The Decline of the Serial Killer
August 28, 2013 2:27 PM Subscribe
Ben Popper writes about the increased faith in strangers and falling crime rates that are enabling services like Lyft, AirBNB, TaskRabbit, and others in the new "sharing economy".
"There is another long-term trend at play here: the sustained and significant drop in the rate of violent crime across the nation over the past few decades. This is especially true in the metropolitan areas where the majority of the startups at the forefront of the sharing economy have taken root. The most dangerous precincts in New York City now report less violent crime than the safest areas did back in 1993. San Francisco’s murder rate has dropped to levels not seen since the 1960s."
"There is another long-term trend at play here: the sustained and significant drop in the rate of violent crime across the nation over the past few decades. This is especially true in the metropolitan areas where the majority of the startups at the forefront of the sharing economy have taken root. The most dangerous precincts in New York City now report less violent crime than the safest areas did back in 1993. San Francisco’s murder rate has dropped to levels not seen since the 1960s."
The "sharing economy" is just a new form of digital sharecropping, only manifested partially in the real world. Nothing more.
posted by NoxAeternum at 2:41 PM on August 28, 2013 [13 favorites]
posted by NoxAeternum at 2:41 PM on August 28, 2013 [13 favorites]
Apparently it is a bit more, actually.
posted by anotherpanacea at 2:48 PM on August 28, 2013 [12 favorites]
posted by anotherpanacea at 2:48 PM on August 28, 2013 [12 favorites]
The "sharing economy" is just a new form of digital sharecropping
QFT.
posted by entropicamericana at 3:01 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
QFT.
posted by entropicamericana at 3:01 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
NoxAeternum beat me to it. It'll be interesting to see what new laws will crop up when companies like Uber, for example, compete against Taxis without having to pay the same fees that Taxis have to pay. They didn't do too well in Stockholm due to that illegal (unfair advantage) competition.
posted by dabitch at 3:02 PM on August 28, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by dabitch at 3:02 PM on August 28, 2013 [3 favorites]
"Digital sharecropping" is a pretty provocative-sounding term, noxaeternum, so it would be nice if you could explain just what the hell you mean by it.
posted by Mars Saxman at 3:05 PM on August 28, 2013 [39 favorites]
posted by Mars Saxman at 3:05 PM on August 28, 2013 [39 favorites]
compete against Taxis without having to pay the same fees that Taxis have to pay.
Uber is an odd example because taxis are possibly the worst-regulated industry around. Why are there so few taxi licenses granted in the first place? Mostly because of incumbent lobbying.
I'm not sure how AirBnB qualifies as "digital sharecropping" as opposed to, say, Metafilter, which is actual digital sharecropping.
posted by GuyZero at 3:05 PM on August 28, 2013 [4 favorites]
Uber is an odd example because taxis are possibly the worst-regulated industry around. Why are there so few taxi licenses granted in the first place? Mostly because of incumbent lobbying.
I'm not sure how AirBnB qualifies as "digital sharecropping" as opposed to, say, Metafilter, which is actual digital sharecropping.
posted by GuyZero at 3:05 PM on August 28, 2013 [4 favorites]
Mars, it's when you are working for free on someones elses land. facebook, Google Plus... Are you a digital sharecropper?
posted by dabitch at 3:06 PM on August 28, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by dabitch at 3:06 PM on August 28, 2013 [3 favorites]
I'm not sure there really is an increased assumption that strangers are not serial killers/rapists/creeps of whatever kind - what there might be is an increased ability to connect at a dustance in such a way that you can reasonably guess that they're not.
posted by Artw at 3:11 PM on August 28, 2013 [6 favorites]
posted by Artw at 3:11 PM on August 28, 2013 [6 favorites]
It's a pretty well known term. It refers to how major social websites derive economic value from the input of users who work for little or nothing. A good recent example was the valuation of Tumblr at $1B - the vast majority of that value was tied to the content created by the users, yet the actual money went into the pockets of the founders.
Jeff Atwood did a good piece on the subject a few years back.
posted by NoxAeternum at 3:13 PM on August 28, 2013 [12 favorites]
Jeff Atwood did a good piece on the subject a few years back.
posted by NoxAeternum at 3:13 PM on August 28, 2013 [12 favorites]
Gosh, it's awesome how everybody just learns to love each other and live together as one when we make a tiny change in our lives. We've spent thousands of years looking for the perfect society; who knew that all we needed to do to build a peaceful, happy society was to lock up everybody who breathes wrong? Sure, there pretty much no poor black men left who aren't behind bars – sure, that means the poor and those who aren't white are shafted if they want fathers or brothers or sons – but it's a small price to pay when you consider the fact that now I can rent that hip loft in downtown Berkeley instead of getting a drab hotel when I visit my friends in Marin.
posted by koeselitz at 3:13 PM on August 28, 2013 [6 favorites]
posted by koeselitz at 3:13 PM on August 28, 2013 [6 favorites]
I feel like the headline "Nearly All Of America Safer Than Ever Before" should run as a headline once a week to counteract the fear-mongering that Dateline and other media push to get ratings and views.
What, are you trying to put news media out of business? Do you want the US to become like Canada, where everything is just hunky-dory?
posted by filthy light thief at 3:13 PM on August 28, 2013
What, are you trying to put news media out of business? Do you want the US to become like Canada, where everything is just hunky-dory?
Newsperson: New Speedbumps!OK, that is a weird "speed bump".
posted by filthy light thief at 3:13 PM on August 28, 2013
Are youa digital sharecropper?
That linked piece describes something that isn't much like sharecropping at all. And it's also not at all like Uber or airbnb. I'm confused.
Sharecropping is when a tenant pays a share of their crops in lieu of rent. I work your land, I harvest a crop, and some share of that crop goes to the landlord rather than to me. It isn't an inherently unfair arrangement, but there is an unpleasant history of abusively onerous rents/shares being imposed on powerless tenants in many instances.
But I'm struggling to see the analogy to the practices described in the FPP. Ironically, of course, many traditional taxi services actually are a form of sharecropping. The owner of the taxi license rents out use of the taxi to drivers who pay him/her a share of the proceeds they bring in.
posted by yoink at 3:14 PM on August 28, 2013 [23 favorites]
That linked piece describes something that isn't much like sharecropping at all. And it's also not at all like Uber or airbnb. I'm confused.
Sharecropping is when a tenant pays a share of their crops in lieu of rent. I work your land, I harvest a crop, and some share of that crop goes to the landlord rather than to me. It isn't an inherently unfair arrangement, but there is an unpleasant history of abusively onerous rents/shares being imposed on powerless tenants in many instances.
But I'm struggling to see the analogy to the practices described in the FPP. Ironically, of course, many traditional taxi services actually are a form of sharecropping. The owner of the taxi license rents out use of the taxi to drivers who pay him/her a share of the proceeds they bring in.
posted by yoink at 3:14 PM on August 28, 2013 [23 favorites]
LA Weekly: Cabbies Push Back Against Uber and Lyft
posted by Pre-Taped Call In Show at 3:14 PM on August 28, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by Pre-Taped Call In Show at 3:14 PM on August 28, 2013 [2 favorites]
I was chatting with a colleague yesterday about some of the threads here about rape culture, harassment etc. We were having a good old rant. Then I got a text from her last night. Her car had broken down on the way home and she had accepted a lift from a total stranger. She said he was a big guy covered in tattoos, and she didn't want to turn him down in case he thought it was the tattoos and was offended. (His potential as a rapist/serial killer naturally being of less concern than committing a social faux pas.) When I saw her today I was like "So do you ever watch any movies?"
But yeah, stranger danger is largely a myth to cover up the reality that your biggest threat is from your nearest and dearest.
posted by billiebee at 3:16 PM on August 28, 2013 [14 favorites]
But yeah, stranger danger is largely a myth to cover up the reality that your biggest threat is from your nearest and dearest.
posted by billiebee at 3:16 PM on August 28, 2013 [14 favorites]
That linked piece describes something that isn't much like sharecropping at all.
Digital serf. There, happy?
posted by entropicamericana at 3:17 PM on August 28, 2013 [2 favorites]
Digital serf. There, happy?
posted by entropicamericana at 3:17 PM on August 28, 2013 [2 favorites]
Gosh, it's awesome how everybody just learns to love each other and live together as one when we make a tiny change in our lives. We've spent thousands of years looking for the perfect society; who knew that all we needed to do to build a peaceful, happy society was to lock up everybody who breathes wrong? Sure, there pretty much no poor black men left who aren't behind bars – sure, that means the poor and those who aren't white are shafted if they want fathers or brothers or sons – but it's a small price to pay when you consider the fact that now I can rent that hip loft in downtown Berkeley instead of getting a drab hotel when I visit my friends in Marin.
Uh...I don't think you mean to be saying this, but it sounds like you're suggesting that the high imprisonment rate of African Americans is, in fact, the reason for the drop in violent crime rates in Nth America.
posted by yoink at 3:18 PM on August 28, 2013 [19 favorites]
Uh...I don't think you mean to be saying this, but it sounds like you're suggesting that the high imprisonment rate of African Americans is, in fact, the reason for the drop in violent crime rates in Nth America.
posted by yoink at 3:18 PM on August 28, 2013 [19 favorites]
Also, this article is pretty much utter shit. Sorry; it is. Take this, for example:
“There have been a number of serial killers over the last decade who found their victims through Craigslist, as detailed in a recent feature for The Atlantic, but this is the exception that proves the rule: Craigslist is a Web 1.0 dinosaur that has stubbornly resisted the shift to a less anonymous, more social web. By contrast, services like Lyft ask users to sign in with Facebook.”
That's right, folks. Use Facebook, because Facebook foils serial killers! Everyone knows that serial killers have terrible taste in web design, and prefer sites that use basic webkit fonts and simple design. After all, serial killers invariably use decades-old ThinkPads running Windows 98, so of course they prefer Craigslist! They hiss and snarl in the presence of clean, modern web apps like Facebook.
Startups would like you to believe that they are going to save the world with their awesomeness. They would like you to believe that they are part of every single wonderful thing that's ever happened in this world. They'd like you to believe that because they're selling you something. But as Uber taught us in New York, they may or may not give two shits about important things like the rule of law and the sovereignty of cities and nations. They just want to make money.
posted by koeselitz at 3:19 PM on August 28, 2013 [14 favorites]
“There have been a number of serial killers over the last decade who found their victims through Craigslist, as detailed in a recent feature for The Atlantic, but this is the exception that proves the rule: Craigslist is a Web 1.0 dinosaur that has stubbornly resisted the shift to a less anonymous, more social web. By contrast, services like Lyft ask users to sign in with Facebook.”
