Subject: Airbnb (2011) • Hacker News Board

Re: Subject: Airbnb (2011)

#41

Post by ddoran » Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 2:11 PM UTC

jMyles wrote: post #26

abcdcba wrote: post #9

I wish AirBnB took more responsibility for the damage they are doing to the NYC housing market

Well, we don't all agree that the changes are tantamount to "damage", first of all. For my part, having lived much of my adult life in New Paltz, AirBnb has greatly increased the availability of NYC housing for me, as I typically only live in NYC for 3-10 days at a time. I can understand that, if your desire is to live there perpetually for years, you might have a different perception. Perhaps living in a single plac…

> I typically only live in NYC for 3-10 days at a time

That's not living somewhere. That's visiting.

Re: Subject: Airbnb (2011)

#42

Post by ur-whale » Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 2:16 PM UTC

lexs wrote: post #11

zimablue wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's some truth that these guys dodge/ignore/lobby down regulations, but there's this narrative now that that's all they do. Being able to flag a taxi through an app is amazing, so is being able to rent a flat from a stranger with confidence that it will be give and work out. Regulation arbitrage is only a fraction of their value, and the regulations are often just rent seeking by those with power. Insane…

At least in Europe there were apps to call a taxi and sites to book vacation homes before either Uber or AirBnB came over. But sure ruthlessly minimising personnel responsibilities and costs can be another "value".

You quite clearly never lived in Europe.

Taxi apps before Uber were either non-existent (still are for most places) or unusable.

Re: Subject: Airbnb (2011)

#43

Post by jermaustin1 » Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 2:17 PM UTC

pjc50 wrote: post #24

MrEfficiency wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is your proposal?

In Edinburgh there's a similar discussion, and the proposals I think have value: 1) Tourist tax on all hotel rooms, including AirBnB. Initially a fairly small amount. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jun/27/edinburgh-le... 2) For whole-unit owner-not-present lets, require planning permission for change of use. You wouldn't be allowed to run a woodworking business in your apartment that inflicted noise on your…

What annoys me about tourists in Edinburgh, is that everyone wants to pile into Old Town, even though it is so small.

No one contemplates Leith or Newington. Neither of those places are beyond a short walk (1-2 miles) to city center, also there are more options for food and drink (especially on Leith Walk).

Re: Subject: Airbnb (2011)

#44

Post by otterley » Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 2:17 PM UTC

vasilipupkin wrote: post #40

collyw wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you explain the difference to me, as I am clearly in the minority in thinking that the two are synonymous.

sure. My town has a paid beach with lifeguard and a free beach without. It is illegal to swim on the free beach. It is not a crime. Worst case that happens is they kick you off the beach.

Lawyer here! Crime is the general term, and describes any offense against the people or the sovereign. Offenses are divided into severities, ranging from felony (worst) to infraction (least), with penalties to suit.

In this case, swimming on the free beach is probably an infraction, much like failing to use your turn signal. The worst penalty you’ll face in the usual case is a fine. But if you swim on the free beach, get yourself in trouble, and a rescue party has to come save you, the fact that it’s a “crime” now gives the state the ability to recover their costs from you afterwards.

Re: Subject: Airbnb (2011)

#45

Post by fendy3002 » Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 2:18 PM UTC

collyw wrote: post #37

vasilipupkin wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems to me people often confuse something being illegal with something being an actual crime. They had the insight that these minor regulations can be easily broken to deliver value with very few repercussions

Could you explain the difference to me, as I am clearly in the minority in thinking that the two are synonymous.

Illegal can be things that hasn't yet regulated or made legal. Autonomous driving car, advanced ai even travelling to mars are things that yet not exists, thus are illegal at time they exists.

Recent examples are GDPR, where before it isn't regulated to track user information without consent, now being prohibited with clear penalty. Next they should regulate personal assistance like alexa and siri

Re: Subject: Airbnb (2011)

#46

Post by collyw » Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 2:18 PM UTC

vasilipupkin wrote: post #40

collyw wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you explain the difference to me, as I am clearly in the minority in thinking that the two are synonymous.

sure. My town has a paid beach with lifeguard and a free beach without. It is illegal to swim on the free beach. It is not a crime. Worst case that happens is they kick you off the beach.

Not sure that actually makes things any clearer to me. Is it actually illegal, or is it just "not allowed"? (Is the free beach public?)

What would make it "a crime" as opposed to just being "illegal"?

Re: Subject: Airbnb (2011)

#47

Post by CaptainZapp » Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 2:24 PM UTC

jMyles wrote: post #26

abcdcba wrote: post #9

I wish AirBnB took more responsibility for the damage they are doing to the NYC housing market

Well, we don't all agree that the changes are tantamount to "damage", first of all. For my part, having lived much of my adult life in New Paltz, AirBnb has greatly increased the availability of NYC housing for me, as I typically only live in NYC for 3-10 days at a time. I can understand that, if your desire is to live there perpetually for years, you might have a different perception. Perhaps living in a single plac…

Well, we don't all agree that the changes are tantamount to "damage", first of all.

I'd wager that anybody who suddenly had an illegal hotel running out of her neighboring appartment will very strongly disagree with that statement.

Unless you personally made that experience, in a house where parties live for 30 years+, you are not aware what a massive impact this can have on your quality of life.

Since I've been there I stopped using AirBnb, period.

Re: Subject: Airbnb (2011)

#48

Post by amitutk » Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 2:32 PM UTC

krn wrote: post #21

dustingetz wrote: post #19

This is bullshit. I fund my startup by consulting 1-2 months per year at 40k/month. Zero people think it is impressive. But $25k of Obama cereal makes a better story.

2008 Democratic National Convention was 10 years ago. At the time, startups, as we know them today, were a rarity. Funding yourself to start one, even more so. Hacker News itself was only 1 year-old.

Startups were a rarity in 2008?

Re: Subject: Airbnb (2011)

#49

Post by jMyles » Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 2:34 PM UTC

jermaustin1 wrote: post #39

jMyles wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, we don't all agree that the changes are tantamount to "damage", first of all. For my part, having lived much of my adult life in New Paltz, AirBnb has greatly increased the availability of NYC housing for me, as I typically only live in NYC for 3-10 days at a time. I can understand that, if your desire is to live there perpetually for years, you might have a different perception. Perhaps living in a single plac…

> if your desire is to live there perpetually for years You mean like 99% of people? When you work in the city, grew up in the city, have met almost everyone you know in the city, to then be forced out of the city because people want to rent their apartments out for 3-10 days at a time instead of 1-3 years means that people who need the stability of a permanent address now have to either shell out much more cash than…

> 99% of people

You are saying that 99% of people live in the same residence for years?

I'd love to see a source on this.

Between transient people, houseless people, digital nomads, business travelers, jetsetters, RVers, and all sorts of other people who don't live in one place all year, I have no doubt that the various modes of nomadism, taken together, account for far, far higher than 1%.

Heck, in NYC alone, I'll wager that less than 70% of today's population has lived in the same domicile for the past 2 years. There's no way it's 99%.

> When you work in the city, grew up in the city, have met almost everyone you know in the city

I made clear in my post that people in those circumstances might have a different experience. But is this the only audience NYC is designed to serve? People who grew up in the city? What about those of us in the Hudson Valley? Do we not deserve any of the economic benefits of the city (for which we pay in many ways, not least of which our watershed) just because we were born 50-150 miles away?

I think it's about time that real opportunities to live in the city for a few weeks out of the year become available to other NYers and not just the super rich.

I didn't grow up in NYC, but I consider it my city too. I know the best open mics, the places where I can order authentic Mexican or Puerto Rican food en español, the incubators and co-working spaces, the subway system, etc.

Just because you grew up there doesn't give you exclusive ownership of the culture of NYC.

Re: Subject: Airbnb (2011)

#50

Post by jMyles » Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 2:35 PM UTC

CaptainZapp wrote: post #47

jMyles wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, we don't all agree that the changes are tantamount to "damage", first of all. For my part, having lived much of my adult life in New Paltz, AirBnb has greatly increased the availability of NYC housing for me, as I typically only live in NYC for 3-10 days at a time. I can understand that, if your desire is to live there perpetually for years, you might have a different perception. Perhaps living in a single plac…

Well, we don't all agree that the changes are tantamount to "damage", first of all. I'd wager that anybody who suddenly had an illegal hotel running out of her neighboring appartment will very strongly disagree with that statement. Unless you personally made that experience, in a house where parties live for 30 years+, you are not aware what a massive impact this can have on your quality of life. Since I've been ther…

As I said, I think it's time to question whether an environment such as NYC is a realistic place to live for 30 years+ - is that sustainable for our species?

I think that the availability of short-term housing in NYC in particular is a net benefit for society, even if it adds an uncomfortable dose of reality for many people who had the extreme privilege of growing up there.