this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2023

146 points (78.1% liked)

Technology

59468 readers

4927 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

146

New York’s Airbnb Ban Is Descending Into Pure Chaos (www.wired.com)

submitted 1 year ago by L4s to c/technology

33 comments fedilink hide all child comments

New York’s Airbnb Ban Is Descending Into Pure Chaos::People are listing short-term rentals on social media and lesser-known platforms, bolstering a rental black market in New York City.

all 34 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 276 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Make sure you keep in mind that Conde Nast (the parent company of Wired) has subsidiary companies running articles like "35 Best Airbnbs Near New York City, From Cozy Cabins in the Catskills to Beachy Houses in the Hamptons"[1]. They likely have indirect or direct financial ties to AirBnB.

So this article that is seemingly trying to present an argument that this regulation isn't working because a black market has emerged, while giving more space in the article to small landlords and AirBnB's CEO and their defence than to critics of AirBnB, as well as mentioning hotel prices rising but not how AirBnB has caused rental prices to rise... should give you pause about the bias this article is trying to hide.

[1] https://www.cntraveler.com/gallery/best-airbnbs-near-new-york-city

[–] SinningStromgald 44 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Conde Nast ruined Wired.

[–] Duamerthrax 43 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They also own reddit.

[–] givesomefucks 24 points 1 year ago (2 children)

And Ars Techina...

They own a shit ton of media and I've never seen a positive improvement after they took something over.

[–] JJROKCZ 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

None of these companies want to improve anything other than quarterly profits and will take whatever shitty action to get there

[–] givesomefucks 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, the big tipoff that Conde owns a website is they post a lot of "great deals for ____!" posts.

Because they all use affiliate links.

And a lot less actual reviews of products because those have to be written. So you end up with a giant page full of links to a 100 products with maybe a sentence for each link.

[–] LostMyRedditLogin 1 points 1 year ago

News companies switched to affiliate links from ads. Even The New York Times made the switch. Google, Facebook, and Craigslist are their lunch.

[–] Duamerthrax 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's a Mediaopoly!

Aired only once, then hidden in the extras of the DVD release btw.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

It's a Mediaopoly!

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 year ago

I figured as much. Without an open and easy to advertise platform to rent out spaces, people are going back to how it used to be...

It's an alarmist article. Much ado about nothing.

[–] AnyProgressIsGood 18 points 1 year ago

Great catch

[–] DaMonsterKnees 12 points 1 year ago

JD POWER AND ASSOCIATES SAID BUY OUR SHIT, IT'S THE BEST!

[–] [email protected] 72 points 1 year ago

The headline is alarmist nonsense that is absolutely not supported by the facts presented. There are no numbers given for how many rentals are being listed on alternate sources. The numbers for listings marked as exempt on AirBNB certainly suggest that the ban is working exactly as intended. Yes, hotel prices will go up, obviously. That's not something that anyone is surprised to hear. The rest is just anecdote presented as data. There's no "chaos" here, just life being life.

[–] [email protected] 70 points 1 year ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Purged by creator

[–] [email protected] 45 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Heck. Let people submit tips with proof, and split the fines with the reporters.

Then the short-term renters own customers will report the rental when they're done. And then get money. Crowdsource the snitching

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not the US, but my city actually started a snitch e-mail address.

Stuff like airbnb now need a permission, and if you suspect an address has an unlicenced one, you can ask them and they will actually tell you if it's an allowed listing.

Reported two of them, one was allowed, another one "will be checked". Not sure what happened to the latter

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Not sure what happened to the latter

Believe it or not, jail.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Hell, just book the suites and dont pay. If they have an issue, they can get into contact with new yorks regulatory body.

[–] [email protected] 61 points 1 year ago

It's so funny watching skumlords scramble!

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It is paywalled

[–] Jakdracula 24 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You can pretty much put any article into archive.ph and it gets past the paywalls.

Go to: http://archive.ph

Paste in the url: https://www.wired.com/story/airbnb-ban-new-york-illegal-listings/

Hit “save” and get: https://archive.ph/ship1

[–] NeoNachtwaechter 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

What did they expect?

All the people who are renting out some spare appartment should suddenly stop it and move in themselves again? ;-)

[–] [email protected] 56 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A spare apartment, you say? Do people just have those lying around?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Yes, they move to a bigger one and rent out their old one for profit.

[–] [email protected] 61 points 1 year ago

And, of course, it would be morally unacceptable to get in the way of them maximising the profits they’re entitled to, such as by forcing them to rent it out long-term to some poors rather than allowing them to run an unregulated hotel room, because invisible hand of the free market or something.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Ah yes, the old hermit crab monopoly.

[–] NeoNachtwaechter 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Or they move in with their period-of-life partners, and then maybe eventually back.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Fine, but don't profit and offer a decent rent length.

[–] NeoNachtwaechter 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

offer a decent rent length.

They don't take that risk.

In my city, most of the singles actually keep their own appartments when moving in with a new loved one. It isn't because of the money, it is their safety net so they can move back eventually. Very few of these appartments are actually rented out. Most are just empty.

And of course they would not want to wait for a year or so.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This number would so low I'm guessing it wouldn't really move the needle. It's like having 1 house mate instead of 2 in a 3room appt.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

That they would return it to the pool of long term rentals and help drive rent rates down. That or drove them to sell to someone that wants to live there.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Probably.
A similar approach is under discussion even where I live and everyone seems to think that forbidding the "short rent" (as it is called here) will magically put all these apartament on the market for "long rent", lowering the prices.

Until it is not understood that (well, at least here) AirBnB is not the cause but the result the problem will never be solved.