That's right, folks. Use Facebook, because Facebook foils serial killers! Everyone knows that serial killers have terrible taste in web design, and prefer sites that use basic webkit fonts and simple design. After all, serial killers invariably use decades-old ThinkPads running Windows 98, so of course they prefer Craigslist! They hiss and snarl in the presence of clean, modern web apps like Facebook.
Startups would like you to believe that they are going to save the world with their awesomeness. They would like you to believe that they are part of every single wonderful thing that's ever happened in this world. They'd like you to believe that because they're selling you something. But as Uber taught us in New York, they may or may not give two shits about important things like the rule of law and the sovereignty of cities and nations. They just want to make money.
posted by koeselitz at 3:19 PM on August 28, 2013 [14 favorites]
She said he was a big guy covered in tattoos...But yeah, stranger danger is largely a myth to cover up the reality that your biggest threat is from your nearest and dearest.
So what you're saying is I should be very alarmed if my wife gets a bunch of tattoos?
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 3:21 PM on August 28, 2013 [3 favorites]
So what you're saying is I should be very alarmed if my wife gets a bunch of tattoos?
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 3:21 PM on August 28, 2013 [3 favorites]
So the pitiless, relentless decline in violent crime has been ruthlessly hunting down and eliminating serial killers one by one?
posted by Western Infidels at 3:21 PM on August 28, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by Western Infidels at 3:21 PM on August 28, 2013 [2 favorites]
But with AirBnB it's just a marketplace. With sharecropping the land owner has a serious power imbalance over the field workers - there's only so much land and seed but there are always more workers.
With AirBnB, the site is as dependent on the property owners as the owners are on the site. Possibly more dependent - if all AirBnB users go to VRBO, AirBnB is finished. it's only actual asset is brand equity. (which is why it's the perfect dot-com company).
At any rate I'm not sure what the thesis of the article is either. Dropping crime rates don't mean you can give up on due diligence. Social media doesn't mean you can just google someone instead of being careful.
posted by GuyZero at 3:21 PM on August 28, 2013 [4 favorites]
With AirBnB, the site is as dependent on the property owners as the owners are on the site. Possibly more dependent - if all AirBnB users go to VRBO, AirBnB is finished. it's only actual asset is brand equity. (which is why it's the perfect dot-com company).
At any rate I'm not sure what the thesis of the article is either. Dropping crime rates don't mean you can give up on due diligence. Social media doesn't mean you can just google someone instead of being careful.
posted by GuyZero at 3:21 PM on August 28, 2013 [4 favorites]
That's right, folks. Use Facebook, because Facebook foils serial killers! Everyone knows that serial killers have terrible taste in web design, and prefer sites that use basic webkit fonts and simple design. After all, serial killers invariably use decades-old ThinkPads running Windows 98, so of course they prefer Craigslist! They hiss and snarl in the presence of clean, modern web apps like Facebook.
I don't think the argument is that Facebook's look makes the difference. I think the point is that Facebook's functionality makes anonymous contact inherently more difficult.
posted by yoink at 3:23 PM on August 28, 2013 [5 favorites]
I don't think the argument is that Facebook's look makes the difference. I think the point is that Facebook's functionality makes anonymous contact inherently more difficult.
posted by yoink at 3:23 PM on August 28, 2013 [5 favorites]
The article talks about a decline in serial killers (which seems like an odd hook), but also talks about the bigger decline in violent crime in general. Which is very big and very real.
Koeselitz brings up incarceration rates among black men, but while racial disparities persist, incarceration rates in general are down, including among black men.
So yeah: it isn't a matter of "locking up everyone who breathes wrong." We did do that, and it was unjust, and we're now slowly stopping it. We're stopping at the same time we're killing each other at a lower rate.
The point of the article seems to be that the rise of certain kinds of businesses may be, in part, related to a set of particular massive improvements in the world. An improvement which is clearly not limited to affluent people.
Obvious caveat that just because some things have improved, not everything has (see wages), and that some improvement isn't necessarily enough. But really, it is OK for folks to accept that some things have gotten better.
posted by feckless at 3:23 PM on August 28, 2013 [6 favorites]
Koeselitz brings up incarceration rates among black men, but while racial disparities persist, incarceration rates in general are down, including among black men.
So yeah: it isn't a matter of "locking up everyone who breathes wrong." We did do that, and it was unjust, and we're now slowly stopping it. We're stopping at the same time we're killing each other at a lower rate.
The point of the article seems to be that the rise of certain kinds of businesses may be, in part, related to a set of particular massive improvements in the world. An improvement which is clearly not limited to affluent people.
Obvious caveat that just because some things have improved, not everything has (see wages), and that some improvement isn't necessarily enough. But really, it is OK for folks to accept that some things have gotten better.
posted by feckless at 3:23 PM on August 28, 2013 [6 favorites]
yoink: “Uh...I don't think you mean to be saying this, but it sounds like you're suggesting that the high imprisonment rate of African Americans is, in fact, the reason for the drop in violent crime rates in Nth America.”
It's pretty clear that the indiscriminate imprisonment of millions upon millions of people is really and truly the reason for the drop in violent crime rates. In the same way, it's pretty clear that the indiscriminate application of stop and frisk in New York (often disproportionately applied to the poor and to non-white people) is a big part of the drop in crime there. What I'm saying is that neither of those things are just or fair. But of course, if you start putting thousands of people up against walls and frisking them every day, if you start locking people up en masse without actually taking the trouble to figure out if they're actually guilty of anything, yes, you will see a drop in the crime rate.
posted by koeselitz at 3:24 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
It's pretty clear that the indiscriminate imprisonment of millions upon millions of people is really and truly the reason for the drop in violent crime rates. In the same way, it's pretty clear that the indiscriminate application of stop and frisk in New York (often disproportionately applied to the poor and to non-white people) is a big part of the drop in crime there. What I'm saying is that neither of those things are just or fair. But of course, if you start putting thousands of people up against walls and frisking them every day, if you start locking people up en masse without actually taking the trouble to figure out if they're actually guilty of anything, yes, you will see a drop in the crime rate.
posted by koeselitz at 3:24 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
[disclaimer: blatantly heteronormative male discussion. I only parade my sexuality below because it's pertinent. ]
In the early days of Friendster, I used it to get dates. Which is to say, before asking a woman out, I checked to see we were a small number of Friendster hops away. I didn't spend time with her profile or anything, and I'd use other media to actually ask her out. But Friendster was a useful way for women to verify probable-non-axe-murderer-ness in first dates, and so made it easier for strangers to acquaint themselves with each other.
posted by ocschwar at 3:27 PM on August 28, 2013
In the early days of Friendster, I used it to get dates. Which is to say, before asking a woman out, I checked to see we were a small number of Friendster hops away. I didn't spend time with her profile or anything, and I'd use other media to actually ask her out. But Friendster was a useful way for women to verify probable-non-axe-murderer-ness in first dates, and so made it easier for strangers to acquaint themselves with each other.
posted by ocschwar at 3:27 PM on August 28, 2013
It's pretty clear that the indiscriminate imprisonment of millions upon millions of people is really and truly the reason for the drop in violent crime rates.
I fervently hope that that isn't true. More than that, I'm pretty confident it isn't true. The USA is a bizarre outlier among the world's nations in the number of people it locks up and the severity of the sentences it imposes. It is not, however, a bizarre outlier in its low rates of violent crime. I think we could release enormous numbers of people from the US prison system without seeing a corresponding or catastrophic rise in violent crime. I think the belief that this insane system of overincarceration is what is "keeping us safe" is one of the more pernicious beliefs in US political discourse (look at what's currently happening in California where the Governor is trying to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to shift nonviolent inmates to private prisons rather than do the obvious thing to comply with the court order to reduce overcrowding in state prisons). I'm surprised to see you pushing that line.
posted by yoink at 3:29 PM on August 28, 2013 [23 favorites]
I fervently hope that that isn't true. More than that, I'm pretty confident it isn't true. The USA is a bizarre outlier among the world's nations in the number of people it locks up and the severity of the sentences it imposes. It is not, however, a bizarre outlier in its low rates of violent crime. I think we could release enormous numbers of people from the US prison system without seeing a corresponding or catastrophic rise in violent crime. I think the belief that this insane system of overincarceration is what is "keeping us safe" is one of the more pernicious beliefs in US political discourse (look at what's currently happening in California where the Governor is trying to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to shift nonviolent inmates to private prisons rather than do the obvious thing to comply with the court order to reduce overcrowding in state prisons). I'm surprised to see you pushing that line.
posted by yoink at 3:29 PM on August 28, 2013 [23 favorites]
So the decline in serial killers is down to the rise in forward thinking web 2.0 businesses at the expense of outmoded web 1.0 sites? I have (an increasingly small number of) pirates that could sell you an increase in sea levels ...
posted by Len at 3:30 PM on August 28, 2013 [5 favorites]
posted by Len at 3:30 PM on August 28, 2013 [5 favorites]
The "they exist on social media so they must be real" may be a way that people vet each other these days, but there are plenty of cray people on social media too. ;)
AirB&B rentals deemed illegal in New York. In Stockholm Uber threw a PR tantrum when their unfair advantages were strangled by ticket-giving cops.. In Toronto Uber decided to be assholes and hiked up the price during a storm.
posted by dabitch at 3:30 PM on August 28, 2013 [5 favorites]
AirB&B rentals deemed illegal in New York. In Stockholm Uber threw a PR tantrum when their unfair advantages were strangled by ticket-giving cops.. In Toronto Uber decided to be assholes and hiked up the price during a storm.
posted by dabitch at 3:30 PM on August 28, 2013 [5 favorites]
yoink: “I think the belief that this insane system of overincarceration is what is "keeping us safe" is one of the more pernicious beliefs in US political discourse... I'm surprised to see you pushing that line.”
