Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Solving All the Wrong Problems

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–118 of 118 posts

Re: Solving All the Wrong Problems

#111

Post by ixtli »

perrygeo wrote: post #108
ebcode wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Homogenous, largely white, largely male, largely safe people are not going to detect the problems the author appears to be implying are going untreated. What you said was both racist and sexist. You're saying that a group of people (based on race and sex) are "not going to ..." do something. Speaking in generalizations using these classifications is generally regarded by most folks as racist/sexist. It can be tricky…

No. There is nothing "racist" in that comment. That comment exhibits "prejudice". Prejudice may co-exist with discriminatory actions ("bigotry") or become institutionalized ("racism") but making comments about an ethnic group is not by itself racist. "Racism" (note the -ism to denote a system) requires a social, political and/or economic system by which a dominant group retains power over other groups. By that widely…

Thanks. This is what I was going to try to explain but was too tired to bother. Also, as a member of the white male american engineer group, I will 100% cop to this sort of prejudice when dealing with generalizations as in the parent article.

Re: Solving All the Wrong Problems

#112

Post by eitland »

Retra wrote: post #103
canadaduane wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the bottom, where need is greatest, they may be underserved because they have so little money. I'd love to see the entrepreneurship engine better incented to search for solutions in such a space. I see universal basic income as a worthy pursuit for this reason (among others)--universally distributing an incentive to solve the problems of the bottom 20% would work wonders.

I've probably seen like 40 "boil water with sunlight" inventions over the last decade, each of which is claiming to revolutionize the lifestyle of poor Africans. ...Which is great, I guess, but nobody with money is buying them. And the fact that I've seen so many of these tells me more that people are really trying to sell something to me : the idea that I can feel good about myself by donating money to Joe Rando USA…

Woman in sibling company to where I work sell efficient wood stoves by the container:

http://www.primestoves.com/

They are very well received, saves fuel (and thereby CO2) and gives cleaner air indoors.

And, yes: people with money are buying them.

Re: Solving All the Wrong Problems

#113

Post by cycomachead »

enjo wrote: post #58

sighs Another one of these articles. The whole article is a fantastic example of the Texas Sharpshooter fallacy. It finds a bunch of ideas that fit the authors thesis and ignores the thousands of companies working on hard problems that impact nearly everybody. Even the examples in the article are sharpshooters. They drew a circle around a set of people and held them out as support for the idea that tech startups are…

I think there are plenty of startups working on valuable things, but since you mentioned education...

Typically, the largest group of students in open online courses like MOOCs are those from privileged backgrounds, like white males, and those who already have high or relatively high levels of education. Certainly, I still believe that these online courses are an amazing resource but they haven't been shown to increase access in ways that people hoped. There are dozens of reasons for this.

I think the real problem is that some startups are unable to recognize exactly what problems they are solving and for whom they are solving them. Extra disposable income from driveways is good, as are promoting healthy drinking habits. However, there's a very real chance that these potentially useful tools never reach the audiences where they would be most impactful.

For example, it seems like the people who could most benefit from extra income from rentable driveways are most likely to live in areas that are less desirable (high crime rates), are not even likely to have a driveway (apartments). Now, I have no idea what app this even is referring to, to be clear. This is just a potential situation.

Re: Solving All the Wrong Problems

#114

Post by sangnoir »

im_down_w_otp wrote: post #5

> "As one colleague in tech explained it to me recently, for most people working on such projects, the goal is basically to provide for themselves everything that their mothers no longer do." Ha! I've used the exact same characterization. Anyway, this seems entirely predictable given a couple different considerations. 1) People are most apt to effectively solve problems for which they have some context. 2) People who…

> 1) People are most apt to effectively solve problems for which they have some context.

Jeopardy style answer/question: "Why is diversity important?"

Re: Solving All the Wrong Problems

#115

Post by Swizec »

throwanem wrote: post #107
Swizec wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Our definition of low-hanging fruit is ever evolving. There's always the next lowest fruit.

Having grown up around apple orchards, I feel it perhaps worth mentioning that this is not in fact true. The fruit that hangs low does so because its weight bends the branches. Once it's picked, the rest is considerably harder to reach. That's why the phrase means what it does. (If you're interested, the word "windfall" is of similar origin. It refers to fruit shaken loose of the tree by a stiff wind, thus requiring…

Thanks! I learned something today.

Re: Solving All the Wrong Problems

#116

Post by mzw_mzw »

ixtli wrote: post #111
perrygeo wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. There is nothing "racist" in that comment. That comment exhibits "prejudice". Prejudice may co-exist with discriminatory actions ("bigotry") or become institutionalized ("racism") but making comments about an ethnic group is not by itself racist. "Racism" (note the -ism to denote a system) requires a social, political and/or economic system by which a dominant group retains power over other groups. By that widely…

Thanks. This is what I was going to try to explain but was too tired to bother. Also, as a member of the white male american engineer group, I will 100% cop to this sort of prejudice when dealing with generalizations as in the parent article.

Sorry, but you can't plead guilty on behalf of other people you don't even know. If you state that you are prejudiced, that's not evidence that other people with a similar skin color are prejudiced; it's only evidence that you, personally, are prejudiced.

Re: Solving All the Wrong Problems

#117

Post by mzw_mzw »

perrygeo wrote: post #108
ebcode wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Homogenous, largely white, largely male, largely safe people are not going to detect the problems the author appears to be implying are going untreated. What you said was both racist and sexist. You're saying that a group of people (based on race and sex) are "not going to ..." do something. Speaking in generalizations using these classifications is generally regarded by most folks as racist/sexist. It can be tricky…

No. There is nothing "racist" in that comment. That comment exhibits "prejudice". Prejudice may co-exist with discriminatory actions ("bigotry") or become institutionalized ("racism") but making comments about an ethnic group is not by itself racist. "Racism" (note the -ism to denote a system) requires a social, political and/or economic system by which a dominant group retains power over other groups. By that widely…

No, that's not the "widely-held definition," no matter you wish it was; it's not the dictionary definition, it's not the Wikipedia definition, it's not what most people are thinking when they hear that word. Rather, it's a definition carefully crafted by groups that want to express without consequence and write into law racist policies while claiming that they are anti-racists.

Re: Solving All the Wrong Problems

#118

Post by ixtli »

mzw_mzw wrote: post #116
ixtli wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks. This is what I was going to try to explain but was too tired to bother. Also, as a member of the white male american engineer group, I will 100% cop to this sort of prejudice when dealing with generalizations as in the parent article.

Sorry, but you can't plead guilty on behalf of other people you don't even know. If you state that you are prejudiced, that's not evidence that other people with a similar skin color are prejudiced; it's only evidence that you, personally, are prejudiced.

I don't think you're responding to what I actually said. Perhaps it was poorly worded but what I intended to say was twofold: I am a member of the group (the privileged class in america) and that I exhibited prejudice. I made no further claims.
Post reply on HN