alt Hacker Newsfair question. BlaBlaCar, Uber, Airbnb all got the same pushback: why would you get in a strangers car, sleep in a strangers house. Trust infrastructure solves it over time: ID verification, package limits, photo documentation, escrow paymnts.
And people already do this informally all the time. Sending stuff "with someone who's traveling" is super common, it just happens with zero oversight right now. This adds structure and accountability to something that already exists
Replies
I note that both Airbnb and Uber marketed as "use part of something you're not otherwise using", and almost immediately became professionalized. Full time drivers. People buying apartments to let out.
Maybe they wouldn't have worked without that professionalization? Which is of course not possible if you're going the "passing traveller" model.
This is completely different. While for Uber and AirBnb as the person delivering the service I have to worry about a private citizen either doing harm to my property (more statistically likely) or my person (much less likely), if I am pulled over by a cop carrying illegal goods I have to deal with the law enforcement.
Insurance can take of property damage.
My personal threat model is:
1. Law enforcement with qualified immunity and a “monopoly on [legalized] violence” .
.
.
99. Everyone else
Uber and Airbnb had budgets to subsidize the first mass of people. Heck, I’m less than nobody and got paid the first several times I used an Uber.
Uber and AirBnB lied about their model as an end run around regulation.
I think you are being too glib. The trust model is really different for small packages. Housing small amounts of drugs in objects is way easier and more likely than wrecking someone's airbnb.
And the consequences are higher for the driver. You can insure an airbnb or trip. Are you going to pay for someone's legal fees when they get popped for being a drug mule?