Well – I'll confess that it's mostly that I've given up on arguing that part of it. I honestly don't think it matters if indiscriminate imprisonment lowers the crime rate; it's wrong, and that massive injustice is far too high a price to pay for a little security. To be honest, I feel more like I agree with this every day, although it's still a little extreme for my taste on some counts.
posted by koeselitz at 3:35 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
Well – I'll confess that it's mostly that I've given up on arguing that part of it. I honestly don't think it matters if indiscriminate imprisonment lowers the crime rate; it's wrong, and that massive injustice is far too high a price to pay for a little security. To be honest, I feel more like I agree with this every day, although it's still a little extreme for my taste on some counts.
posted by koeselitz at 3:35 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
Koeselitz, America's policy of mass incarceration is unique in the west, but violent crime is dropping sharply everywhere. How can one explain the other?
posted by Pre-Taped Call In Show at 3:36 PM on August 28, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by Pre-Taped Call In Show at 3:36 PM on August 28, 2013 [4 favorites]
It's pretty clear that the indiscriminate imprisonment of millions upon millions of people is really and truly the reason for the drop in violent crime rates.
That is simply not true, or at least is heavily in dispute. For one thing the crime rate started dropping (peaking in the mid 90s) before the incarceration rate did (peaking in the early 2000s).
posted by feckless at 3:36 PM on August 28, 2013 [4 favorites]
That is simply not true, or at least is heavily in dispute. For one thing the crime rate started dropping (peaking in the mid 90s) before the incarceration rate did (peaking in the early 2000s).
posted by feckless at 3:36 PM on August 28, 2013 [4 favorites]
In Toronto Uber decided to be assholes and hiked up the price during a storm.
Economists call this "economically rational behaviour." The real question is why it doesn't happen for everything because it's not like the price of goods & services never goes up or down in general.
posted by GuyZero at 3:36 PM on August 28, 2013 [3 favorites]
Economists call this "economically rational behaviour." The real question is why it doesn't happen for everything because it's not like the price of goods & services never goes up or down in general.
posted by GuyZero at 3:36 PM on August 28, 2013 [3 favorites]
It's pretty clear that the indiscriminate imprisonment of millions upon millions of people is really and truly the reason for the drop in violent crime rates.
Stephen Pinker's The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined is 832 pages of exploring why violence is on the decline. Incarceration rates are a pretty tiny part of it.
posted by GuyZero at 3:38 PM on August 28, 2013 [6 favorites]
Stephen Pinker's The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined is 832 pages of exploring why violence is on the decline. Incarceration rates are a pretty tiny part of it.
posted by GuyZero at 3:38 PM on August 28, 2013 [6 favorites]
GuyZero: That's the exact same theory used to argue that the NCAA is ultimately held in check by the colleges - if the NCAA acts too onerously, then the colleges will leave. In reality, the only way that works is if there's a mass revolt where a large amount of the user base leaves. Otherwise, the brand equity winds up being a very powerful point of leverage against single actors or even small groups - a single property owner leaving Airbnb has very little effect on Airbnb, but can absolutely cripple the departing owner due to the loss of access to the brand and the access and resources it provides.
posted by NoxAeternum at 3:39 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by NoxAeternum at 3:39 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
It's pretty clear that the indiscriminate imprisonment of millions upon millions of people is really and truly the reason for the drop in violent crime rates.
No, in fact, because just as many have been born -- hell, even more. It's not only clear, it's very clear that incarceration rates have zero impact on crime rates.
What is far more clear a link is simple. Leaded gas. Now, we are not blowing lead into the air, giving every child in the country a dose of a neurotoxin that, among other things, causes problems with impulse control.
And, amazingly enough, almost every country that has banned leaded gas has seen a dramatic decline in crime rates, starting about 8 years after the ban and continuing for at least 12 years more.
posted by eriko at 3:40 PM on August 28, 2013 [19 favorites]
No, in fact, because just as many have been born -- hell, even more. It's not only clear, it's very clear that incarceration rates have zero impact on crime rates.
What is far more clear a link is simple. Leaded gas. Now, we are not blowing lead into the air, giving every child in the country a dose of a neurotoxin that, among other things, causes problems with impulse control.
And, amazingly enough, almost every country that has banned leaded gas has seen a dramatic decline in crime rates, starting about 8 years after the ban and continuing for at least 12 years more.
posted by eriko at 3:40 PM on August 28, 2013 [19 favorites]
What is far more clear a link is simple. Leaded gas.
Seriously guys. Read Pinker first. Although that is indeed a factor.
posted by GuyZero at 3:41 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
Seriously guys. Read Pinker first. Although that is indeed a factor.
posted by GuyZero at 3:41 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
"economically rational behaviour." The real question is why it doesn't happen for everything
maybe because like a bunch of things economists believe, it is full of douchenozzelery, and assumes that the people on the other end of the transactions have neither a sense of fairness, nor the ability to remember how and by whom they were 'rationally acted' upon in the past?
posted by hap_hazard at 3:41 PM on August 28, 2013 [5 favorites]
maybe because like a bunch of things economists believe, it is full of douchenozzelery, and assumes that the people on the other end of the transactions have neither a sense of fairness, nor the ability to remember how and by whom they were 'rationally acted' upon in the past?
posted by hap_hazard at 3:41 PM on August 28, 2013 [5 favorites]
a single property owner leaving Airbnb has very little effect on Airbnb, but can absolutely cripple the departing owner due to the loss of access to the brand and the access and resources it provides.
But unlike the NCAA there is no exclusivity to AirBnB - there's VRBO and potentially lots of other sites. Although I do agree with you - there's a positive feedback/network effect to sites like this which does tend to lead to a winner-takes-all situation.
posted by GuyZero at 3:43 PM on August 28, 2013
But unlike the NCAA there is no exclusivity to AirBnB - there's VRBO and potentially lots of other sites. Although I do agree with you - there's a positive feedback/network effect to sites like this which does tend to lead to a winner-takes-all situation.
posted by GuyZero at 3:43 PM on August 28, 2013
I really don't see how this could ever be called digital sharecropping, unless you can dramatically redefine digital sharecropping and show how it applies here. Digital sharecropping was coined for the circumstance when you build your software on top of something that somebody else owns, like building a Facebook app on top of Facebook APIs, where Facebook is the land, and you can't transfer your work anywhere else. Some people apply it to developing a Windows application, because you have no control of when Microsoft will change the the API. The most quintessential example of this is the App Store for iOS apps; you're farming Apple's land when you make money on the App Store, and you had better not ever forget that, because your income could be gone tomorrow if Apple has the slightest Whim. Jeff Atwood may have changed and popularized the term, but I first heard it from Mark Pilgrim, and he was a much better advocate of it before he committed his info-suicide. Sharecropping involves the land owner taking a percentage of the profits, so the "working for free" makes little sense in Atwood's definition of digital sharecropping. The danger of being a sharecropper is that you may not be able to sharecrop next year unless your landlord wants you too, you are in a position of less power, and in danger of being exploited.
With Lyft, AirBNB, etc. the person providing a ride or renting their house still owns their car or house, and they can seek to advertise their own services or take their resources to a different customer-connection service. They literally own the "land" in question, and AirBNB connects customers to people who own the the land. If you are sick of AirBNB, go to VRBO, or some other service. Unlike Apple's App Store or Facebook Apps, there is no close tie between your labor and the particular service, your house is perfectly portable to any of the many booking services. Lyft or AirBNB act as salesmen, but they are easily replaced with other salesmen.
I think a far better derisive term for these services is probably mini-capitalism, or capitalism-lite. Those that have a bit of extra capital that would typically go un-used, such as a car or extra homes, can derive small amounts of revenue from their marginal contribution, without having to open and market a large chain, or have a huge supply of rooms, or build a brand, or anything like that.
With typical cabbie systems, where the drivers rent the car or rent time with the medallion, the laborers literally do not own the means of production and these systems are far more like sharecropping, and usually far more exploitive.
posted by Llama-Lime at 3:43 PM on August 28, 2013 [17 favorites]
With Lyft, AirBNB, etc. the person providing a ride or renting their house still owns their car or house, and they can seek to advertise their own services or take their resources to a different customer-connection service. They literally own the "land" in question, and AirBNB connects customers to people who own the the land. If you are sick of AirBNB, go to VRBO, or some other service. Unlike Apple's App Store or Facebook Apps, there is no close tie between your labor and the particular service, your house is perfectly portable to any of the many booking services. Lyft or AirBNB act as salesmen, but they are easily replaced with other salesmen.
I think a far better derisive term for these services is probably mini-capitalism, or capitalism-lite. Those that have a bit of extra capital that would typically go un-used, such as a car or extra homes, can derive small amounts of revenue from their marginal contribution, without having to open and market a large chain, or have a huge supply of rooms, or build a brand, or anything like that.
With typical cabbie systems, where the drivers rent the car or rent time with the medallion, the laborers literally do not own the means of production and these systems are far more like sharecropping, and usually far more exploitive.
posted by Llama-Lime at 3:43 PM on August 28, 2013 [17 favorites]
We already did a whole long thread on the Toronto Uber thing (one which, in my opinion, the better arguments were on the "it was perfectly o.k.") side. I think it's a distraction in this thread.
posted by yoink at 3:44 PM on August 28, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by yoink at 3:44 PM on August 28, 2013 [3 favorites]
I personally am not a serial butt stabber because it seems like too much work.
posted by elizardbits at 3:46 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by elizardbits at 3:46 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
Llama-lime: Again, the argument that one can leave the network and either go solo or find a competing service doesn't hold up in practice. If Airbnb is the dominant player with the vast majority of the market, then there is no choice - you either play by their rules, or you don't play.
posted by NoxAeternum at 3:54 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by NoxAeternum at 3:54 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
If Airbnb is the dominant player with the vast majority of the market, then there is no choice - you either play by their rules, or you don't play.
But individuals don't need the entire market, they just need to fill their relatively tiny capacity. If you can list your condo on VRBO and be completely booked then you don't need AirBnB.
posted by GuyZero at 4:00 PM on August 28, 2013
But individuals don't need the entire market, they just need to fill their relatively tiny capacity. If you can list your condo on VRBO and be completely booked then you don't need AirBnB.
posted by GuyZero at 4:00 PM on August 28, 2013
So I'm totally confused by this article.
First it threw out the names of services like AirBnB as examples of "digital sharecropping" in the subtitle to the article, but then when it went on to give an example of "digital sharecropping" in the first paragraph, it described something that was more like a content farm.
