Stop The JerkTech • Hacker News Board

Re: Stop The JerkTech

#31

Post by eevilspock » Fri, Jul 04, 2014, 2:45 AM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #10

bunkat wrote: post #5

Whenever I hear about these I always wonder what the people that found them are thinking. I mean, what type of person would you have to be to decide to try and screw over the restaurant industry (which already has historically low margins) just to make a buck? I can't even imagine how many fake reservations they would need to create to make that idea worthwhile for them. And what investors would give them money to do…

I mentor at startup events, so I know exactly what kind of people they are. The good ones are people who just haven't thought it through. They've found some sort of demand, and they're doing the standard hack-the-system thing that the startup culture trains them to do. Once it's rolling, it's like Mencken said: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it…

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."

Because nearly every internet business gets it's revenue from advertising, a lot of good people jump through hoops to convince themselves that they have not made a deal with the devil. The downvotes[1] come fast when I point out this moral and cognitive dissonance, usually without any counter argument since they just want me to go away.

When I talk to anyone who's livelihood doesn't rely on advertising or marketing, there is near unanimous agreement that advertising is fundamentally manipulative and dishonest.

Besides the social cost of Advertising, there many other costs[2]. The idea that advertising gives us free web content and services is utter bullshit.

-

[1] The cowardly downvotes with no counter argument have already started. Upton Sinclair is the actual source of the quote at the top. A wise man who got a bunch of downvotes in his time.

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7767811

Re: Stop The JerkTech

#32

Post by rahimnathwani » Fri, Jul 04, 2014, 2:47 AM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #22

crapshoot101 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to disagree some here. When people claim starups aren't creating value, I always push back - just because they aren't creating value to you does not mean that they are't creating value to someone else. In this case, people value reservations; its the same thing with concerts or sporting events with scalpers - the price does not reflect market value - that value is being allocated already to people who may n…

Scalpers do not create value. At a concert the value is being created by the performers, and it's not like scalpers create seats or make the show longer. They just shift value around to people with more money.

Scalpers do create value. After a complete scalping transaction:

- the original ticket purchaser is happier with the cash received than with the ticket they had before

- the final ticket purchaser is happier with the ticket than with the cash they paid

- the scalper is happy with his/her profit

- the promoter's/venue's revenue is unaffected

So, three people are better off. Value has been created.

Re: Stop The JerkTech

#33

Post by Andys » Fri, Jul 04, 2014, 2:47 AM UTC

bunkat wrote: post #5

Whenever I hear about these I always wonder what the people that found them are thinking. I mean, what type of person would you have to be to decide to try and screw over the restaurant industry (which already has historically low margins) just to make a buck? I can't even imagine how many fake reservations they would need to create to make that idea worthwhile for them. And what investors would give them money to do…

Maybe the restaurants could enjoy higher margins if they made great websites which let you bid for last-minute reservations?

Re: Stop The JerkTech

#34

Post by neumann » Fri, Jul 04, 2014, 2:49 AM UTC

crapshoot101 wrote: post #19

bunkat wrote: post #5

Whenever I hear about these I always wonder what the people that found them are thinking. I mean, what type of person would you have to be to decide to try and screw over the restaurant industry (which already has historically low margins) just to make a buck? I can't even imagine how many fake reservations they would need to create to make that idea worthwhile for them. And what investors would give them money to do…

I'm going to disagree some here. When people claim starups aren't creating value, I always push back - just because they aren't creating value to you does not mean that they are't creating value to someone else. In this case, people value reservations; its the same thing with concerts or sporting events with scalpers - the price does not reflect market value - that value is being allocated already to people who may n…

> just because they aren't creating value to you does not mean that they are't creating value to someone else.

True, but follow that logic, and replace 'create' with 'revoke/destroy'. These apps are proposing a tiering system that favours people willing to trade money for convenience, and _simultaneously depriving those how aren't willing or can't_. So this pay to use system is scalping limited resources at a cost to others, and profiting middle men piggybacking of existing infrastructure. I think the article made a clear argument for why this is not okay.

The proposal that you can require a credit card for each reservation escalates the situation, because now in order to stop scalpers from operating, the bar for entry is raised. If people are independently abusing the system, then this is the logical way to combat the problem. But if it is a parasitic entity then regulation is sensible way to protect the business and its customers (eg. some who might not have credit cards).

Often when these arguments are raised people argue as back and forth as if economics and law are the only considerations. What about considerations towards decency?

How annoyed would you be if you tried going to a restaurant, saw empty car spaces installed by your local council, but people standing in them holding signs saying "Reserved. Yours for $4". Finally, you arrive at the restaurant but get told that is is full. A guy out the front waves you down, 'psst. I have 10 reservations - want one? $5 bucks.' Not only that, the guy is part of an organization that has done it to all the other restaurants in the area.

Re: Stop The JerkTech

#35

Post by MBlume » Fri, Jul 04, 2014, 2:50 AM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #20

MBlume wrote: post #4

> Thankfully the city of San Francisco is fighting Sweetch and Monkey Parking with cease-and-desist orders. The city of San Francisco should be fighting Sweetch and Monkey Parking by cutting out the middleman and drastically raising their parking fees.

