Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> As an analogy, I'd say there's a major difference between tolerating gambling/confidence tricks from individual hustlers working the local park vs allowing the entire finance industry to scale up those same games

The thing is that both of these are still illegal on paper. Even if the police might turn a blind eye to some of it, in a court of law you would get convicted. In this specific example we are saying if you stay below a certain scale it is legal and intermediaries can profit. If you go above a certain scale it is illegal and banned.

> Difference seems clear to me

It is clear yes that one is more unethical than the other. As you say the difference between small crime and big crime. But both are still unethical to different degrees then.

My worry do worry about unintended consequences. If you start banning companies on this basis, that you cannot sell fake intimacy, can you also sue individuals on the same basis or intermediaries?

Maybe like gambling you can go for a middle ground approach. You accept people will engage in the behavior but you make companies go through a licensing process. I do not know what the AI Boyfriend equivalent to disclosing odds is but maybe certain predatory practices would be forbidden.




Consider applying for YC's Summer 2025 batch! Applications are open till May 13

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: