To me, the game of the "sharing economy" is to use the vastly lowered transaction and communication costs of the internet to make better use of unused capital. Cars and housing in those cases.

That regulation is a decade or two behind the technology is unfortunate, but merely a side story.

I spend two nights with Airbnb hosts. Both had a spare room, one was home writing her thesis the other a single mother. Both could use the additional money more than the few minutes of bathroom/kitchen time that I used.

I also spend a couple nights with family - they don't have any special insurance or taxes for me either. I don't really see any difference, I didn't annoy the neighbours in any case.

That sounds clever and informed but is mostly obnoxious.

What? It's well known that both Uber and AirBnB long relied on their users to operate unlicensed jitneys and unlicensed, uninspected, uninsured lodging houses.

I didn't mean to offend, but I apparently have. I truly believe what I said, so I would like to know how would you suggest I improve the comment?

You could improve your comment by acknowledging that most businesses cajole, skirt, finagle or ignore regulations when it suits their purpose and they think they can get away with it. Uber and AirBnB did not invent this game.

> Uber and AirBnB did not invent this game.

True, but most businesses (outside finance) have other ways to make money besides cajoling, skirting, finagling or ignoring laws (or the latinate "regulations," as you prefer).

> or the latinate "regulations," as you prefer

"Regulation" (at least in the US) is a broader category, covering both "laws" passed by elected lawmakers and "rules" made by unelected public servants.

For starters, suggesting that the primary cause of their success is anything other than consistently executing at a high level is insulting.

Secondly, Uber got big using exclusively licensed town cars. And vacation rentals have been around for centuries.

Are you describing your own comment?

That's very meta!