I still don't know what digital sharcropping is, what content farming has to do with Airbnb, and why either one of them have anything to do with the decline of serial killers. Seriously, they could have thrown something in there about how strawberry yogurt prices also affected things and it would have made as much sense.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 4:04 PM on August 28, 2013 [4 favorites]
First it threw out the names of services like AirBnB as examples of "digital sharecropping" in the subtitle to the article, but then when it went on to give an example of "digital sharecropping" in the first paragraph, it described something that was more like a content farm.
I still don't know what digital sharcropping is, what content farming has to do with Airbnb, and why either one of them have anything to do with the decline of serial killers. Seriously, they could have thrown something in there about how strawberry yogurt prices also affected things and it would have made as much sense.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 4:04 PM on August 28, 2013 [4 favorites]
People with the ability, resources and background to use expensive information technology are more willing to trust people who also have the ability, resources and background to access said technology.
posted by The Whelk at 4:13 PM on August 28, 2013 [11 favorites]
posted by The Whelk at 4:13 PM on August 28, 2013 [11 favorites]
If Airbnb is the dominant player with the vast majority of the market, then there is no choice - you either play by their rules, or you don't play.
But the entire history of internet services is a testament against something like this being the status quo in the long run. If there is one thing that has been proven time and time again with social networks, web stores, and so on is that everyone is willing to abandon ship with the drop of a hat if a new services comes up with better features. How many now-market-leaders are the very first iteration of the concept from which they're profiting? How many massively-populated/used services are now ghost towns?
I mean replace "Airbnb" in your sentence with any once-popular now-doomed service and it'll be correct right up until it isn't, just as it is with AirBNB.
posted by griphus at 4:14 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
But the entire history of internet services is a testament against something like this being the status quo in the long run. If there is one thing that has been proven time and time again with social networks, web stores, and so on is that everyone is willing to abandon ship with the drop of a hat if a new services comes up with better features. How many now-market-leaders are the very first iteration of the concept from which they're profiting? How many massively-populated/used services are now ghost towns?
I mean replace "Airbnb" in your sentence with any once-popular now-doomed service and it'll be correct right up until it isn't, just as it is with AirBNB.
posted by griphus at 4:14 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
GuyZero: Sure, if you can fill up your capacity on a competing service, then you will be okay to move. But that's a much bigger hypothetical than you think. What if there is no competing service that has a user base big enough to give you reasonable assurance that you can fill your capacity?
Remember, the Internet trends towards monopoly, especially with services built to some degree around user base (as Google Reader so clearly demonstrated).
posted by NoxAeternum at 4:16 PM on August 28, 2013
Remember, the Internet trends towards monopoly, especially with services built to some degree around user base (as Google Reader so clearly demonstrated).
posted by NoxAeternum at 4:16 PM on August 28, 2013
I thought crime rates are lower because of increased reproductive rights.
posted by MoxieProxy at 4:17 PM on August 28, 2013
posted by MoxieProxy at 4:17 PM on August 28, 2013
I'm not sure what's behind the lower crime rates, but I'm sure it's one single thing that's easy to point at.
posted by bleep-blop at 4:20 PM on August 28, 2013 [34 favorites]
posted by bleep-blop at 4:20 PM on August 28, 2013 [34 favorites]
as Google Reader so clearly demonstrated
I dont think thats a good example at all. The main reason there wasnt a lot of movement in that space is that no one, including Reader, made any money off it. Maybe now someone will, maybe not, but its not some big commercial space that one company dominated.
These services involve actual money, so theres a lot more incentive for new players to challenge incumbents.
posted by wildcrdj at 4:35 PM on August 28, 2013
I dont think thats a good example at all. The main reason there wasnt a lot of movement in that space is that no one, including Reader, made any money off it. Maybe now someone will, maybe not, but its not some big commercial space that one company dominated.
These services involve actual money, so theres a lot more incentive for new players to challenge incumbents.
posted by wildcrdj at 4:35 PM on August 28, 2013
Sharecropping is when a tenant pays a share of their crops in lieu of rent.
Or like when a taxi driver works the first half of his shift paying the $100+ "gate fee" to the corporation which controls the medallions needed to drive taxis in that city...
With sharecropping the land owner has a serious power imbalance over the field workers - there's only so much land and seed but there are always more workers.
There are only so many taxi medallions but there are always more drivers.
posted by alexei at 4:44 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
Or like when a taxi driver works the first half of his shift paying the $100+ "gate fee" to the corporation which controls the medallions needed to drive taxis in that city...
With sharecropping the land owner has a serious power imbalance over the field workers - there's only so much land and seed but there are always more workers.
There are only so many taxi medallions but there are always more drivers.
posted by alexei at 4:44 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
He has a point, I'd be more likely to trust someone from MetaFilter than a complete stranger.
Everyone except scarabic.
posted by arcticseal at 4:45 PM on August 28, 2013 [14 favorites]
Everyone except scarabic.
posted by arcticseal at 4:45 PM on August 28, 2013 [14 favorites]
Mars, it's when you are working for free on someones elses land.Metafilter isn't anything like that. We pay!
posted by This, of course, alludes to you at 4:50 PM on August 28, 2013 [2 favorites]
ooh, I know how Airbnb is like digital sharecropping. It's because of the new contract they have with landlords where you rent a new place and part of the lease says that you agree to airbnb out the apartment at least one week per year and the landlord gets that money, but if you rent it out any more then you get to keep the extra money.
Right?
posted by jacalata at 4:54 PM on August 28, 2013
Right?
posted by jacalata at 4:54 PM on August 28, 2013
There are about a zillion compelling arguments about crime rate decline. Incarceration rarely figures into them.
posted by ead at 5:03 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by ead at 5:03 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
If there is one thing that has been proven time and time again with social networks, web stores, and so on is that everyone is willing to abandon ship with the drop of a hat if a new services comes up with better features
Google+ wishes this were true.
posted by Sangermaine at 5:04 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
Google+ wishes this were true.
posted by Sangermaine at 5:04 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
wildcrdj: There was no movement in that space because there was a large corporate interest dominating the field - Google. And because of their monetization strategy and willingness to innovate early on, they were able to starve out the competition relying on direct funding. Ultimately, their control of that service sector became so absolute that people just stopped trying to compete.
alexei: And Lyft/Uber instead take a percentage of each fare. Which ultimately winds up worse for the cabbie - instead of just paying a flat rental fee, they're paying constantly into the company's coffers. As for why medallions are limited, Thomas Malthus had some good points there.
posted by NoxAeternum at 5:04 PM on August 28, 2013
alexei: And Lyft/Uber instead take a percentage of each fare. Which ultimately winds up worse for the cabbie - instead of just paying a flat rental fee, they're paying constantly into the company's coffers. As for why medallions are limited, Thomas Malthus had some good points there.
posted by NoxAeternum at 5:04 PM on August 28, 2013
People with the ability, resources and background to use expensive information technology are more willing to trust people who also have the ability, resources and background to access said technology.
posted by The Whelk at 4:13 PM on August 28
Can I underline this?
It's not a rise of trust in strangers, it's a rise of trust in the filtering potential of new niche technologies.
posted by subdee at 5:08 PM on August 28, 2013 [5 favorites]
posted by The Whelk at 4:13 PM on August 28
Can I underline this?
It's not a rise of trust in strangers, it's a rise of trust in the filtering potential of new niche technologies.
posted by subdee at 5:08 PM on August 28, 2013 [5 favorites]
@subdee
I dunno, I've begun to trust people like that a lot less
posted by This, of course, alludes to you at 5:10 PM on August 28, 2013
I dunno, I've begun to trust people like that a lot less
posted by This, of course, alludes to you at 5:10 PM on August 28, 2013
The article also overlooks the fact that a lot of these technologies, like Uber, have rating systems built in. You trust a stranger to give you a ride because he's a stranger with a 5-star user rating.
posted by subdee at 5:12 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by subdee at 5:12 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
Google+ wishes this were true.
Google+ should change its name to Garbo+: "Garbo+: when you vant to be alone."
posted by yoink at 5:18 PM on August 28, 2013 [3 favorites]
Google+ should change its name to Garbo+: "Garbo+: when you vant to be alone."
posted by yoink at 5:18 PM on August 28, 2013 [3 favorites]
Does this mean we can eat homemade Trick-or-Treat candy again?
posted by cacofonie at 5:22 PM on August 28, 2013 [6 favorites]
posted by cacofonie at 5:22 PM on August 28, 2013 [6 favorites]
Remember, the Internet trends towards monopoly, especially with services built to some degree around user base (as Google Reader so clearly demonstrated).
You can't compare a service with no physical limits (search engines, RSS aggregators) to ones with actual physical components (apartment rental, taxi rides). Network effects do lead to winner-take-all but transaction costs associated with the rental of physical goods dampen the positive feedback effect. AirBnB would move towards a monopoly iff it didn't charge any fees, like Craigslist.
posted by GuyZero at 5:26 PM on August 28, 2013
You can't compare a service with no physical limits (search engines, RSS aggregators) to ones with actual physical components (apartment rental, taxi rides). Network effects do lead to winner-take-all but transaction costs associated with the rental of physical goods dampen the positive feedback effect. AirBnB would move towards a monopoly iff it didn't charge any fees, like Craigslist.
posted by GuyZero at 5:26 PM on August 28, 2013
I'm not sure why Uber gets lumped in with Lyft in this conversation. At least the part of Uber's service that hooks you up with real cab drivers. All the cab drivers that I've spoken to like Uber. It's a lead generating service for them with guaranteed payment.
Personally I stay away from UberX though. I don't know who these people are who think serial killers and rapists don't exist anymore but I'm not about to get into some stranger's car and let them drive me wherever they want just for UberX to have the motive to cover it up. At least if a taxi driver did that there'd be a picture of me getting into the car someplace.
posted by bleep at 5:27 PM on August 28, 2013
Personally I stay away from UberX though. I don't know who these people are who think serial killers and rapists don't exist anymore but I'm not about to get into some stranger's car and let them drive me wherever they want just for UberX to have the motive to cover it up. At least if a taxi driver did that there'd be a picture of me getting into the car someplace.
posted by bleep at 5:27 PM on August 28, 2013
real cab drivers
I believe you mean "arbitrary people vetted by the nanny state and given monopoly powers in the field of car transportation."
posted by GuyZero at 5:28 PM on August 28, 2013
I believe you mean "arbitrary people vetted by the nanny state and given monopoly powers in the field of car transportation."
posted by GuyZero at 5:28 PM on August 28, 2013
This article is stupid. There are definitely two things happening: increase of sharing culture (and ways to monetize that), decrease in crime. The weird pseudo-causal missing link is ... Craigslist where serial killers prey on people because they haven't 2.0-ed up their interface?
