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

Uber and Airbnb Alumni Fuel Tech’s Next Wave

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 168 posts

Re: Uber and Airbnb Alumni Fuel Tech’s Next Wave

#81

Post by ebarns »

warp_factor wrote: post #79

Airbnb or Uber are not really tech companies. They are business companies with a WebApp required as part of the execution. They didn't invent anything on the technical level, they brought some business ideas to existing tech (I mean Airbnb is literally a website with a DB) In the same way that United is not a tech company, but they have a website that accepts reservation. Tech companies create new Tech as part of the…

not necessarily true. AirBnb created Lottie which drastically changed the way people can do cookie cutter animations in in apps. I'd argue that their business decisions are driven by tech. By improving their tech/apps they enable their business to succeed more than the others. Ubers app is also pretty complex, it's not just a simple queue of riders and drivers

Re: Uber and Airbnb Alumni Fuel Tech’s Next Wave

#82

Post by rco8786 »

ben_jones wrote: post #11
rco8786 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its easy to be cynical. It’s harder to recognize that any significant societal change is going to come with some identifiable downside and that those downsides aren’t automatically a reason to not make the change.

That is such a slippery slope. How do you distinguish between painful societal change that will actually produce long term benefits versus painful societal change that is virtue signaling as good but really is lining the pockets of, ironically, Chinese and Saudi Arabian investors.

A) that’s not what a slippery slope means B) carefully and thoughtfully. Airbnb has also enabled a whole slew of new small business owners. Uber has demonstrably cut down on the number of traffic deaths attributable to drinking and driving. Etc etc. you have to evaluate the whole.

Re: Uber and Airbnb Alumni Fuel Tech’s Next Wave

#83

Post by rco8786 »

Zhenya wrote: post #56
dmitriy_ko wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"AirBnb increasing rents" is theory popularized by hotel industry and never been confirmed with hard data. AirBnb allows anyone to profit from demand for lodging, as opposed to few large hotel chains taking all profit. For many AirBnb hosts it's their livelihood. E.g. do you see benefit in anyone being able to start a restaurant or do you think only large restaurant chains should be able to do it? Also AirBnb increas…

Well you stepped right into it. You need a TON of permits to open a restaurant and you can not open in your house, it has to be in a commercial space. Furthermore, you are free to open your own hotel. You just need to do it in a commercial zoned area since you are doing commercial things.

Technology has always outrun regulation. It’s not any different in these cases. Regulators will catch up as they always have. This, truly, is how progress has been made since the dawn of time.

You’re taking the same position people took against the printing press, automobiles, and computers when they were all in their infancy.

Restaurants in people’s homes were incredibly common until health regulators showed up.

Re: Uber and Airbnb Alumni Fuel Tech’s Next Wave

#84

Post by SamReidHughes »

brandonmenc wrote: post #23
closeparen wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disrupting and extracting value from NIMBYs would definitely be on my personal “request for startups” list.

TIL a community that votes on their own zoning laws is NIMBY just because you think you have the right to rent a cheap hotel room there.

Yes. In voting, it is often the case that one choice is moral, the other is immoral.

Re: Uber and Airbnb Alumni Fuel Tech’s Next Wave

#85

Post by yaacov »

csallen wrote: post #62
yaacov wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

New York Times has had a consistently anti-tech slant the last few years. I don’t know the reason for it, but I find it very annoying

The media has a lot to lose in a tech-dominated world. They used to have a monopoly on reach. Readers came to directly to them. Today that role belongs largely to tech companies. Media companies are heavily dependent on the algorithms and whims of the likes of Google, Twitter, Facebook, Apple, and Amazon. And it's not just distribution: it's their business models, too. Apple taking a cut of NYC subscription revenue,…

Maybe... but I’ve noticed this far more at NYT than other newspapers

Re: Uber and Airbnb Alumni Fuel Tech’s Next Wave

#86

Post by ghobs91 »

wankerrific wrote: post #75
ghobs91 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it was property rights, they'd be voting on what can be built on their own property. Instead, NIMBYs vote on what can be built in the surrounding neighborhood and beyond, as if the purchase of a home also includes a guarantee that everything around it can never change. It's elitist gatekeeping and deep selfishness masked as "wanting to retain neighborhood character".

