Hacker News Reader

Comment by ucaetano | Hacker News Reader

I never got why Uber would be part of a sharing economy.

Sharing economy is about sharing underutilized resources, in other words, fully utilizing expensive assets by spreading usage across a larger number of users. The focus here is on the asset, not the service.

AirBnB? Check, that's sharing economy, you're clearly increasing usage of an underutilized asset (your home when you travel, or your spare bedroom), although there are exceptions (those who buy a place to rent on AirBnB like a hotel).

TaskRabbit? Nope. Uber? Nope. That's just the service economy, nothing new to see here folks.

View on HN

Even AirBnB isn't sharing though, in the traditional sense of the word. This should be obvious when you compare it to CouchSurfing, which is genuinely about sharing.

I would argue that the way it's traditionally understood, sharing is something that happens between equals, or people who have an intention of becoming equals. "Let me share some advice with you" is fundamentally about a relationship between equals or possibly a relationship between people who are not exactly equals in some aspect, but either feel like they belong to some common in-group or like they will be equals eventually.

From this perspective, it's obvious that CouchSurfing is sharing while AirBnB isn't: on AirBnB, the expectation is that there is a split between the seller and the buyer; on CouchSurfing, there is a shared identity of "travelers" and an expectation of reciprocity.

Let me also point out that by your own definition of how you use the word sharing, it's not so clear why you wouldn't call Uber a sharing service. After all, somebody might decide that their car is an underused asset which should be "shared". (Hold on, you say, those people are also selling their labor? Well, so do AirBnB hosts when they clean the room after you stayed in it...).

tl;dr: Your conclusions don't actually follow from your implied definition of sharing, and your definition of sharing doesn't match the general feeling that the word evokes.

Also: Freecycle and Popcorn Time# (and BitTorrent, both legal and illegal uses).

# "Theft" is part of the economy too, with a purchase price of zero.

Don't confuse copyright infringement with theft.

https://www.quora.com/Intellectual-Property-Law/Is-copyright...

Guess I should have made my definition of "sharing" more explicit: Share: have a portion of (something) with another or others. I never said sharing should be free. Carrier share towers (for fees), companies share office buildings, warehouses, etc.

"I would argue that the way it's traditionally understood, sharing is something that happens between equals, or people who have an intention of becoming equals."

Well, that's your definition. We can spend the rest of our lives arguing about definitions.

"From this perspective, it's obvious that CouchSurfing is sharing while AirBnB isn't: on AirBnB, the expectation is that there is a split between the seller and the buyer; on CouchSurfing, there is a shared identity of "travelers" and an expectation of reciprocity."

So, by my definitions, AirBnB is sharing, so is CouchSurfing.

"by your own definition of how you use the word sharing"

Again, you're implying a different definition of sharing than I'm using (or even that the dictionary uses).

"somebody might decide that their car is an underused asset which should be "shared""

The car yes, but you're not paying for usage of the car, you're paying for a transportation service.

"Well, so do AirBnB hosts when they clean the room after you stayed in it...)."

That's asset maintenance. Someone driving a car isn't asset maintenance, it's a service. And that's even charged separately, usually (as a "cleaning fee").

"tl;dr: Your conclusions don't actually follow from your implied definition of sharing, and your definition of sharing doesn't match the general feeling that the word evokes."

Not only you wrongly implied my definition of "sharing", which I actually took from a dictionary, but you also didn't understand the difference between usage of assets and labor services. Another way to look at it is: what's the main cost component? Is it return on assets or labor?

- Uber: labor

- TaskRabbit: labor

- AirBnB: return on asset

Uber requires a significant investment - a new car.

Nope, not significant at all, you can lease a reasonable, "uberable" car for way less than $200/month (which already includes depreciation).

If the car is used on Uber for (a very conservative estimate) of 20 hours per week, ~150 hours per month, that's about $1/hour in asset costs. Let's say maintenance and what not costs another 50% of that plus another 50% of whatever, we're still talking $2/hour in asset costs, which is far less than minimum wage.

Dictionaries don't specify that sharing be free, sure, but that's because the concept of 'i give you part of something i am in excess of in exchange for something' is already called selling, and 'i allow you to use part of something i am in excess of in exchange for something' (airBnB) is already called renting. Those activities are not sharing because they are already renting and selling, which are incompatable with sharing.

By induction, sharing must not involve transaction of money between the two parties doing the sharing. A timeshare is sharing because the people who share the condo do not pay each other, they both pay someone else and agree on when each party will have access.

Also, Uber's claim to be 'ride sharing' is the idea that the rider is filling otherwise empty space in the drivers car. It's original purpose was to let drivers pick up strangers to fill otherwise empty seats while on their way to do other things, it just mutated into the 'driver as a profession' form that we have now, so I think it does fit your definition.

We can disagree on definitions then.

Your desire to have a word mean something different does not make that alternate meaning correct.

I'm just looking up in the dictionary:

verb verb: share; 3rd person present: shares; past tense: shared; past participle: shared; gerund or present participle: sharing 1. have a portion of (something) with another or others.

You're the one making your own definitions...

We share the same dictionary definition of the word share.

By way of example; you and I may share a ride in an Uber drivers car. The Uber driver (as a profession) does not share our same purpose so is more accurately described as renting out their service and vehicle.

With example of carriers sharing a tower care must be taken to clarify the roles of the participants. If three carriers are using the tower then all three are sharing. Note the common purpose. If one of the carriers owns the tower then this carrier is also renting. There is nothing precluding both renting and sharing from occurring at the same time but to include sharing there must be a common purpose.

Since the dictionary definition of sharing speaks to a 'portion' with out regard to financial reward and rent is a 'payment for use' then the correct way to describe the financial transaction that occurs with an Uber driver is 'rent'.

As @kedean correctly points out; Uber may have started out as a service for sharing a common purpose but it is no longer that. The fact that Uber drivers are contractors, or in the State of California, employees is clear evidence that the driver and rider no longer share a common purpose.

As the word economy connotes finance and there is not a common purpose to portion out the more accurate phrase is 'Rental Economy'.

Once again you're narrowing the definition of sharing to fit your argument and, as I said, we're arguing definitions.

By the first definition of sharing on the dictionary, my argument is valid.

If you want to use another definition, than don't expect my argument to be valid.

I agree, except AirBnB means you are expected to operate a mini-hotel (without the protections of a hotel).

Clean room, fresh towels, etc.... AirBNB = you are renting.

Notice you are operating without the protections of a landlord (i.e. landlords have formal leases)

Notice you are operating without the protections of a hotel (i.e. hotels have as part of their contract a statement that hotel guests are not renters no matter how long the guest stays - read the contract on the back of every hotel door; it is there for this very important reason.)

This is IMPORTANT.

In most states if a person stays a certain number of contiguous days (~30days), has a key - they become a renter de jure. And renters cannot be evicted without a formal eviction process.

AirBnB doesn't sound very "sharing" now does it?

"I agree, except AirBnB means you are expected to operate a mini-hotel (without the protections of a hotel)."

Not necessarily, you can just rent a basic room with nothing else, some people do.

But I agree with you on the point of the law, that's a tricky issue, but easily solvable by changing laws.

But in the end, like my Uber example, the largest part of the cost is still the asset compensation, not the additional services.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com