People with the ability, resources and background to use expensive information technology are more willing to trust people who also have the ability, resources and background to access said technology.
Exactly. The tech/access is a class filter plus the rise of facebook (itself a class filter on MySpace at some level) means that you can tell people all about the new sharing that you are doing. Before when I had dirty hippies sleep at my place for free it was just me being dumb and only my neighbors knew about it. Now if I charge them $75/night to do it via AirBnB, it's almost the same people but I don't look so dumb even though the risks are almost the same and you hear about it because I'm encouraged to tweet/facebook/whatever about it.
And I'm not sure where he is going with the city/suburbs thing at all. Out in rural USA we have very very few of these sexy sharing options, but we maybe don't need them because we are all friendly and share anyhow because otherwise you don't survive the winter.
posted by jessamyn at 5:29 PM on August 28, 2013 [8 favorites]
People with the ability, resources and background to use expensive information technology are more willing to trust people who also have the ability, resources and background to access said technology.
Exactly. The tech/access is a class filter plus the rise of facebook (itself a class filter on MySpace at some level) means that you can tell people all about the new sharing that you are doing. Before when I had dirty hippies sleep at my place for free it was just me being dumb and only my neighbors knew about it. Now if I charge them $75/night to do it via AirBnB, it's almost the same people but I don't look so dumb even though the risks are almost the same and you hear about it because I'm encouraged to tweet/facebook/whatever about it.
And I'm not sure where he is going with the city/suburbs thing at all. Out in rural USA we have very very few of these sexy sharing options, but we maybe don't need them because we are all friendly and share anyhow because otherwise you don't survive the winter.
posted by jessamyn at 5:29 PM on August 28, 2013 [8 favorites]
I believe you mean "arbitrary people vetted by the nanny state and given monopoly powers in the field of car transportation."
Also people with a little bit more invested and a little bit more to lose if they really want to do something bad.
posted by bleep at 5:31 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
Also people with a little bit more invested and a little bit more to lose if they really want to do something bad.
posted by bleep at 5:31 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
"Digital Sharecropping" is such an asshole phrase.
Content by itself is almost free. Fill a million notebooks with your scribblings and it's useless. That's been true forever. What's valuable is getting the content in front of other people. Some of that value is money, some of that value is ego-bo, and some of it is social capital. The reasons that so many sites like tumblr or what-have-you are worth so much is they have create a reliable, friendly way to share your content with others and do so in a way that scratches a particular itch that many people want. That's actually hard to do well!
Real world sharing on the other hand, is a totally different thing, and more online making arbitrage cheap enough that it's actually possible for tiny bits of capital like "use my car for a few hours" or "rent my studio for a day".
Sharecropping? Sharecropping is a meager step up from serfdom, none of which is being used here.
(Oh and I'd argue that the reason SF's murder rate is so low is the crazy ass gentrification more than anything else. Otherwise you'd expect a similar drop in the cities nearby.)
posted by aspo at 5:32 PM on August 28, 2013 [4 favorites]
Content by itself is almost free. Fill a million notebooks with your scribblings and it's useless. That's been true forever. What's valuable is getting the content in front of other people. Some of that value is money, some of that value is ego-bo, and some of it is social capital. The reasons that so many sites like tumblr or what-have-you are worth so much is they have create a reliable, friendly way to share your content with others and do so in a way that scratches a particular itch that many people want. That's actually hard to do well!
Real world sharing on the other hand, is a totally different thing, and more online making arbitrage cheap enough that it's actually possible for tiny bits of capital like "use my car for a few hours" or "rent my studio for a day".
Sharecropping? Sharecropping is a meager step up from serfdom, none of which is being used here.
(Oh and I'd argue that the reason SF's murder rate is so low is the crazy ass gentrification more than anything else. Otherwise you'd expect a similar drop in the cities nearby.)
posted by aspo at 5:32 PM on August 28, 2013 [4 favorites]
aspo: ""Digital Sharecropping" is such an asshole phrase."
I have to agree. I mean, comparing your dissatisfaction with social media to a backbreaking cycle of poverty, debt, and despair isn't quite as shitty as say, calling a miserable work retreat "like Auschwitz" but it's pretty fucking bad.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 5:51 PM on August 28, 2013 [3 favorites]
I have to agree. I mean, comparing your dissatisfaction with social media to a backbreaking cycle of poverty, debt, and despair isn't quite as shitty as say, calling a miserable work retreat "like Auschwitz" but it's pretty fucking bad.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 5:51 PM on August 28, 2013 [3 favorites]
I'd feel more sorry for the taxi drivers if taking a cab in LA and San Francisco wasn't a fucking nightmare experience. I'd be more scared of being murdered by the crazy cabbies I've had than by the uniformly professional Uber drivers I've had.
posted by Ghostride The Whip at 6:03 PM on August 28, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by Ghostride The Whip at 6:03 PM on August 28, 2013 [2 favorites]
Coincidentally, I am reading this while watching the likely final season of Dexter...
posted by Nanukthedog at 6:26 PM on August 28, 2013
posted by Nanukthedog at 6:26 PM on August 28, 2013
(Oh and I'd argue that the reason SF's murder rate is so low is the crazy ass gentrification more than anything else. Otherwise you'd expect a similar drop in the cities nearby.)
Because hipsters and yuppies (with the exception of Patrick Bateman) are too busy tweeting to take the time to murder their neighbors?
posted by ActingTheGoat at 7:08 PM on August 28, 2013
Because hipsters and yuppies (with the exception of Patrick Bateman) are too busy tweeting to take the time to murder their neighbors?
posted by ActingTheGoat at 7:08 PM on August 28, 2013
"Seriously guys. Read Pinker first. Although that is indeed a factor."
Pinker's thesis and book is badly flawed.
"It's pretty clear that the indiscriminate imprisonment of millions upon millions of people is really and truly the reason for the drop in violent crime rates."
Yeah, this is an unusual flub by koeselitz. It's just not true. I mean, it's certainly not true that "it's clear that...", but it's also true that incarceration isn't the cause. Incarceration didn't increase everywhere in the US where violent crime has declined, and certainly didn't increase everywhere in the world where violent crime has declined. This is a worldwide trend, it's not explained by changes in US sentencing guidelines.
But over and over, all around the world and offset by about 20 years, there's a correlation between environmental lead exposure and violent crime rates. Not the same 20 year interval: some places adopted leaded gasoline earlier or later, and some eliminated it earlier or later. As well as it remaining, or having been removed, from paint and plumbing and correlating to violent crime rates.
And of course we know quite well that developmental lead exposure causes neurological damage in the part of the brain related to judgment and impulse control. We have an extremely plausible mechanism, we have a well documented environmental exposure to children, and that correlates to violent crime with a 20 year lag, both the environmental loading going up, and then coming down.
That's about a bazillion times more plausible than Pinker's story. It's more plausible than broken window policing and such because crime has declined where those methods weren't used and has failed to decline where they were.
That's not to say that all these other things don't matter, because they almost certainly do matter. Take all the usual factors put forward for contributing to violent crime and they probably collectively account for a baseline of crime that we could raise or lower by addressing those things; but environmental lead has been one big, honking factor that jacked up violent crime rates for a few generations.
posted by Ivan Fyodorovich at 7:36 PM on August 28, 2013 [15 favorites]
Pinker's thesis and book is badly flawed.
"It's pretty clear that the indiscriminate imprisonment of millions upon millions of people is really and truly the reason for the drop in violent crime rates."
Yeah, this is an unusual flub by koeselitz. It's just not true. I mean, it's certainly not true that "it's clear that...", but it's also true that incarceration isn't the cause. Incarceration didn't increase everywhere in the US where violent crime has declined, and certainly didn't increase everywhere in the world where violent crime has declined. This is a worldwide trend, it's not explained by changes in US sentencing guidelines.
But over and over, all around the world and offset by about 20 years, there's a correlation between environmental lead exposure and violent crime rates. Not the same 20 year interval: some places adopted leaded gasoline earlier or later, and some eliminated it earlier or later. As well as it remaining, or having been removed, from paint and plumbing and correlating to violent crime rates.
And of course we know quite well that developmental lead exposure causes neurological damage in the part of the brain related to judgment and impulse control. We have an extremely plausible mechanism, we have a well documented environmental exposure to children, and that correlates to violent crime with a 20 year lag, both the environmental loading going up, and then coming down.
That's about a bazillion times more plausible than Pinker's story. It's more plausible than broken window policing and such because crime has declined where those methods weren't used and has failed to decline where they were.
That's not to say that all these other things don't matter, because they almost certainly do matter. Take all the usual factors put forward for contributing to violent crime and they probably collectively account for a baseline of crime that we could raise or lower by addressing those things; but environmental lead has been one big, honking factor that jacked up violent crime rates for a few generations.
posted by Ivan Fyodorovich at 7:36 PM on August 28, 2013 [15 favorites]
“There have been a number of serial killers over the last decade who found their victims through Craigslist, as detailed in a recent feature for The Atlantic, but this is the exception that proves the rule: Craigslist is a Web 1.0 dinosaur that has stubbornly resisted the shift to a less anonymous, more social web. By contrast, services like Lyft ask users to sign in with Facebook.”
I've never personally known a serial killer who used facebook, but I was acquaintances with a guy who used myspace as a platform to find 13 year old girls to rape (something I found out about after he got arrested). So I hardly think that social media is a cure-all for on-line predators.
posted by empath at 8:59 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
I've never personally known a serial killer who used facebook, but I was acquaintances with a guy who used myspace as a platform to find 13 year old girls to rape (something I found out about after he got arrested). So I hardly think that social media is a cure-all for on-line predators.
posted by empath at 8:59 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
I spit on the 'sharing economy.' Sharing to me means not charging for the thing I am sharing; if I have a textbook and let you read it it with you because you've lost yours, that's sharing. If I charge you $10 to use it, then I am a jerk and what we have here is the regular economy. Only less regulated, for good or for ill.
posted by lesbiassparrow at 10:08 PM on August 28, 2013 [6 favorites]
posted by lesbiassparrow at 10:08 PM on August 28, 2013 [6 favorites]
The leaded fuel link was the first thing I thought when I saw this, and it collided in my head with things like the recent Pando story, and the product was white hot fury.
