News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:San Francisco Denies Scooter Permits for Bird, Lime, Uber... by toomuchtodo on Thursday August 30, 2018 @11:51PM (#17882811)
It’s not a gamble, it’s ownership. It’s not a guaranteed return, it’s compensation for loss of value by an injuring party.

Them the breaks of real estate law and it’s English origins, and while I won’t dissuade you from action, know that it will take decades before you see meaningful change. Plan accordingly.

Re:San Francisco Denies Scooter Permits for Bird, Lime, Uber... by 0xB31B1B on Friday August 31, 2018 @12:13AM (#17882903)
You lost me when you acted like property owners in California are poor and need protection. They have seen some of the greatest unearned wealth increases by sitting on their butts doing nothing in the past generations. Meanwhile, the low income renters are the ones actually needing “equity” in this situation
Re:San Francisco Denies Scooter Permits for Bird, Lime, Uber... by toomuchtodo on Friday August 31, 2018 @12:21AM (#17882931)
All property owners are afforded protection under the law, regardless of income and wealth status. Low income renters, by the very definition, have no equity in the situation. Someone would need to subsidize the equity you want them to have (no complaints with that, just find the voluntary party willing to pay for it).