No its not. I want the same things you do - good city services, shorter commutes, etc. Allowing runaway building without properly developing infrastructure is long term negative for everyone involved. Most of those you label "NIMBY" are just looking to maintain an existing community and civic service level. The people you should be directing your ire towards is not your strawman "NIMBY" but the city planners and comm…

Why do you think they're under-zoning housing? Because office space tends to be built away from existing homes and doesn't face as much opposition from NIMBYs.

Housing, on the other hand, is blocked by them because that "gargantuan 4 story apt building" is going to lower their precious home value. I agree that infrastructure needs to keep up with development, but that's not impossible to do.

If NYC, Chicago, Seattle, etc can do it, why does SF seem to have such a hard time doing so? Because SF local government is a shitshow that does nothing but serve the interests of existing homeowners, who somehow want to benefit from the prosperity of growing cities without the construction/density those cities require.

Re: Uber and Airbnb Alumni Fuel Tech’s Next Wave

#87

Post by BurningFrog »

yaacov wrote: post #58
georgewfraser wrote: post #35

> The start-up world projects a meritocratic image, but in reality, it is a small, tightknit club where success typically hinges on whom you know. This is...so not true. My co-founder and I had hardly any network in SV. We applied to YC through the website, raised seed money after demo day. We ran on seed + revenue up to about 60 employees and we recently did a series A. If you don’t have a network, don’t be dissuade…

New York Times has had a consistently anti-tech slant the last few years. I don’t know the reason for it, but I find it very annoying

Tech is - inadvertently, as a side effect, but still - murdering the traditional media world that NYT rules/ruled.

When your whole world is being destroyed around you, it's not that strange if you develop a hostile attitude to the people doing the destroying, even if your job description is to be an "objective journalist".

Re: Uber and Airbnb Alumni Fuel Tech’s Next Wave

#89

Post by viscanti »

georgewfraser wrote: post #35

> The start-up world projects a meritocratic image, but in reality, it is a small, tightknit club where success typically hinges on whom you know. This is...so not true. My co-founder and I had hardly any network in SV. We applied to YC through the website, raised seed money after demo day. We ran on seed + revenue up to about 60 employees and we recently did a series A. If you don’t have a network, don’t be dissuade…

> it is a small, tightknit club where success typically hinges on whom you know.

This is such a weird point to make given it seems like almost none of the Uber and Airbnb Alumni seem to have been in any kind of tight knit club before. This wasn't something like PayPal mafia members starting yet another company, they seem to have been started by relative outsiders and most of the employees seem to be as well.

Maybe there's an argument to be made that some of the people who strike it rich as early employees of tech unicorns end up investing in other companies or founding other companies. But these companies seem to be proof that you don't need to have come from a tight knit club to become a successful startup.

Re: Uber and Airbnb Alumni Fuel Tech’s Next Wave

#90

Post by michaelt »

jacques_chester wrote: post #69
csallen wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The media has a lot to lose in a tech-dominated world. They used to have a monopoly on reach. Readers came to directly to them. Today that role belongs largely to tech companies. Media companies are heavily dependent on the algorithms and whims of the likes of Google, Twitter, Facebook, Apple, and Amazon. And it's not just distribution: it's their business models, too. Apple taking a cut of NYC subscription revenue,…

Most newspapers have a clear division between the editorial and money-making parts. Journalists look down on the advertising and classifieds departments. The consider it beneath their worthiness. If you think they're hiring because they give a shit about the lowlies who pay to keep the lights on, you haven't worked in the trade.

True, you don't need to go out hiring journalists who have an anti-tech stance.

But does anyone think print journalists haven't noticed their industry is fucked and loads of people are getting laid off? No need to break the firewall between editorial and ad sales to know that Gannett cut 400 jobs in January, McClatchy cut 450 jobs in February, BuzzFeed cut 200 jobs in January, and so on.

Post reply on HN