Because dot-com 2.0 seems to be populated by a bunch of dipshit libertarians engaged in a giant narcissistic circle-jerk about how terribly individual and creative and world-changing their little digital doodads are, and here is a case where the only way to render proper credit would be to give a wet sloppy kiss to the fucking EPA.
posted by bjrubble at 10:55 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
Because dot-com 2.0 seems to be populated by a bunch of dipshit libertarians engaged in a giant narcissistic circle-jerk about how terribly individual and creative and world-changing their little digital doodads are, and here is a case where the only way to render proper credit would be to give a wet sloppy kiss to the fucking EPA.
posted by bjrubble at 10:55 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
Oh wow, so it'd be awesome to hear great hitchhiking stories here. (Y'all read the article, right?)
I hitchhiked a bit in the '90s. Picked up a fair number of hitchhikers then, too. I never felt terribly threatened, although I was put in some uncomfortable positions a few times.
Once I picked up a guy who believed he was kidnapped by Reagan's staff and brainwashed. I felt bad for the guy, but I was kind of scared of him, too--esp. when he started pulling things out of his pockets, just out of my eye sight.
Another time I hitched a ride from the southern border of Spain/France and got picked up by a race car driver ... in his race car. We got to Paris crazy fast.
And then there was the time I was mistaken for a woman, the time my Yellowstone roommate juggled bowling ball pins for a ride, the time I beat the train from Barcelona to Madrid ....
Seriously, there's gotta be plenty of y'all with some awesome hitching stories out there ... potentially the good point of the story being that world's going good so let's celebrate our positive encounters.
posted by agog at 10:58 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
I hitchhiked a bit in the '90s. Picked up a fair number of hitchhikers then, too. I never felt terribly threatened, although I was put in some uncomfortable positions a few times.
Once I picked up a guy who believed he was kidnapped by Reagan's staff and brainwashed. I felt bad for the guy, but I was kind of scared of him, too--esp. when he started pulling things out of his pockets, just out of my eye sight.
Another time I hitched a ride from the southern border of Spain/France and got picked up by a race car driver ... in his race car. We got to Paris crazy fast.
And then there was the time I was mistaken for a woman, the time my Yellowstone roommate juggled bowling ball pins for a ride, the time I beat the train from Barcelona to Madrid ....
Seriously, there's gotta be plenty of y'all with some awesome hitching stories out there ... potentially the good point of the story being that world's going good so let's celebrate our positive encounters.
posted by agog at 10:58 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
Seriously, there's gotta be plenty of y'all with some awesome hitching stories out there
I caught a ride with some random people after leaving a bar in Nicaragua, and ended up at a girl's birthday party in a mansion in downtown Grenada at 1 in the morning, drinking free booze and looking at 2-300 year old artwork on the walls.
disclaimer: It's probably not smart to get drunk and jump into random SUV's anywhere in Central America.
posted by empath at 11:02 PM on August 28, 2013 [2 favorites]
I caught a ride with some random people after leaving a bar in Nicaragua, and ended up at a girl's birthday party in a mansion in downtown Grenada at 1 in the morning, drinking free booze and looking at 2-300 year old artwork on the walls.
disclaimer: It's probably not smart to get drunk and jump into random SUV's anywhere in Central America.
posted by empath at 11:02 PM on August 28, 2013 [2 favorites]
Content is only "almost free" if you don't care about the quality. The moment that you stop treating content as so much extruded product and actually start caring about finding good content, content - the good stuff - becomes quite valuable, because while everyone may have ideas, being able to execute on those ideas is a much rarer skill.
I'd also say that another issue with the "sharing economy" is that these services aren't good citizens. The situation at LAX is a good example - since LAX runs are some of the most profitable fares, there's a system in place where taxis have to share access, so everyone gets to benefit. But the Lyft cars, since they're licensed by the state, can just ignore that system. So they get to skim off the most profitable fares, leaving the less profitable services to the taxis. You see the same issue with Airbnb, where their avoidance of hostelry laws means that the people subletting can violate fair access protections (and thanks to Section 230, Airbnb isn't obligated to make sure they do.)
posted by NoxAeternum at 11:41 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
I'd also say that another issue with the "sharing economy" is that these services aren't good citizens. The situation at LAX is a good example - since LAX runs are some of the most profitable fares, there's a system in place where taxis have to share access, so everyone gets to benefit. But the Lyft cars, since they're licensed by the state, can just ignore that system. So they get to skim off the most profitable fares, leaving the less profitable services to the taxis. You see the same issue with Airbnb, where their avoidance of hostelry laws means that the people subletting can violate fair access protections (and thanks to Section 230, Airbnb isn't obligated to make sure they do.)
posted by NoxAeternum at 11:41 PM on August 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
Couchsurfing.org is a sharing site that has been around for quite some time and that actively frowns on its users exchanging money (i.e. charge someone for staying and they'll kick you off). It also involves far more trust from both parties than AirBNB or Lyft, because you're sleeping in the same house as a stranger.
Perhaps the general incidence of crime and the number of serial criminals plays a very very small part in some people's decision to use this site or not, but I think that Whelk, subdee, et al are correct that shared technological culture, plus the ratings of others in that culture, are far far more influential. Couchsurfing users and sharers may not share any commonalities at all other than knowing about the site and having a mindset to even consider couchsurfing a possibility; just like hitchhiking you have to be willing to experience somebody entirely new and unknown in a very personal space, and be excited by that.
But just like hitchhiking, walking home alone at night, traveling alone, or any other activity with risk of human predators there's some amount of privilege that men and tougher looking people have in order to enjoy these experiences at all. Replacing trust in institutions with trust in others' reviews doesn't change that part of the equation much. Couchsurfing.org's safety page has specific advice for women, for example.
posted by Llama-Lime at 11:52 PM on August 28, 2013 [2 favorites]
Perhaps the general incidence of crime and the number of serial criminals plays a very very small part in some people's decision to use this site or not, but I think that Whelk, subdee, et al are correct that shared technological culture, plus the ratings of others in that culture, are far far more influential. Couchsurfing users and sharers may not share any commonalities at all other than knowing about the site and having a mindset to even consider couchsurfing a possibility; just like hitchhiking you have to be willing to experience somebody entirely new and unknown in a very personal space, and be excited by that.
But just like hitchhiking, walking home alone at night, traveling alone, or any other activity with risk of human predators there's some amount of privilege that men and tougher looking people have in order to enjoy these experiences at all. Replacing trust in institutions with trust in others' reviews doesn't change that part of the equation much. Couchsurfing.org's safety page has specific advice for women, for example.
posted by Llama-Lime at 11:52 PM on August 28, 2013 [2 favorites]
Mod note: Deleted offensive macro thing; jokey lulz stuff in non-jokey threads isn't great.
posted by taz (staff) at 12:19 AM on August 29, 2013
posted by taz (staff) at 12:19 AM on August 29, 2013
Content is only "almost free" if you don't care about the quality.
Fair point, but generally high quality content isn't what people are adding to the kind of sites in question. If you have content people are willing to seek out and pay for, by all means find a way to let them, but the vast vast majority of content isn't high quality. (And that's OK! Most of us are amateurs at most of the things we do.)
posted by aspo at 12:26 AM on August 29, 2013
Fair point, but generally high quality content isn't what people are adding to the kind of sites in question. If you have content people are willing to seek out and pay for, by all means find a way to let them, but the vast vast majority of content isn't high quality. (And that's OK! Most of us are amateurs at most of the things we do.)
posted by aspo at 12:26 AM on August 29, 2013
If the internet is a neo-feudal system, does that mean we are serfing the net?
Enquiring minds demand to know.
posted by MuffinMan at 12:28 AM on August 29, 2013 [4 favorites]
Enquiring minds demand to know.
posted by MuffinMan at 12:28 AM on August 29, 2013 [4 favorites]
Pinker's thesis and book is badly flawed.
Please tell me more, Ivan.
posted by devious truculent and unreliable at 3:49 AM on August 29, 2013
Please tell me more, Ivan.
posted by devious truculent and unreliable at 3:49 AM on August 29, 2013
Isn't digital sharecropping really more like digital bird-dogging or digital Tom Sawyering or something?
posted by klarck at 4:49 AM on August 29, 2013
posted by klarck at 4:49 AM on August 29, 2013
Before I RTFA, does it include statistics on crime in prison in its "falling crime rates"? Are there reliable statistics on crime rates in the prison system? It certainly seems plausible that the type of crime whose prevalence discourages couchsurfing and hitchhiking has actually decreased, but is total violent crime known to have decreased, or has it simply moved into prison (or is the decrease real but overstated for this reason)?
posted by kengraham at 4:49 AM on August 29, 2013
posted by kengraham at 4:49 AM on August 29, 2013
Picking up a hitchhiker knowing nothing about them is an act of trust. But if you pulled over and asked them to enter their social security number so you could conduct a quick background check before you went on your way? That doesn't sound like something you'd do to someone you trust. In fact, it sounds more like starting from suspicion, not trust.
The idea of the serial killer is a paranoid fantasy that assumes we can't take anything at face value. The key is that he's just a regular guy on first glance, but there's something evil behind the mask. The "identity layer of the internet" just formalizes this: please provide your Facebook credentials, your LinkedIn credentials, credit history, driving records, evidence of continuous coverage, social security number and so on.
Ideologists of Silicon Valley like Ben Popper and his investor friends at Union Square Ventures have an incredible talent at redefining words so they mean the opposite of their original definition. Normally, trust means that I take someone at their word, on the basis of a smile and a handshake. Demanding extensive third party documentation is the opposite of that. If the guiding assumption built into the internet is that we're all good, trustworthy people, then why does it demand that we submit to constant monitoring and surveillance? The logic of this article is totally twisted and perverse. Why not claim that we overestimate the probability of terrorism, and the NSA's collection of all our data is helpfully reassuring us that most people aren't terrorists. Or that racial profiling is helping to combat stereotypes because the number of actual arrests shows that most minorities aren't criminals?
posted by AlsoMike at 5:12 AM on August 29, 2013 [1 favorite]
The idea of the serial killer is a paranoid fantasy that assumes we can't take anything at face value. The key is that he's just a regular guy on first glance, but there's something evil behind the mask. The "identity layer of the internet" just formalizes this: please provide your Facebook credentials, your LinkedIn credentials, credit history, driving records, evidence of continuous coverage, social security number and so on.
