3 ms·

> Moving forward, I question whether these types of suspensions should be allowed from the tech giants without any oversight or regulation. There is an industr

by scbrg 7y ago

> Moving forward, I question whether these types of suspensions should be allowed from the tech giants without any oversight or regulation. There is an industry based on providing short term lodging for people that is subject to oversight and regulation. Businesses operating in this industry are usually called "hotels".

bryanrasmussen 7y ago
On one hand you're correct, on the other there's all sorts of industries that still exist even though they have been 'disrupted', but I'm guessing if you relied on one of the disrupters for a service and were banned you might not be so cavalier in your attitude - this is based on my never having read of anyone being banned from one of these services unfairly and taking it in the calm stride you're recommending.
drstewart 7y ago
And yet hotels can and do permanently ban guests from their property all the time with no recourse, so I'm not sure what your implication is. http://www.nbcnews.com/id/25243594/ns/travel-travel_tips/t/hotels-upgrade-their-no-stay-lists/ http://www.nbcnews.com/id/25243594/ns/travel-travel_tips/t/h...
- toomuchtodo 7y ago
  Just as with cryptocurrencies ("What do you mean my net worth just evaporated and I have no recourse!?"), it's somewhat humorous to witness platform enthusiasts demand the very regulation platforms subverted to grow to what they are today. Your point stands though; businesses have the right to turn away customers for any reason that isn't discriminatory or class protected. Perhaps there's a reason to consider regulating certain platforms as utilities once they reach a certain scale? (Not referring to AirBnB in this case)
  - nathanappere 7y ago
    If they are not required by law to provide the reasons and some context, it is difficult to assess if they are discriminatory or class protected.
    - toomuchtodo 7y ago
      Astute observation as it relates to a gap in legislation and regulation that could use some fixing up. An Ombudsman to handle disputes such as these would be a welcomed development.
  - drstewart 7y ago
    I don't consider myself a platform enthusiast, but I do find myself annoyed at people who call for regulation of tech companies because its trendy. People are outraged Airbnb can ban you without recourse -- tech must be regulated! Not a peep against hotel giants who can do the same thing People are outraged that Amazon wants to build an HQ2 in NYC because it'll displace people and must be stopped! Not a peep that it's home to the headquarters of 52 Fortune 500 companies already and grows by tens of thousands of people a year. People are outraged that Apple paid little in income tax on a huge profit last year and tech must be regulated! Not a peep about Chevron, Delta, or Halliburton. It's just populism. People know and interact brands like Google, Apple, Airbnb, etc so they're easy targets, and as a result we're going to end up with regulation that narrowly targets that high profile offenders without doing anything to solve the broader root cause issues. California's AB5 is a perfect example -- it's basically meant to target Lyft/Uber/etc and exempts many industries for no reason: hair salons, insurance brokers, real estate agencies, photographers, fishermen, and more. Why? Because they want to specifically target the big bad tech companies without fundamentally fixing the problem of ensuring all workers get a living wage.
    - toomuchtodo 7y ago
      Even if you think the complaints are due to "trendiness" or "populism", there a more non-tech folks than not. It's plain math (tech is a vocal minority), the regulation will get here eventually (as has happened with Uber, Lyft, AirBnB, and is likely to happen to larger tech firms in the future). As a tech professional, I believe more regulation over tech in general is long overdue. With leverage comes responsibility and oversight.
- SilasX 7y ago
  True, but for whatever reason, they don't -- and I have a hard time imagining one that would -- say, "Hey we're banning you and we're not telling you why and we're not alerting you to the violation as we become aware of it and not giving you a chance to correct the behavior." Sure, I suppose nothing legally stops them, I guess, but it just doesn't seem to happen. (Perhaps there is a legal barrier, where they try to leave a defensible paper trail so as to show it wasn't e.g. racially motivated, but then, I don't know why such concerns don't spur similar behavior from Airbnb.)
  - GhettoMaestro 7y ago
    The reason for saying nothing is legal weaseling. We are afraid of being accused of banning someone for being black, gay, jewish, tall, short, smart, dumb, etc. The underlying reason and the facts are mattering less and less these days because everyone is a fucking mental midget and gets offended at the lightest perceived slight.
    - SilasX 7y ago
      That's not a satisfing explanation, because the big chains seem to have no problem with at least alerting you of the violating behavior as it happens, and the booking that led to the ban. Airbnb didn't do either.

