Here’s the solution to the Uber and Airbnb problems — and no one will like it
Nick Grossman

Fascinating. I have a similar insight from SeeClickFix:

Occasionally we will we hear from government officials on-boarding to SeeClickFix that they want the citizens reporting to them via the platform to be personally identifiable.

As we dissect the reasons for discomfort, it always comes down to some previous notion of accountability. In order to get officials over their concern for a new paradigm of anonymous participation enabled by crowd accountabilitywe demonstrate the upside of accessing a whole new group of citizens. We then get them comfortable with the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy and methods for holding users to this policy. It almost always works.

One interesting caveat: If a government was to try and host an open communication platform themselves, moderation and accountability might proove more legally challenging given freedom of information and open record laws. Operating under old assumptions that officials are the sole facilitators and regulators the need to regulate in a traditional fashion becomes apparent. If the official simply thinks of themselves as a participant or user in a system with its own governance the opportunity to engage in new ways becomes more possible.

To return to AirBnb, Uber and Umi Kitchen(which will raise questions about food safety policy at scale) I wonder if a new form of legislation is in order. Possibly a legislation that defines acceptable levels of crowd accountability for platforms while providing fall-back regulation where no such accountability is in place.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.