Ideologists of Silicon Valley like Ben Popper and his investor friends at Union Square Ventures have an incredible talent at redefining words so they mean the opposite of their original definition. Normally, trust means that I take someone at their word, on the basis of a smile and a handshake. Demanding extensive third party documentation is the opposite of that. If the guiding assumption built into the internet is that we're all good, trustworthy people, then why does it demand that we submit to constant monitoring and surveillance? The logic of this article is totally twisted and perverse. Why not claim that we overestimate the probability of terrorism, and the NSA's collection of all our data is helpfully reassuring us that most people aren't terrorists. Or that racial profiling is helping to combat stereotypes because the number of actual arrests shows that most minorities aren't criminals?
posted by AlsoMike at 5:12 AM on August 29, 2013 [1 favorite]
the Governor is trying to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to shift nonviolent inmates to private prisons rather than do the obvious thing to comply with the court order to reduce overcrowding in state prisons
maybe use those millions to fund restorative justice programs?
posted by kliuless at 5:43 AM on August 29, 2013 [2 favorites]
maybe use those millions to fund restorative justice programs?
When people get into trouble with the law, they normally don’t have a chance to have a conversation with their victims. To explain what happened. Hear about the damage they caused. Say they’re sorry. But there’s a growing trend to try and make that happen, so both parties can move on.Human Brains Hardwired for Empathy & Friendship
Restorative Justice brings together the accused, the victim, supportive parties, and authorities. All at the same table in a safe space. It’s an old idea and it’s international. In fact, in New Zealand, where it was originally used by indigenous Maoris, it's a mandatory part of the criminal justice system. Here, in the U.S, these community conferences are increasingly being used in prisons, schools and as an alternative to juvenile detention...
Bradley asked him to stand up and write on a big presentation paper everything that he needed to work on. The teen’s demeanor changed; he was happy to be writing all of this out: applying for jobs; volunteering at the Boys and Girls Club; talking to kids at a middle school about crime; working with an arts project to express himself.
“What our program requires is that they go through a four part program," Bradley told me. "They fix the harm with themselves, they fix the harm with their families, they fix harm to the victim, and fix the harm with the community."
Bradley has about more than 100 cases like this one; he’s completed 40 so far. Some of them were serious assaults, burglaries, and robberies, all scheduled to meet their victims face to face...
Congress has been increasing the amount of federal money for restorative justice programs over the last several years.
Although it’s cheaper than sending a child to a detention center, restorative justice is very labor intensive. Counselors have to check in to make sure promises are kept: rooms cleaned; community services completed; jobs applications filled out. And, on the front end, if the parents, police, or victims don’t show up to the conferencing, it can send a message to the kids that it’s not that important.
This is both the fundamental strength and weakness of restorative justice: that is only works when everybody is convinced to care.
posted by kliuless at 5:43 AM on August 29, 2013 [2 favorites]
Am I the only one who uses these services because they're cheaper?
I was surprised that cost, wage stagnation, and general economy woes didn't enter into the article at all. I mean, I'm already very used to looking for roommates on Craigslist, as I really can't afford to live on my own given my salary and the rental rates in the city. This (pretty common) set of circumstances probably readied me for using AirBnB more than any subconscious thoughts on crime-rate drop.
posted by Curiosity Delay at 6:56 AM on August 29, 2013 [2 favorites]
I was surprised that cost, wage stagnation, and general economy woes didn't enter into the article at all. I mean, I'm already very used to looking for roommates on Craigslist, as I really can't afford to live on my own given my salary and the rental rates in the city. This (pretty common) set of circumstances probably readied me for using AirBnB more than any subconscious thoughts on crime-rate drop.
posted by Curiosity Delay at 6:56 AM on August 29, 2013 [2 favorites]
Ivan Fyodorovich: “Yeah, this is an unusual flub by koeselitz. It's just not true.”
Which, let's be clear, doesn't really matter at all in the context of my point, which was that this article is a glib and silly reduction of a massive issue down to "Craigslist is for serial killers, Facebook is safe and friendly because it's non-anonymous."
posted by koeselitz at 6:56 AM on August 29, 2013 [1 favorite]
Which, let's be clear, doesn't really matter at all in the context of my point, which was that this article is a glib and silly reduction of a massive issue down to "Craigslist is for serial killers, Facebook is safe and friendly because it's non-anonymous."
posted by koeselitz at 6:56 AM on August 29, 2013 [1 favorite]
Am I the only one who uses these services because they're cheaper?
I don't think so and I think rather than some new paradigm, what they really represent is a natural response to a market failure.
Like my choice of hotels, even budget hotels, usually comes down to "cheap but you will probably get murdered or catch bedbugs" or "Within budget but with a ton of stuff you don't need." I usually don't need a 24 hour business center or pool or fitness center or restaurant or maid service or pseudo-"environmentally friendly" maid service where they just make the bed, even free breakfast. All I usually need is a clean, safe place to sleep and drop my bags, preferably cheap, preferably located close to whatever I'm doing. (And yeah, I know about hostels, but once you're over ~25, you kinda feel like The Weird Old Guy)
My AirBnB stays have provided those with the added bonus of being in interesting or great neighborhoods with lots of cool stuff going on, and there's a lot more variety in accommodations. For example, I was on a business trip with some of the other guys I work with and rather than a block of hotel rooms, we booked a house, so we all had private rooms but had a cool house to have guests over or to sit around and have beers and bond. It was fantastic. I was on another trip to LA and wound up staying in Hollywood in a nice studio apartment just a block from Hollywood Boulevard for about a third of what a hotel would've cost. By contrast, I got a hotel room on another trip from a name chain and it was adequate, but there was a ton of mold in the bathroom and the smoke alarm was dangling by its wires from the ceiling even though it had maid service and a restaurant.
I don't think many people really value the hotel experience, so much as they want it to not be a hassle, but AirBnB makes me feel like I actually live in the city because I'm not stuck in the hotel district in the suburbs or going through that very artificial experience.
posted by Ghostride The Whip at 8:00 AM on August 29, 2013 [3 favorites]
I don't think so and I think rather than some new paradigm, what they really represent is a natural response to a market failure.
Like my choice of hotels, even budget hotels, usually comes down to "cheap but you will probably get murdered or catch bedbugs" or "Within budget but with a ton of stuff you don't need." I usually don't need a 24 hour business center or pool or fitness center or restaurant or maid service or pseudo-"environmentally friendly" maid service where they just make the bed, even free breakfast. All I usually need is a clean, safe place to sleep and drop my bags, preferably cheap, preferably located close to whatever I'm doing. (And yeah, I know about hostels, but once you're over ~25, you kinda feel like The Weird Old Guy)
My AirBnB stays have provided those with the added bonus of being in interesting or great neighborhoods with lots of cool stuff going on, and there's a lot more variety in accommodations. For example, I was on a business trip with some of the other guys I work with and rather than a block of hotel rooms, we booked a house, so we all had private rooms but had a cool house to have guests over or to sit around and have beers and bond. It was fantastic. I was on another trip to LA and wound up staying in Hollywood in a nice studio apartment just a block from Hollywood Boulevard for about a third of what a hotel would've cost. By contrast, I got a hotel room on another trip from a name chain and it was adequate, but there was a ton of mold in the bathroom and the smoke alarm was dangling by its wires from the ceiling even though it had maid service and a restaurant.
I don't think many people really value the hotel experience, so much as they want it to not be a hassle, but AirBnB makes me feel like I actually live in the city because I'm not stuck in the hotel district in the suburbs or going through that very artificial experience.
posted by Ghostride The Whip at 8:00 AM on August 29, 2013 [3 favorites]
I don't think many people really value the hotel experience, so much as they want it to not be a hassle
This is me as well. For a lot of people it's exactly what they need and this is fine, but there is definitely a subset of travelers who would make a different set of choices either financially or socially or whatever (for me it's having 100% certainty I will not be sleeping within 50 feet of an ice machine or an elevator or a television that is on all night) and are willing to trade off for that. And the trade isn't money--it often costs less to not sleep near the ice machine--but it's making some different calculations about how much you want to interact with regular humans as opposed to corporations.
And don't get me wrong, I have interacted with some weird humans in my AirBnB experiences (one guy had me sleeping in his room while he slept on couch cushions on his office floor, but he also cooked breakfast and the whole thing was $40 right in Indianapolis) but it's a different type of situation than the bad corporation situations (ice machine! television! snotty desk people! creeps in elevators!) that on balance I'd rather err in that direction. AirBnB seems to be spending an awful lot of money assuring people they are trustworthy lately which is amusing, but they don't get to trade on the "We're totally what you want" hotel brand that we've had as a sort of not-very-contemplated cultural touchstone for hundreds of years. And really it's all about trade-offs which I think is ultimately the point.
posted by jessamyn at 8:57 AM on August 29, 2013
This is me as well. For a lot of people it's exactly what they need and this is fine, but there is definitely a subset of travelers who would make a different set of choices either financially or socially or whatever (for me it's having 100% certainty I will not be sleeping within 50 feet of an ice machine or an elevator or a television that is on all night) and are willing to trade off for that. And the trade isn't money--it often costs less to not sleep near the ice machine--but it's making some different calculations about how much you want to interact with regular humans as opposed to corporations.
And don't get me wrong, I have interacted with some weird humans in my AirBnB experiences (one guy had me sleeping in his room while he slept on couch cushions on his office floor, but he also cooked breakfast and the whole thing was $40 right in Indianapolis) but it's a different type of situation than the bad corporation situations (ice machine! television! snotty desk people! creeps in elevators!) that on balance I'd rather err in that direction. AirBnB seems to be spending an awful lot of money assuring people they are trustworthy lately which is amusing, but they don't get to trade on the "We're totally what you want" hotel brand that we've had as a sort of not-very-contemplated cultural touchstone for hundreds of years. And really it's all about trade-offs which I think is ultimately the point.
posted by jessamyn at 8:57 AM on August 29, 2013
this article is a glib and silly reduction of a massive issue down to "Craigslist is for serial killers, Facebook is safe and friendly because it's non-anonymous."
