, so", he cringes, "I must."

Re: Violated: A traveler’s lost faith, a difficult lesson learned

#348

Post by chailatte » Wed, Jul 27, 2011, 11:29 PM UTC

forgotAgain wrote: post #337

zacharypinter wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn't specifically answer your question, but the post does seem to mention that financial compensation from AirBNB was offered: "They have offered to help me recover emotionally and financially, and are working with SFPD to track down these criminals."

TechCrunch is reporting I spoke to Airbnb about EJ’s situation. They won’t reimburse her for damages, they say, and they do not insure against losses. They are helping police track down the person who did this, but their help ends there. http://techcrunch.com/2011/07/27/the-moment-of-truth-for-air...

I love that the entire investment community is gaga over this company.

So they sold a fad product (cereal) at the right time to make a little bit of money. Just tells me they have no moral integrity (which explains the craigslist email spamming).

So they struggled to make rent in SF a while. Who told them to stay in an expensive city with no savings? That's bad financial planning, and they could've bootstrapped their startup in Austin.

Oh, and they made a startup that is illegal in many parts of US, and manage to dupe investors to give them hundreds of millions. Now they won't even give financial help to a girl whose life they help tear to shreds.

Sounds like upstanding company/fellows to me.

Re: Violated: A traveler’s lost faith, a difficult lesson learned

#349

Post by pbhjpbhj » Thu, Jul 28, 2011, 12:25 AM UTC

cookiecaper wrote: post #331

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> given that we are taught from birth to obey authority figures (parents, family, teachers, policemen) /without question/ One of the important aspects I'm trying to maintain with my kids is a right to reply and express their opinion. My eldest's teacher goes against this, she demands "do it first time" whilst I demand a response - he can refuse but he can't ignore a request, if he can reason his way out/in to somethi…

It's important to teach children to obey authority figures. It's also important to teach them critical thinking skills and learn how to detect when a thing is arbitrary. However, instead of teaching the child to disrupt the authority in place, I think it is preferable to teach the children to obey unless there is a moral imperative against doing so. For instance, while your son's teacher may assign him some silly wor…

>I think it is preferable to teach the children to obey unless there is a moral imperative against doing so

// I'm not teaching my kids to be anarchists ;0) But equally well I'm not happy for them to be drones or to accept the word of others without reflection on the truth/moral good/right action.

>while there is no reason to do this work other than the teacher said so

// That's a pretty good reason and one that, within the school framework is hard to argue against. The only sorts of arguments that will work against such reasoning are those arguing for a greater moral good or similar.

>Things go much smoother this way than they do if people are constantly nagging and arguing over things that really have no incident;

Who decides what has no incident. Things that matter to one don't to another.

Let me give an example of the sorts of issues that he currently has to address, they're pretty low level: The school has a policy where the teachers lead a class out at a time from the building to be met by parents/carers. The teacher tells them to put their coats on, but it's often too hot to do so and my lad is there in summer in a jumper and coat (causing a minor harm to himself) because he's being obedient. Weather here is very changeable. His jumper and coat should rightly be in his bag. I say he should tell the teacher "it's too hot to wear my coat, can I put it in my bag please". The teacher is possibly menopausal and may be having difficulty assessing the temperature - should he just put his coat on, or should he make a [albeit small] stand with the possible outcome being the greater comfort of all the class [ie they wear appropriate levels of clothing]?

>disrespect to authority

I don't consider it disrespectful to question someone’s reason or motive in giving an instruction. Indeed if you can't explain why one should carry out your instructions then you need to question them.

I could be wrong but I think the child questioning the reason to put on a coat in hot weather today, if they learn to reason an argument, is better equipped to question those who have authority in more vital questions tomorrow.

If something has no incident then why demand it's fulfilment?

Re: Violated: A traveler’s lost faith, a difficult lesson learned

#350

Post by domador » Thu, Jul 28, 2011, 12:55 AM UTC

wisty wrote: post #65

morganwarstler wrote: post #42

Airbnb should willingly do MORE to verify users than CarFax, Paypal, Facebook, etc. Screw your bizmodel. Run a credit and criminal background check - and charge 4%.

Simple - first time users submit scan of a photo ID, and a picture of themselves. AirBnB checks the ID, and publishes the photo. After booking, the owner can use Skype to see if they match the photo.

Great idea! However, AirBnB should not only post the photo, but also be in charge of verifying over Skype that it matches the person posting it. If it'd be too expensive to verify every single new user, they could just verify them once they make their first booking.

AirBnB should be the one matching photos to real, living individuals since not everyone renting out their home is likely to be as through as a company with a well-established procedure.