"The Licensing Racket," by Philip Hamburger, exposes the pervasive and often absurd world of occupational licensing in America. Hamburger argues that these boards, ostensibly designed to protect the public, frequently serve as protectionist barriers for existing practitioners, stifling competition and harming consumers with higher prices and reduced access to services. He details the often arbitrary and onerous requirements imposed on aspiring professionals, from florists and interior designers to fortune tellers, illustrating how these regulations disproportionately impact lower-income individuals seeking economic advancement. The book ultimately calls for a reassessment of the necessity and scope of occupational licensing, advocating for deregulation and a return to more open markets.
The FTC is taking action against GoDaddy for allegedly failing to adequately protect its customers' sensitive data. GoDaddy reportedly allowed unauthorized access to customer accounts on multiple occasions due to lax security practices, including failing to implement multi-factor authentication and neglecting to address known vulnerabilities. These lapses facilitated phishing attacks and other fraudulent activities, impacting millions of customers. As a result, GoDaddy will pay $21.3 million and be required to implement a comprehensive information security program subject to independent assessments for the next 20 years.
Hacker News commenters generally agree that GoDaddy's security practices are lacking, with some pointing to personal experiences of compromised sites hosted on the platform. Several express skepticism about the effectiveness of the FTC's actions, suggesting the fines are too small to incentivize real change. Some users highlight the conflict of interest inherent in GoDaddy's business model, where they profit from selling security products to fix vulnerabilities they may be partially responsible for. Others discuss the wider implications for web hosting security and the responsibility of users to implement their own protective measures. A few commenters defend GoDaddy, arguing that shared responsibility exists and users also bear the burden for securing their own sites. The discussion also touches upon the difficulty of patching WordPress vulnerabilities and the overall complexity of website security.
TikTok was reportedly preparing for a potential shutdown in the U.S. on Sunday, January 15, 2025, according to information reviewed by Reuters. This involved discussions with cloud providers about data backup and transfer in case a forced sale or ban materialized. However, a spokesperson for TikTok denied the report, stating the company had no plans to shut down its U.S. operations. The report suggested these preparations were contingency plans and not an indication that a shutdown was imminent or certain.
HN commenters are largely skeptical of a TikTok shutdown actually happening on Sunday. Many believe the Reuters article misrepresented the Sunday deadline as a shutdown deadline when it actually referred to a deadline for ByteDance to divest from TikTok. Several users point out that previous deadlines have come and gone without action, suggesting this one might also be uneventful. Some express cynicism about the US government's motives, suspecting political maneuvering or protectionism for US social media companies. A few also discuss the technical and logistical challenges of a shutdown, and the potential legal battles that would ensue. Finally, some commenters highlight the irony of potential US government restrictions on speech, given its historical stance on free speech.
Summary of Comments ( 94 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42982578
Hacker News users generally agree with the premise of the WSJ article, lamenting the excessive licensing requirements across various professions. Several commenters share personal anecdotes of burdensome and seemingly pointless licensing procedures. Some highlight the anti-competitive nature of these boards, suggesting they serve primarily to protect established professionals and inflate prices. Others point to the variability of licensing requirements across states as further evidence of their arbitrary nature. A few commenters discuss potential solutions, including deregulation and national reciprocity agreements, while acknowledging the difficulty of implementing meaningful reform. The discussion also touches upon the historical context of licensing, with some suggesting it originated as a way to ensure quality and protect consumers, but has since morphed into a protectionist racket.
The Hacker News post titled 'The Licensing Racket’ Review: There's a Board for That has a moderate number of comments discussing various aspects of occupational licensing.
Several commenters share personal anecdotes about the burdens of licensing requirements. One user describes the extensive and costly process of becoming a licensed massage therapist, highlighting the disparity between the required schooling and the actual practice. Another commenter mentions the difficulties faced by military spouses who have to re-license in every new state they move to due to their spouse's deployments, creating a significant barrier to employment. A different user points out the absurdity of requiring licenses for professions like interior design, questioning the necessity of government intervention in such fields.
The economic implications of licensing are a recurring theme. One commenter argues that licensing creates artificial scarcity, driving up prices for consumers while limiting opportunities for aspiring professionals. Another echoes this sentiment, suggesting that licensing boards often serve to protect established businesses from competition rather than ensuring public safety. Someone else brings up the potential for regulatory capture, where licensing boards become dominated by industry insiders who use their power to benefit themselves at the expense of consumers and smaller businesses.
A few commenters discuss the historical context of licensing, with one suggesting that it initially emerged as a way to exclude certain groups, particularly African Americans, from specific professions. Another user points out that the rationale behind licensing varies depending on the profession, with some licenses genuinely serving to protect public safety (e.g., doctors, electricians) while others seem more focused on restricting competition.
Some commenters offer alternative solutions to the problems posed by excessive licensing. One suggests mutual insurance or certification programs as less restrictive ways to ensure quality and accountability. Another proposes relying on customer reviews and reputation as a market-based mechanism for regulating professions.
While there's a general consensus among commenters that occupational licensing is often excessive and burdensome, some acknowledge that it does have a legitimate role to play in certain professions. The debate centers around finding the right balance between protecting public safety and allowing for economic opportunity. The overall tone of the comments is critical of the current licensing regime, with many users calling for reform and deregulation.