Comment

Comment by geebee

Unfortunately, some of the problem may be the language we use to advance our points. Here's a phrase that I think really does illustrate this:

"Making it harder to share your home in San Francisco may make it impossible for some of these hosts to afford to stay in their homes and in this city."

I really do want to discuss this reasonably, but to me, this is clearly a misuse of the word "share". There is a powerful emotion around "sharing", and to say that San Francisco is making it harder to "share" your home does have a different ring than saying it is making it harder to "rent out your home short term".

I will certainly agree that there can be some ambiguity around the word "share". For instance, if two people both pay equally for a large sandwich, they might say they "shared" it rather than "split it". But when you list your room on a website for a certain price, and someone pays you for it, I don't think we're anywhere close to that ambiguous grey area. This is clearly a quid-pro-quo commercial transaction. They can be friendly transactions, people can get to know each other through these transactions. I'm not even saying it's an undesirable transaction (more or less everyone I know things that airbnb has its place, though there is great disagreement over how these rentals should be regulated).

But I really don't think it's "sharing" by any reasonable definition of the term.

parent geebee 11 years ago

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton