The current gap as I see it is that SV doesn’t understand the regulatory nature of DC and DC does not understand the technological prowess of SV. Closing that gap is lucrative.
Show this thread
I’m relistening to the @ezraklein show featuring @patrickc and I’m reminded that the innovation of Uber and Airbnb is not some massive technological leap on their part, but that they had leaders that were fearless in flaunting regulatory barriers. It’s an underrated lesson.
-
-
-
Another thing that
@patrickc mentions, and with@CassSunstein’s new book out brings it back to the discussion, is that the current conversation of regulation is all pretty bad.Show this thread -
Conservatives want to indiscriminately abolish most regulations, Leftists want to indiscriminately regulate various things and “Centrists” want to do Sunstein style cost-benefit analysis. All of these miss the mark
Show this thread -
The correct regulatory framework is probably between Sunstein’s and the Right’s. Be open to regulation, but be extremely skeptical to second and third order effects that you probably can’t anticipate. Thus you should err on the side of no regulation.
Show this thread -
Notable exception because it is the immediate example that comes to mind: don’t mess with environmental regulations.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The lesson is that regulations have little legitimacy and the free choices of consumers in control of their own pocketbooks are often much better.
-
Civil disobedience is part of the search function for getting to better legal frameworks/equilibriums. Related:http://slatestarcodex.com/2018/03/19/the-dark-rule-utilitarian-argument-for-science-piracy/ …
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Re err on side of no regulation: I think it's easier to start tight and then loosen, than to start loose and then tighten. Unless you believe it's easy to go back to Congress for revision.
-
Except when you start tight, you create entrenched special interest groups who fight for their rent-seeking ways See, e.g., how taxi regulation worked (or rather didn't) for consumers
-
Taxi policy was old, unreviewed. If Kavanaugh has his way, loose will get overturned as soon as it trys tight, so tight at first will be the only way to go.
-
But it went unreviewed for a reason. A powerful interest developed that would pounce on anyone in government threatening their turf. Which left them completely unprepared when they were beaten by the free market. I'm fairly pro-regulation, but entrenched interests are a problem.
-
Anti regulation has entrenched interests too. Algo monopolies for example. Pre regulation, Pinkertons killed and beat up strikers for hire.
-
Yes, and I think there should be a considerably larger role for the government to break up monopolies. But one has to be careful, and rent seeking is a real problem that should not be ignored.
-
Ok, sure. From both sides (governed and ungoverned), rent seeking is a problem. Both should be watched and analyzed. You can have defense corps, and Blackwaters. Surprising to some that one ought to referee both sides, but that's the norm, not the exception, isn't it? Should be.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
“Flouting”. “Flaunting” means “showing off”.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
For Uber, that’s at least partly wrong. Uber can’t exist without the smartphone. It’s a technological breakthrough in the fact that a new innovation allowed a completely new system to be invented
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Airbnb wasn’t quite that easy - it wasn’t that people believed it wasn’t legal, it’s that no one believed people would let strangers stay in their homes. There was a massive mental barrier that
@bchesky et al broke down before anyone, government or other, worried about the rules.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
1. ) "X is not Y, but Z ..." is both facile and a fallacy, ipso facto. 2. ) Before cloud computing and many other innovations of the past DECADE, Uber and Airbnb could not exist.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I think of Uber the way I think of drug dealers - breaking the law in order to serve their customers is their whole thing, and it's not shocking that this service is provided by criminals.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
What of
@ATabarrok recent work on the lack of correlation between dynamism and regulatory burden? To me, that suggests it is something to do with technological advances and not regulatory burdens.https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2018/02/federal-regulation-not-cause-declining-dynamism.html …Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.