[HN Gopher] Surge Pricing, Artificial Intelligence, and Responsi...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Surge Pricing, Artificial Intelligence, and Responsibility
        
       Author : monsieurpng
       Score  : 21 points
       Date   : 2021-02-25 06:19 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (medium.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (medium.com)
        
       | pgsimp wrote:
       | "we would never build a system that might "learn" that people
       | whose destination is a hospital tend to be willing to pay higher
       | fares"
       | 
       | I'm sorry, but wouldn't that exactly be the point of "surge
       | pricing"? To allow people who REALLY need a ride to be able to
       | pay a higher price and get where they need to be?
       | 
       | "Surge pricing" would kick in because of scarcity, as in, not
       | enough rides available for everybody.
       | 
       | The person who needs to go to the hospital needs it more urgently
       | than the person who wants to meet her friends at the pub, so she
       | should be able to pay a higher price to get where she needs to be
       | (the hospital).
       | 
       | The alternative is that she doesn't have the option of paying a
       | higher price out of "ethical considerations", and has a high
       | probability of not actually finding a ride to the hospital.
       | 
       | If you want to get all ethical about it, maybe you can set up a
       | system where people get their money back if they can prove they
       | needed to go to the hospital (or health insurance could cover
       | it). But it is unlikely to cover all possible cases of urgency
       | ("needed to flee from a terrorist attack", "needed to catch the
       | love of my life before she marries somebody else" and so on) .
       | Much easier and more effective to regulate by market prices.
       | 
       | It seems to me yet another case of misguided socialist ideology
       | causing harm in the real world.
       | 
       | If you are worried people might not be able to afford the ride to
       | the hospital, you could give them credit.
        
       | swiley wrote:
       | Surge pricing probably wouldn't be an issue if there were
       | speculators that could sell during the highs to smooth it out.
        
       | sokoloff wrote:
       | > Contrast this with what we have heard about electricity
       | providers in Texas. The surge was allowed to skyrocket up nearly
       | 100-fold, just when people needed power most to survive.
       | 
       | Texas _regulators_ set both the surge maximum and ensured that
       | the wholesale price was set at this maximum for days on end. This
       | was not a market exploitation of surge pricing but rather a
       | regulator's decision to try to manage a gross imbalance of supply
       | and demand.
        
         | jackson1442 wrote:
         | I didn't hear about this change in electric pricing until after
         | the blackouts were over and electricity was restored, mostly
         | because I didn't have hardly any internet access during the
         | storm. Was my demand supposed to decrease? Because every time
         | the power came on my heat was on max and I would charge as much
         | stuff as possible, boil water, etc. because I had no idea when
         | I'd have power again.
        
       | ajsnigrutin wrote:
       | Surge pricing is great within limits (mostly monetary), to help
       | with keeping an actual network effective. If regulations are set
       | correctly (max surge price factor, max highprice interval in a
       | pre-set time interval,...), and surge-pricing-aware devices are
       | available (eg. water heaters that turn off at higher price, and
       | turn back on at lower).
       | 
       | Going from a couple of cents to $9 per kWh, for extended time
       | periods, without users actually having an alternative is well...
       | pretty shitty.
        
       | lrem wrote:
       | A nice, strong piece. I love the example of people accepting to
       | pay through their teeth to get to the hospital. Makes a nice,
       | clear case for all the research on ethics in ML.
        
         | p1mrx wrote:
         | That's what happens (in the US) if you're hurt badly enough to
         | need a helicopter: https://youtu.be/3gdCH1XUIlE
        
       | bko wrote:
       | > People needed to be evacuated, but left to its own devices, our
       | AI would have discouraged them with a higher price.
       | 
       | There's two sides to the market. If off-duty drivers saw the
       | higher price, they would be inclined to join. The price conveys
       | information to both parties. Similarly, if I could, but don't
       | have to, take a cab, seeing a very high price would dissuade me.
       | But if I'm in a dangerous situation, I would gladly pay that
       | price. Prices exist whether you want them or not. Charging
       | everyone a low price when there are extraneous circumstances that
       | affect the supply or demand doesn't miraculously solve the
       | mismatch.
       | 
       | Variable pricing in general is a good idea, but you obviously
       | need caps and floors. For instance, I have an adjustable rate
       | mortgage. It makes sense to me, and when it starts adjusting the
       | maximum rate it can go up to is around 10%, still not
       | unreasonable worst case scenario. These contracts apparently
       | didn't have a reasonable maximum rate, but there's no reason they
       | can't be built with one.
       | 
       | We should encourage transparent prices. If energy is constrained,
       | we should discourage people from using energy if they can and
       | encourage supply. And the simplest way to do that is the price
       | system.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-02-27 23:01 UTC)