They're doing some of that. But there's a problem with that: plenty of people who live here can't afford a sudden major bump in living expenses. In the long term, correct pricing is part of the solution. But in the short term, it'd be unfortunate to solve the problem by screwing poorer people. And anyway, this could be a temporary spike in demand. Once places like ZipCar and Uber get ahold of self-driving cars, I exp…

Politically impossible, but my blanket response to "how will this affect poor people" arguments is "give them money" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income

Re: Stop The JerkTech

#36

Post by wpietri » Fri, Jul 04, 2014, 2:55 AM UTC

NhanH wrote: post #29

wpietri wrote: post #7

God yes. The whole point of commerce is the creation and exchange of value. The great startups have been great because they create massive amounts of value in the world. Startups like this don't create value. They just shift the value around. In the case of these startups, they shift the value to rich people while pocketing the cash. They are essentially parasitic. Not only is that a dick move, it's dumb for a startu…

Just to be clear: I agree with your point on focusing on creating value. And after I read your comment, I agree that none of the startups in the articles are truly creating that much value. However, is it that simple to qualify when you're creating value? If I had read the article before HN's comments, I'd have thought the startup is cool (admittedly trivial and silly, but we have a lot of those nowadays), rather tha…

Not sure why you were downvoted; I think it's a great question.

I don't think it's that hard if you look at it systemically. If the problem is parking, none of the JerkTech startups are solving the problem, they're just shifting the burden. And they're probably making the problem worse, as now they've created a financial incentive for people to occupy hot parking spaces so they can get paid to leave.

On the other hand, if the problem is "rich people don't have enough time", then there are plenty of ways to solve that. Indeed, Uber basically set out to solve the problem of "rich people don't have enough time and/or feel important enough". Thus the fleet of fancy cars. That created value.

I think solving small problems across a large number of people is fine. Look at entertainment. There are plenty of video games that created value one quarter at a time. Or today, $0.99 per. It's not like it cures cancer, but as long as people end up having fun and are happier, that seems fine to me. However, in my view that excludes operations like Las Vegas and Zynga, which create very little fun and a lot of compulsion, which they then use to extract cash.

I think the hypothesis that rich people generate more value given more time is... unproven. There are plenty of people who are rich because of their cash-extraction skills, not their value-generation skills. Many of them do it in ways that are negative sum. For those people, the best thing you could do for the world is to waste their time.

Re: Stop The JerkTech

#37

Post by bhauer » Fri, Jul 04, 2014, 2:56 AM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #10

bunkat wrote: post #5

Whenever I hear about these I always wonder what the people that found them are thinking. I mean, what type of person would you have to be to decide to try and screw over the restaurant industry (which already has historically low margins) just to make a buck? I can't even imagine how many fake reservations they would need to create to make that idea worthwhile for them. And what investors would give them money to do…

I mentor at startup events, so I know exactly what kind of people they are. The good ones are people who just haven't thought it through. They've found some sort of demand, and they're doing the standard hack-the-system thing that the startup culture trains them to do. Once it's rolling, it's like Mencken said: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it…

> it's like Mencken said: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."

H.L. Mencken?

The Internet appears to ascribe that quote to Upton Sinclair.

Re: Stop The JerkTech

#38

Post by onewaystreet » Fri, Jul 04, 2014, 2:57 AM UTC

bunkat wrote: post #5

Whenever I hear about these I always wonder what the people that found them are thinking. I mean, what type of person would you have to be to decide to try and screw over the restaurant industry (which already has historically low margins) just to make a buck? I can't even imagine how many fake reservations they would need to create to make that idea worthwhile for them. And what investors would give them money to do…

Right now they are taking all of the money for themselves, but in the future, if the service becomes popular, you will likely see them work directly with restaurants and share the revenue. The whole point of this service is to make reservations into something that can be bought. This obviously works best with the cooperation of the restaurants.

Re: Stop The JerkTech

#39

Post by wpietri » Fri, Jul 04, 2014, 2:58 AM UTC

fidotron wrote: post #18

tyoma wrote: post #13

The restaurant issue I'm somewhat conflicted about -- I don't know enough about the business so some of my thoughts maybe impossible for various reasons. If people are willing to buy reservations, why not just charge more for the food until there is no waiting list? Or just charge for reservations (or at least those at preferred times) and keep the money for the restaurant? Whats the inherent reason that reservations…

Right - what I get from the parking stuff is just how undervalued parking actually is, and just how poorly cities deal with it. The restaurant one is dodgy though. I could approve of a system where they've paid the restaurant in order to sell on a reservation (so the restaurant gets something even if there are no takers) but as it stands it's just a con.

Parking isn't undervalued. People just pay in time, not money. Better to say that it's inefficiently priced. Shoup's "The High Cost of Free Parking" is the bible on that: http://www.amazon.com/High-Cost-Parking-Updated-Edition/dp/1...

Re: Stop The JerkTech

#40

Post by ivanca » Fri, Jul 04, 2014, 2:59 AM UTC

aaronwall wrote: post #23

nl wrote: post #17

Just wait someone realizes that it costs less for a driverless, electric car to sit in a traffic jam than a car park.

Then they can have a fleet of them which go into traffic at peak hours & allow people to bid to have them removed from traffic. ;)

"What is your business model?"

"Extortion"

"Well, it is a time-proven way of making money; and you may go to jail, so I can see you are not afraid of risk... like a true entrepreneur!"