4 ms·

I'm genuinely curious but how to do prevent abuse with shared stuff? There's lots of people in the world who will abuse, destroy, hog, etc. There was that story

I'm genuinely curious but how to do prevent abuse with shared stuff? There's lots of people in the world who will abuse, destroy, hog, etc. There was that story about the airbnb sex party just over a month ago as just one example. I'm sure there are good ideas. Maybe that's yet another tech solution? A quick google about abuse of Zipcars brought up this article http://www.triplepundit.com/2012/07/zipcar-users-dont-good-care-cars-new-research-offers-4-lessons-access-economy/ http://www.triplepundit.com/2012/07/zipcar-users-dont-good-c...

llamataboot 13y ago
Part of it is about the empathetic circle of concern, and part of it is about reputation. Figuring out ways to both widen the circle of concern and build stronger reputation metrics should help quite a bit. You're not very likely to destroy the chainsaw you are borrowing from your next-door neighbor or your best friend, for example. One could also argue that sole ownership leads to abuse simply because it is "allowed". For example, if you "own" a field, you can salt that field and leave it barren for many years.
obi-nine 13y ago
I think that was the point of the reputation economy the article speculated. Much harder to get away with that kind of abuse with a ubiquitous, trustable (ie. decentralized) reputation system.
dalke 13y ago
That link makes 4 good points. I'll add another observation - library books. They are "shared stuff" by any definition. Libraries will rebind books to make them more durable and sharable. This suggests that a 5th point is to design shared things for higher amounts of abuse. However, it's much easier to rebind a book than a car.
- zo1 13y ago
  Don't forget to include a few common and important properties of the library model that I think are very pertinent to this discussion: 1. If you damage the book that you are "borrowing" or "sharing" then you are to pay a fixing/repair fee. 2. Natural degradation/wear & tear of books is covered by a general library fee/subscription.

llamataboot 13y ago

Part of it is about the empathetic circle of concern, and part of it is about reputation. Figuring out ways to both widen the circle of concern and build stronger reputation metrics should help quite a bit. You're not very likely to destroy the chainsaw you are borrowing from your next-door neighbor or your best friend, for example. One could also argue that sole ownership leads to abuse simply because it is "allowed". For example, if you "own" a field, you can salt that field and leave it barren for many years.

obi-nine 13y ago

I think that was the point of the reputation economy the article speculated. Much harder to get away with that kind of abuse with a ubiquitous, trustable (ie. decentralized) reputation system.

dalke 13y ago

That link makes 4 good points. I'll add another observation - library books. They are "shared stuff" by any definition. Libraries will rebind books to make them more durable and sharable. This suggests that a 5th point is to design shared things for higher amounts of abuse. However, it's much easier to rebind a book than a car.

zo1 13y ago
Don't forget to include a few common and important properties of the library model that I think are very pertinent to this discussion: 1. If you damage the book that you are "borrowing" or "sharing" then you are to pay a fixing/repair fee. 2. Natural degradation/wear & tear of books is covered by a general library fee/subscription.