Why The Sharing Economy Isn’t • Hacker News Board

Re: Why The Sharing Economy Isn’t

#21

Post by seiji » Sat, Aug 31, 2013, 3:36 PM UTC

tvanantwerp wrote: post #11

Maybe it's because I work for a nonprofit, but this piece seems like speculation and paranoia. Oh, so this group Peers is actually funded by a handful of wealthy patrons? Guess what--all nonprofits make 90%+ of their revenues from the top 10% or less of donors. Some nonprofits only really have ONE donor. That's just how the nonprofit sector works. All of it. By the author's logic, the Red Cross is astroturf. I think…

I think it's a fair point that these companies aren't building a sharing economy.

That's the point. They're directly manipulating gullible people into thinking they're "sharing" and "doing good" when in reality the entire mission is to sign up more people so sites can take their 30% cut of actual work happening (then, if reported properly, taxes take 50% of the 70% paid out to the user, so the user is left with... not much).

Re: Why The Sharing Economy Isn’t

#22

Post by awakeasleep » Sat, Aug 31, 2013, 3:39 PM UTC

wes-exp wrote: post #16

clicks wrote: post #4

That is one interesting piece. I highly encourage reading it all, as well as the articles linked within. I had not been aware of this 'sharing movement', and how this perspective was being force-fed by some SV folks. And now that I've found about it I find this to be very off-putting, I was expecting better from SV. The BI article on TaskRabbit ( http://www.businessinsider.com/confessions-of-a-task-rabbit-... ) I thi…

Be careful about making the flawed assumption that economics is a zero-sum game. That if craigslist earned money, it must somehow be stealing it. Actually, the opposite is true. I think craigslist is so focused on being barebones and profit-free that it actually is doing a disservice to the economy. It took a lot of pressure for Craigslist to add a basic feature, maps integration, and it only did so recently. If crai…

Craigslist is an enormous benefit to people in general. The economy is only valuable in its benefits to people.

If any other business can figure out a way to provide a better value service, they're free to start at any time.

Man, saying craigslist does a disservice to the economy sure rankles. I feel like a similar argument might be that peace does a disservice to the economy, too. And imagine what a lack of disease would do to the healthcare economy.

Re: Why The Sharing Economy Isn’t

#23

Post by potatolicious » Sat, Aug 31, 2013, 4:17 PM UTC

Joeboy wrote: post #7

Is this not a shameless land grab for the term "sharing economy"? I've always associated the term with actual grassroots things like Freecycle, LETS systems etc. Or maybe people have actually started to think AirBnB is part of the "sharing economy" and I just missed it.

It absolutely is. Freecycle, Couchsurfing, etc.

Now you have Uber joining the fray as "ride-sharing". No, these are professionally licensed drivers cruising around town in sleek, jet-black towncars. They are not "ride sharing" any more so than that restaurant is "food sharing" to me.

Re: Why The Sharing Economy Isn’t

#24

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Aug 31, 2013, 4:21 PM UTC

[deleted]

Re: Why The Sharing Economy Isn’t

#25

Post by wes-exp » Sat, Aug 31, 2013, 4:58 PM UTC

awakeasleep wrote: post #22

wes-exp wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Be careful about making the flawed assumption that economics is a zero-sum game. That if craigslist earned money, it must somehow be stealing it. Actually, the opposite is true. I think craigslist is so focused on being barebones and profit-free that it actually is doing a disservice to the economy. It took a lot of pressure for Craigslist to add a basic feature, maps integration, and it only did so recently. If crai…

Craigslist is an enormous benefit to people in general. The economy is only valuable in its benefits to people. If any other business can figure out a way to provide a better value service, they're free to start at any time. Man, saying craigslist does a disservice to the economy sure rankles. I feel like a similar argument might be that peace does a disservice to the economy, too. And imagine what a lack of disease…

Sorry if I was being unclear. I wasn't trying to say craigslist does a disservice to the economy in general; it's clearly beneficial and I don't want to diminish that. Rather, I think that its attitude of being barebones and avoiding profit is doing a disservice, by holding it back from becoming a better, more useful service.