by scbrg 7y ago

bryanrasmussen 7y ago

On one hand you're correct, on the other there's all sorts of industries that still exist even though they have been 'disrupted', but I'm guessing if you relied on one of the disrupters for a service and were banned you might not be so cavalier in your attitude - this is based on my never having read of anyone being banned from one of these services unfairly and taking it in the calm stride you're recommending.

drstewart 7y ago

And yet hotels can and do permanently ban guests from their property all the time with no recourse, so I'm not sure what your implication is. http://www.nbcnews.com/id/25243594/ns/travel-travel_tips/t/hotels-upgrade-their-no-stay-lists/ http://www.nbcnews.com/id/25243594/ns/travel-travel_tips/t/h...

toomuchtodo 7y ago
Just as with cryptocurrencies ("What do you mean my net worth just evaporated and I have no recourse!?"), it's somewhat humorous to witness platform enthusiasts demand the very regulation platforms subverted to grow to what they are today. Your point stands though; businesses have the right to turn away customers for any reason that isn't discriminatory or class protected. Perhaps there's a reason to consider regulating certain platforms as utilities once they reach a certain scale? (Not referring to AirBnB in this case)
- nathanappere 7y ago
  If they are not required by law to provide the reasons and some context, it is difficult to assess if they are discriminatory or class protected.
  - toomuchtodo 7y ago
    Astute observation as it relates to a gap in legislation and regulation that could use some fixing up. An Ombudsman to handle disputes such as these would be a welcomed development.
- drstewart 7y ago
  I don't consider myself a platform enthusiast, but I do find myself annoyed at people who call for regulation of tech companies because its trendy. People are outraged Airbnb can ban you without recourse -- tech must be regulated! Not a peep against hotel giants who can do the same thing People are outraged that Amazon wants to build an HQ2 in NYC because it'll displace people and must be stopped! Not a peep that it's home to the headquarters of 52 Fortune 500 companies already and grows by tens of thousands of people a year. People are outraged that Apple paid little in income tax on a huge profit last year and tech must be regulated! Not a peep about Chevron, Delta, or Halliburton. It's just populism. People know and interact brands like Google, Apple, Airbnb, etc so they're easy targets, and as a result we're going to end up with regulation that narrowly targets that high profile offenders without doing anything to solve the broader root cause issues. California's AB5 is a perfect example -- it's basically meant to target Lyft/Uber/etc and exempts many industries for no reason: hair salons, insurance brokers, real estate agencies, photographers, fishermen, and more. Why? Because they want to specifically target the big bad tech companies without fundamentally fixing the problem of ensuring all workers get a living wage.
  - toomuchtodo 7y ago
    Even if you think the complaints are due to "trendiness" or "populism", there a more non-tech folks than not. It's plain math (tech is a vocal minority), the regulation will get here eventually (as has happened with Uber, Lyft, AirBnB, and is likely to happen to larger tech firms in the future). As a tech professional, I believe more regulation over tech in general is long overdue. With leverage comes responsibility and oversight.
SilasX 7y ago
True, but for whatever reason, they don't -- and I have a hard time imagining one that would -- say, "Hey we're banning you and we're not telling you why and we're not alerting you to the violation as we become aware of it and not giving you a chance to correct the behavior." Sure, I suppose nothing legally stops them, I guess, but it just doesn't seem to happen. (Perhaps there is a legal barrier, where they try to leave a defensible paper trail so as to show it wasn't e.g. racially motivated, but then, I don't know why such concerns don't spur similar behavior from Airbnb.)
- GhettoMaestro 7y ago
  The reason for saying nothing is legal weaseling. We are afraid of being accused of banning someone for being black, gay, jewish, tall, short, smart, dumb, etc. The underlying reason and the facts are mattering less and less these days because everyone is a fucking mental midget and gets offended at the lightest perceived slight.
  - SilasX 7y ago
    That's not a satisfing explanation, because the big chains seem to have no problem with at least alerting you of the violating behavior as it happens, and the booking that led to the ban. Airbnb didn't do either.