Hacker News Reader

Comment by boldrikboldrik | Hacker News Reader

Laws are made to keep status quo. I'd say, break them.

EDIT2: I did not mean all laws. But law != morality. EDIT: Cool to know that this community downvotes due to disagreement. Or did this comment add nothing to conversation? I won't be commenting again.

View on HN

Oh man, I thought it was so that my drinking water is clean, my roads are safe, and that I'm treated fairly when I purchase goods or services in my community.

Thanks for clearing that up for me.

EDIT: "Or did this comment add nothing to conversation? I won't be commenting again."

No. It did not add to the conversation. While I will agree that, at times, laws are lobbied for that attempt to maintain the status quo, the vast majority of laws are to keep society in an acceptable equilibrium (i.e. my rights end where your rights begin).

Those things are all status quo, do you want clean water or innovation? Because apparently in some people's realities you can't have both.

There is literally nothing innovative about AirBnB or Uber. It's just "The Hilton App" or "The Checkered Cabs App", except that they break hotel & taxi law respectively

I would say their pricing models are much more dynamic, but that's because they're just middle men and aren't responsible for the supply side (except providing incentives to increase supply, not actually providing capital, management, etc).

Right but dynamic pricing is precisely why taxicabs are as regulated as they are. It costs you the same amount to get from the Airport downtown on a Friday night as it does Tuesday at midday. And you the tourist know how much it'll cost you when you get there, because the price is regulated.

> It costs you the same amount to get from the Airport downtown on a Friday night as it does Tuesday at midday.

Only in a world with unlimited supply. When demand peaks, you'll either have the price increased ("surge pricing") or people will have to go without when supply can't mean demand.

No, there really isn't anything innovative about them. I doubt that will stop HN comments from crying "Won't someone think of the INNOVATION" when confronted with regulations to produce an impediment to something they want.

The apartment building I live in here in NYC forbids people from using airbnb and similar services. I'm glad because I don't want to worry about a flux of transients in my building. Some laws may be problematic to vc/startup folks but I'm glad they exist because they protect me.

I feel like the word transients is too often used to refer to homeless people. My impression is that AirBnB caters primarily to upper middle class vacationers. Are they really a problem? This is a serious question as I've never had to deal with this sort of problem.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/17/airbnb-orgy_n_49788...

Given any sufficiently large sample size...

The vast majority of NYC leases forbid subletting of any sort. Leasing or subletting to someone for under 30 days is illegal in NYC if you don't have the proper permits. There is a loophole in the law that makes it legal for you to rent out a room within your apartment for under 30 days while you are present in the apartment, though most leases forbid this as well.

did this comment add nothing to conversation?

Yup. It's a meaningless comment that doesn't back up its aggressive assertion or expand on the mental leap it makes.

- Can you prove that laws are made to keep status quo?

- Why does that alone mean we should break them?

That's great until you're living next to someone with the same ethos.

I'm about as anti-Law, anti-establishment, anti-authority pro-Snowden as they come... but ...we can't all just go around breaking whatever law without some kinda of "justification"(hopefully moral/ethics based)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com