Re: Why The Sharing Economy Isn’t

#26

Post by jiggy2011 » Sat, Aug 31, 2013, 5:42 PM UTC

wes-exp wrote: post #25

awakeasleep wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Craigslist is an enormous benefit to people in general. The economy is only valuable in its benefits to people. If any other business can figure out a way to provide a better value service, they're free to start at any time. Man, saying craigslist does a disservice to the economy sure rankles. I feel like a similar argument might be that peace does a disservice to the economy, too. And imagine what a lack of disease…

Sorry if I was being unclear. I wasn't trying to say craigslist does a disservice to the economy in general; it's clearly beneficial and I don't want to diminish that. Rather, I think that its attitude of being barebones and avoiding profit is doing a disservice, by holding it back from becoming a better, more useful service.

If that was the case , one would expect a for profit craigslist to have dominated by now.

Re: Why The Sharing Economy Isn’t

#27

Post by Natsu » Sat, Aug 31, 2013, 5:55 PM UTC

jiggy2011 wrote: post #26

wes-exp wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry if I was being unclear. I wasn't trying to say craigslist does a disservice to the economy in general; it's clearly beneficial and I don't want to diminish that. Rather, I think that its attitude of being barebones and avoiding profit is doing a disservice, by holding it back from becoming a better, more useful service.

If that was the case , one would expect a for profit craigslist to have dominated by now.

Two-sided marketplaces are notoriously difficult to get going. Craigslist benefits extensively from network effects, and they're good.

You can't beat them by being just a little bit better.

Re: Why The Sharing Economy Isn’t

#28

Post by temphn » Sat, Aug 31, 2013, 8:14 PM UTC

jiggy2011 wrote: post #26

wes-exp wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry if I was being unclear. I wasn't trying to say craigslist does a disservice to the economy in general; it's clearly beneficial and I don't want to diminish that. Rather, I think that its attitude of being barebones and avoiding profit is doing a disservice, by holding it back from becoming a better, more useful service.

If that was the case , one would expect a for profit craigslist to have dominated by now.

They have, just on a category-by-category basis. Many of the sharing economy companies are included.

http://cdixon.org/2012/11/23/some-problems-are-so-hard-they-...

Re: Why The Sharing Economy Isn’t

#29

Post by theorique » Sat, Aug 31, 2013, 8:16 PM UTC

potatolicious wrote: post #23

Joeboy wrote: post #7

Is this not a shameless land grab for the term "sharing economy"? I've always associated the term with actual grassroots things like Freecycle, LETS systems etc. Or maybe people have actually started to think AirBnB is part of the "sharing economy" and I just missed it.

It absolutely is. Freecycle, Couchsurfing, etc. Now you have Uber joining the fray as "ride-sharing". No, these are professionally licensed drivers cruising around town in sleek, jet-black towncars . They are not "ride sharing" any more so than that restaurant is "food sharing" to me.

Does anybody really think of Uber as "ride sharing"? I think of it as "app that calls you a black car cheaper and faster than if you went through a car service".

Some of these like Lyft or RelayRide are truly car sharing - peer to peer facilitating hitchhiking by unlicensed "cab drivers" for tips.

But still, the "economy" part is more in evidence than the "sharing" part. Obviously, people expect to be paid for doing services, even if it's an informal and off-the-books part of their income.

Re: Why The Sharing Economy Isn’t

#30

Post by king_jester » Sat, Aug 31, 2013, 8:19 PM UTC

Joeboy wrote: post #19

king_jester wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Back when I was a teenager, I dreamt up that the women's rights movement was ultimately a ploy by the capitalist class to dilute the value of labor in the market. This is most certainly a dream, because in reality women's rights and feminist movements are in part about getting women actually paid for the labor they perform.

> This is most certainly a dream, because in reality women's rights and feminist movements are in part about getting women actually paid for the labor they perform. The idea that capitalism subverted feminism in the pursuit of cheap labour is shared by some feminists, and isn't necessarily inherently antifeminist.

I've not heard this before, from what I've seen and read feminism has been partly about the exploitation of women's labor, an exploitation that has occurred for a long, long time. That women's labor isn't paid for or is underpaid is a long standing issue.