This thread could do with a little more RTFA. The thesis is not "Craigslist made serial killers, Facebook defeated them." The thesis is "the kinds of peer-to-peer businesses that are becoming increasingly popular today would have been hard to imagine back in the 80s when we were obsessed with a generalized stranger-danger panic that often focused around the figure of the serial killer. The general drop in violent crime since that time has reduced that fear, and the de-anonymizing nature of social media platforms like Facebook also plays into this reduction of fear. Craigslist did generate some 'OMG, serial killer' narratives, but Craigslist is an older model of web platform that does not have the built-in social-web features of something like Facebook, so it's the exception that proves the rule."
posted by yoink at 9:10 AM on August 29, 2013 [1 favorite]
This thread could do with a little more RTFA. The thesis is not "Craigslist made serial killers, Facebook defeated them." The thesis is "the kinds of peer-to-peer businesses that are becoming increasingly popular today would have been hard to imagine back in the 80s when we were obsessed with a generalized stranger-danger panic that often focused around the figure of the serial killer. The general drop in violent crime since that time has reduced that fear, and the de-anonymizing nature of social media platforms like Facebook also plays into this reduction of fear. Craigslist did generate some 'OMG, serial killer' narratives, but Craigslist is an older model of web platform that does not have the built-in social-web features of something like Facebook, so it's the exception that proves the rule."
posted by yoink at 9:10 AM on August 29, 2013 [1 favorite]
You're trying to make it sound better by erasing the clear causal link that the article tries to imply between specific internet sites (Facebook, Lyft, etc) and the increase in social trust and reverse in paranoia and fear of crime. The article absolutely doesn't read Facebook, etc as a symptom of increasing trust – it actually says they "created a new paradigm."
And your explanation of the bit about Craigslist doesn't make sense to me – honestly, I'll take back my glib mockery of it above, because I really and truly have no idea what it's trying to say. It's like they're linking the fact that some serial killers have used Craigslist with the fact that Craigslist uses a spare design, but those things don't seem linked to me at all. Metafilter uses similar design to Craigslist in a lot of ways. Is Metafilter a harbor for serial killers? If not, what does the connection even mean?
And what's more, there's a lot of corporate-speak in that article that makes it vague and difficult to take seriously. For example: "Collectively these companies have raised over $200 million in funding to power what's known as the 'sharing economy.'" What dose this mean? "Power the 'sharing economy'" – the talk about "power the X economy" is not really a very precise way of putting things, and in fact I think it masks some pretty fuzzy thinking about how economies work.
posted by koeselitz at 9:43 AM on August 29, 2013 [1 favorite]
And your explanation of the bit about Craigslist doesn't make sense to me – honestly, I'll take back my glib mockery of it above, because I really and truly have no idea what it's trying to say. It's like they're linking the fact that some serial killers have used Craigslist with the fact that Craigslist uses a spare design, but those things don't seem linked to me at all. Metafilter uses similar design to Craigslist in a lot of ways. Is Metafilter a harbor for serial killers? If not, what does the connection even mean?
And what's more, there's a lot of corporate-speak in that article that makes it vague and difficult to take seriously. For example: "Collectively these companies have raised over $200 million in funding to power what's known as the 'sharing economy.'" What dose this mean? "Power the 'sharing economy'" – the talk about "power the X economy" is not really a very precise way of putting things, and in fact I think it masks some pretty fuzzy thinking about how economies work.
posted by koeselitz at 9:43 AM on August 29, 2013 [1 favorite]
Pinker's thesis and book is badly flawed.
Please tell me more, Ivan.
I'm not sure if this is what Ivan had in mind, but this review by Douglas P. Fry identifies some pretty glaring issues with the way that Pinker has framed his project in The Better Angels of Our Nature.
posted by Austenite at 12:47 PM on August 29, 2013 [1 favorite]
Please tell me more, Ivan.
I'm not sure if this is what Ivan had in mind, but this review by Douglas P. Fry identifies some pretty glaring issues with the way that Pinker has framed his project in The Better Angels of Our Nature.
posted by Austenite at 12:47 PM on August 29, 2013 [1 favorite]
The " lead leads to violence" theory is one of those neat, soundbite-worthy ideas that the internet loves. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be true. The fact is, violence rates have been declining for centuries, long before leaded gas appeared.
posted by happyroach at 2:17 PM on August 29, 2013
posted by happyroach at 2:17 PM on August 29, 2013
The article absolutely doesn't read Facebook, etc as a symptom of increasing trust – it actually says they "created a new paradigm."
No, it absolutely does not. It quotes one "Mike Aamodt," a psychology professor, as saying that the advent of the internet, per se, "created a new paradigm." You're skimming this thing looking for evidence of crazy wackiness which really isn't there. Sure, it's no brilliant new insight into, well, anything. It's not trying to be a scholarly piece of economic or criminological theory and it's just unfair to carp at it for failing to rise above hand-wavy economic theory. But nor is it saying any of the bizarre and wacky things that have been alleged in this thread.
posted by yoink at 2:30 PM on August 29, 2013
No, it absolutely does not. It quotes one "Mike Aamodt," a psychology professor, as saying that the advent of the internet, per se, "created a new paradigm." You're skimming this thing looking for evidence of crazy wackiness which really isn't there. Sure, it's no brilliant new insight into, well, anything. It's not trying to be a scholarly piece of economic or criminological theory and it's just unfair to carp at it for failing to rise above hand-wavy economic theory. But nor is it saying any of the bizarre and wacky things that have been alleged in this thread.
posted by yoink at 2:30 PM on August 29, 2013
I question whether anyone who has the wherewithal to use services like airbnb, etc., would ever fall prey to a serial killer to begin with. The victims of serial/thrill killers and rapists are more often than not unlikely to have a large digital footprint, and their families (who would be their advocates and the public voice to bring them home) have considerably less agency due to socioeconomic disadvantages. Homeless people, sex workers, people with developmental/physical disabilities, undocumented immigrants, the abject poor...these are the people who are most likely to be victimized.
So perhaps what "digital sharecropping" has done is enabled those of us who are able to vet our short-term rentals and errand runners/employers to circle our wagons and interpret those acts as the means to increase public safety.
posted by cowboy_sally at 5:07 PM on August 29, 2013
So perhaps what "digital sharecropping" has done is enabled those of us who are able to vet our short-term rentals and errand runners/employers to circle our wagons and interpret those acts as the means to increase public safety.
posted by cowboy_sally at 5:07 PM on August 29, 2013
yoink: "It's not trying to be a scholarly piece of economic or criminological theory and it's just unfair to carp at it for failing to rise above hand-wavy economic theory. But nor is it saying any of the bizarre and wacky things that have been alleged in this thread."
What it is trying to do, as a puff piece in a pro-startup webzine, is draw out a vague association between the feel-good sense that people are more trusting and the fact that social-network startups are having good fundraising rounds. And the fact that it does this through a very fuzzy and questionable overview of crime and its motivations and effects is, I'm confident in saying, very problematic.
posted by koeselitz at 5:12 PM on August 29, 2013 [1 favorite]
What it is trying to do, as a puff piece in a pro-startup webzine, is draw out a vague association between the feel-good sense that people are more trusting and the fact that social-network startups are having good fundraising rounds. And the fact that it does this through a very fuzzy and questionable overview of crime and its motivations and effects is, I'm confident in saying, very problematic.
posted by koeselitz at 5:12 PM on August 29, 2013 [1 favorite]
alexei: And Lyft/Uber instead take a percentage of each fare. Which ultimately winds up worse for the cabbie - instead of just paying a flat rental fee, they're paying constantly into the company's coffers. As for why medallions are limited, Thomas Malthus had some good points there.
No, I don't see it. Why would it be worse for the cabbie? The fixed-fee system seems absolutely brutal: it demands that the cabbie drives as fast as possible--crams in as many fares as possible. Bring in $200 and you get to keep $95. Slack off even a little, and bring in only $150, and your pay is cut to $45. Now pay for gas.
There is a lot of support on Metafilter for the minimum wage. The taxi system doesn't just throw the minimum wage out the window-- it opens the door for the company to demand that its workers pay for the privilege of working. Imagine agricultural workers being subjected to the same system-- pay to enter, then get paid by the pound of fruit you pick. If you don't pick enough--for whatever reason-- you end up paying the company.
Is it really worse to be charged a percentage of every fare? Of course it depends on the amount, but nothing I've seen suggests that Uber drivers are getting a raw deal compared to official cab drivers.
Here is a set of interviews regarding the current state of affairs in the regulated taxi industry.
Here is an informative discussion regarding the nuts-and-bolts of driving a cab.
posted by alexei at 11:47 PM on August 29, 2013
No, I don't see it. Why would it be worse for the cabbie? The fixed-fee system seems absolutely brutal: it demands that the cabbie drives as fast as possible--crams in as many fares as possible. Bring in $200 and you get to keep $95. Slack off even a little, and bring in only $150, and your pay is cut to $45. Now pay for gas.
There is a lot of support on Metafilter for the minimum wage. The taxi system doesn't just throw the minimum wage out the window-- it opens the door for the company to demand that its workers pay for the privilege of working. Imagine agricultural workers being subjected to the same system-- pay to enter, then get paid by the pound of fruit you pick. If you don't pick enough--for whatever reason-- you end up paying the company.
Is it really worse to be charged a percentage of every fare? Of course it depends on the amount, but nothing I've seen suggests that Uber drivers are getting a raw deal compared to official cab drivers.
Here is a set of interviews regarding the current state of affairs in the regulated taxi industry.
Here is an informative discussion regarding the nuts-and-bolts of driving a cab.
posted by alexei at 11:47 PM on August 29, 2013
The taxi system we have may or may not be a mess, but Über is absolutely not the answer we need. The solution to legal problems is not legally-questionable startups.
posted by koeselitz at 1:11 AM on August 31, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by koeselitz at 1:11 AM on August 31, 2013 [2 favorites]
The Uber drivers I've talked to about it love the service. I'm super thrilled with it. It's better than dealing with cabs in almost every way, except the price.
posted by empath at 1:37 AM on August 31, 2013
posted by empath at 1:37 AM on August 31, 2013
« Older The difficult choices facing families seeking... | My mind to your mind; my thoughts to your thoughts... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Aizkolari at 2:32 PM on August 28, 2013 [82 favorites]