Okay, so, it's a major u-turn, so major that they're now denying they even ever had the previous policy of simply denying all responsibility. But the past is th

Okay, so, it's a major u-turn, so major that they're now denying they even ever had the previous policy of simply denying all responsibility. But the past is the past and the $50,000 is, well, $50,000 more reassurance than their users had before. It's just a pity that in this final coming clean with their customers that they couldn't, you know, come clean. "... we weren’t prepared for the crisis and we dropped the ball". How is it possible that no-one predicted that something like this might happen? With multiple founders and employees thinking about the business day and night, this never occurred to anyone? Really? And what about the investors? Not one single investor, these Gods of fine detail, raised the question of what contingency plans were in place for just such an event? I don't buy it. Airbnb had a plan, and that plan was to boldly deny all responsibility, to flat out ignore the human consequences of their flawed model - a flaw that affects only a tiny fraction of their hundreds of thousands of users but one that, nonetheless, has massive, life-changing consequences for the unlucky few who get caught beneath the wheels of statistical inevitability. Brian Chesky knew this, every employee knew it, every investor new it and Paul Graham damn well knew it too. Unfortunately for all of them, they didn't think about the possibility that one of the unlucky few might have the communication skills and, more importantly, the sheer tenacity to tear down the illusion that they have so carefully crafted. In the past few days, she became a victim again as a panicked company and horrified investors, watching $1.3bn start to swirl down the drain, launched a concerted slur campaign against her, casting aspersions on her sanity, as if that had any bearing whatsoever on the tragedy that befell her - they owe her a quite separate apology for that nasty, mean-spirited assault. Hilariously, they also owe Michael Arrington an apology, but you shouldn't hold your breath waiting for that one. So, yesterday is yesterday, we stride bravely into the future with a somewhat more humane policy in place. What hasn't changed is that the model is still fatally flawed and, sorry to be crude, but how is $50,000 meant to be applied to a serious beating or, God forbid, a rape? We all hope that won't happen but, again, I look at this whole concept and I know in my heart that, eventually, it will. Does anyone really believe that this model has a future? Are we in that much of a bubble? P.S. Just for the record, and Brian Chesky take note, this comment "reflects my true feelings".