In 2014, Seattle's transportation committee proposed regulations for new ride-sharing services like Uber and Lyft, calling them "Transportation Network Companies" (TNCs). The proposed regulations were traditional, including licensing, inspection, insurance, and market-size restrictions, which was called the "1.0, permission-based regulatory paradigm." However, these TNCs had already gained customers' trust through sophisticated internal systems for trust and safety, such as 360-degree peer review and detailed real-time data. This is the "2.0, information-based trust and safety regime" that allows for low barriers to entry and accountability through data. The key thing to note is that both models strive for the safeguarding of trust and safety of consumers. The “2.0 model” achieves the same objectives without the costs associated with licensing, registering and inspecting as it utilises data to “rank” providers according to the quality of the service that they provide. Consumers rationally choose providers with the highest rating and best safety record. Thus, through data analysis that facilitates a rating and disclosure regime, the policy objectives are achieved and the market itself promotes safe and trustworthy providers.

As such, the trust and safety of consumers is a priority for both the "1.0, permission-based regulatory paradigm" and the "2.0, information-based trust and safety regime." Both models strive to achieve the same objectives, with the "2.0 model" providing a cost-effective alternative to traditional regulations through data analysis that facilitates a ratings and disclosure regime. Through this approach, the market itself is empowered to promote safe and trustworthy providers while also achieving the policy objectives.