I can take or leave the people&#x27;s court story. I mostly found it interesting for this para:<p>&quot;The situation also reveals a Catch-22 created by San Francisco’s new laws regulating short-term rentals. Entire-home rentals are limited to 90 days a year and must be occupied by a permanent resident. Huang switched to rentals of 30 days or more since those are legal. That’s a decision that other local landlords have also made. But by requiring longer stays, landlords run the risk of the temporary visitors gaining permanent renters’ rights.&quot;<p>New businesses lead to new regulation. New regulations lead to unintended consequences. Unintended consequences lead businesses to look for new disruptive solutions...<p>Does that cycle repeat or is that overly simplistic?