[mrtksn]

Welcome to minority report where machines guess your intentions and block you in real life. It was bad enough online.

The attestation is fine but blocking?

I wonder if can be used to do other stuff, like ML models that distribute the guests in certain ways to increase the chance of certain people meet in order to boost or suppress political movements. Maybe block or overprice individuals likely to engage in environmental activities in sponsorship with the oil companies? Maybe arrange pricing and availability in certain way to demoralize people from certain ideologies so it's more likely they have less energy and money to their thing.

This is the kind of stuff EU needs to block.

[FirmwareBurner]

>This is the kind of stuff EU needs to block.

Airbnb needs to be blocked all together in the EU. I lost track of how many cities pushed people out and became unaffordable to the locals, because the rentals went to Airbnbs and tourists.

Housing should be for shelter of the people who live, work and study there, not for tourists, they have registered hotels, motels, inns, etc dedicated just for that.

[nness]

Also, by and large, they're just awful — Airbnb's across Europe is a game of chance if it's actually a nice flat or if it was someone who has divide a regular-sized residence into 3 very small rooms with plasterboard dividers.

I opt for hotels as much as I possibly can, but when travelling with a group or family, hotels are perceived as "anti-social," which I think is really the only thing keeping Airbnb alive at this stage — the social norms.

Apartment rentals on booking.com/hotels.com is, at least, a bit closer to what I want — but most are still tailored around the long-stay/corporate travellers... Airbnb does fill that niche well.

[j1elo]

It was very nice originally, when they sold themselves (at least in the EU) as a way to stay "at home", even share some time and meet the locals renting you their room, all for a fraction of what a hotel costs.

But soon enough they diverged from that into the "whole buildings bought by deep pocket owners to build apartments for Airbnb" thing that hurts neighborhoods and is a net negative for cities.

Also now with the big service fees they charge, I usually just prefer avoiding Airbnb altogether. Between their +80€ creeping up from nowhere after having chosen a place, and the "cleaning fee" (for nothing because owners will just clean a bit) that ends up being another +50€ or so, makes most places I see in Airbnb hardly competitive against hotels or proper tourism-approved apartments in other platforms.

[bigger_inside]

Also, while they save all the expenses on staff, meaning, gradually destroying hotel staff jobs, too. Airbnb: all the price of a regular hotel without the staff or attention.

[svdr]

That is true, but cities themselves are very slow to regulate (and prevent) this.

[FirmwareBurner]

Yeah, because it's tough to say no to free $$$.

Our elected leaders in charge of regulating this are often the ones directly profiting from Airbnbs and overinflated housing markets.

They often directly or through family and friends own several properties in desirable neighborhoods. So why would they?

[realusername]

Airbnb should be back to what it was at the beginning, a way to rent a room in your own house, everything else should be banned.

There's a shortage of housing everywhere, there's no place for Airbnb in such an environment.

[FirmwareBurner]

>Airbnb should be back to what it was at the beginning, a way to rent a room in your own house

Every app that starts with the idea of renting "just a room", quickly turns into an unofficial mass market rental scheme by the users. Same how every app that starts with the idea of traveling, socializing and meeting new people, eventually gets turned into an unofficial dating and hookup app by its users.

[ndsipa_pomu]

I agree with the general sentiment, but isn't this just a consequence of Capitalism and free markets working as they are supposed to?

[FirmwareBurner]

You'd probably think differently if you and your family would be pushed out of the housing market by wealthier foreigners.

Every free market has a lot of asterixis and contingencies to prevent exploitations and imbalances, such as the introduction of tariffs.

It's a free market if you and me living and working in the same country are competing for the same real estate. But if much wealthier foreigners from a country where the average salary is 5x higher or private equity firms can come and easily swoop up that real estate from us, it's no longer free market, it's just economic colonialism.

The problem with the current free market is that it's free as in freedom but not free as in beer, meaning it's no longer people competing with other people for assets, but piles of money competing against other international piles of money, and the bigger piles are winning.

All this just leads to the ever increasing wealth inequality.

The free market is efficient at creating competition to drive down the costs of goods and services and drive up the quality(in theory), but works very poorly at doing the same for life necessities like housing where costs keep going up as they're treated as investment vehicles not as commodities.

[ndsipa_pomu]

Well, I do think differently and I believe that Capitalism is pushing humans to the brink of destruction as it provides a strong incentive for people/corporations to exploit resources as fast as possible.

The Airbnb problem highlights that free markets shouldn't be applied everywhere as there's often important considerations that go beyond just making someone some money.

> The free market is efficient at creating competition to drive down the costs of goods and services and drive up the quality(in theory)

I know that's the general belief of free markets, but in reality the size of businesses counts far more than their efficiency or quality. Arguably, we don't have free markets as that would entail people having sufficient knowledge about the products/services and that just doesn't happen as the people with the most money can easily influence people (e.g. marketing, advertising, buying news services etc).

[FirmwareBurner]

>Well, I do think differently and I believe that Capitalism is pushing humans to the brink of destruction as it provides a strong incentive for people/corporations to exploit resources as fast as possible.

It's not really differently in any way, I'm on the same page as you.

Capitalism is mostly driven by greed to amass more wealth, and real estate is a finite form of wealth.

[bigger_inside]

I thought the same. The step to "renting to attend a protest" is miniscule. And they'll sell it, of course, as a "safety enhancing measure".

[imjonse]

I am not sure if fancy airbnb holidays are necessarily the place where political movements are born or get amplified.

[mrtksn]

How about the non-fancy ones where people travel to attend meetings and events?

[palemoonale]

More laws are not a solution. And i definitely don't want more EU non-voted-for-commissariat interventions. (similar shit w/ 'fraud preventention', just because you happen to SEPA something to a neighboring country. While having to use your banks' newly-fancy new 'app' -no ther means left possible- to authorize said payment!)

[mrtksn]

Hmm, you seem to be well versed on the problems with over regulation but maybe AirBnB should push you towards stays with poor sanitary conditions so you can appreciate the benefits of regulations better. Part of the well rounded citizen program of course, first stop parties then stop the other troublemakers. How do you feel about that?