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

Bread and Circuses: The State of Web App Startups

jolieodell.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 153 posts

Re: Bread and Circuses: The State of Web App Startups

#21

Post by patrickgzill »

replicatorblog wrote: post #16
patrickgzill wrote: post #14

I fail to see how overly bureaucratic paper-pushing and stiflingly ridiculous licensing and regulatory frameworks (which are the REAL reasons that medical care is the problem) can be solved by technology. That is, it is not a technology problem, it is a problem of regulatory capture.

I work in medical and regulatory compliance isn't that big a burden. The simplest way to reduce health care costs in the US would be reducing obesity which tends to cause the most expensive diseases (Diabetes, Heart Disease, Stroke).

No offense, but I find that a little hard to believe. Every doctor's office I have ever visited in the last 10 years had more admin staff than nurses and doctors.

That is, for each doctor there were perhaps 1.5 admin people doing paperwork. While they are cheaper than doctors, that is a still a large expense (figure $60K per person as a minimum, thus $90K per doctor per year in additional expense).

However I do agree that obesity is a problem in the US.

Re: Bread and Circuses: The State of Web App Startups

#22

Post by timr »

replicatorblog wrote: post #15

I didn't find the reasoning in this article very sound and the heated "high school angst" quotes hurt its credibility. e.g. "These products feed and profit from our bovine adoration of mindless time-wasting." That said, to address her point, I don't understand why tech start ups would be the answer to everything, especially a complex problem like homelessness. Homelessness isn't going to be solved by some RoR hacker…

"Homelessness isn't going to be solved by some RoR hacker creating a website that matches the homeless with available space. Rather it is the challenge for social workers, mental health practitioners, etc."

I think you're missing the larger point: when the best and the brightest technological minds are chasing the instant riches of social networks for dogs, they're not creating new antibiotics, energy efficient cars, cheap building materials, or any of a thousand other different things that people with big brains might be doing to better the world.

People who are smart enough to be writing social networks are more than smart enough to be doing pharmaceutical research or inventing solar cookers for the third world. There's just not much of an economic incentive to do it, when it's easier to sell to the vices of the first world.

That said, I realize that I'm a hypocrite on this point: I'm in this wacky social-network-hoo-hah business as much as anyone else. I just wish the economic forces were aligned differently.

Re: Bread and Circuses: The State of Web App Startups

#23

Post by dasil003 »

Reading this resonated with me. I knew that the responses here would pretty much rip it apart, but I'm surprised that as of right now only one of 15 comments is positive.

It's pretty easy to find ways to criticize this post. It's not particularly well written, it's not inspirational, and of course you can poke holes in any kind of argument this vague. But if you don't agree, I think it's worth it to stop and be honest with yourself about whether you really think it's complete bullshit, or if there is maybe a tinge of guilty defensiveness mixed in.

I'm not claiming that this article is anything close to the whole truth—after all, we can't make a difference if we can't make a living—but if there wasn't at least a seed of truth here then I don't think "changing the world" would be part of the standard entrepreneurial goals.

Re: Bread and Circuses: The State of Web App Startups

#24

Post by alex1 »

tgriesser wrote: post #7

It really depends on whether you look at the startup as the means or the end. For example, while the creation of Microsoft did not directly fix the problem of healthcare or hunger, it allowed for Bill Gates to create his foundation, and thus indirectly created a ton of good for the world. Same goes for Facebook, yes of course keeping up with your friends has no direct impact on real issues, but the fact that 110m wen…

In some ways, Facebook does have a direct impact on real issues. It is much easier now for non-profits to get their message out to people, through Facebook. Applications like Causes makes it easier for organizations that do have an impact on real issues to collect donations from Facebook users.

Re: Bread and Circuses: The State of Web App Startups

#25

Post by benreyes »

Not everything has to be solving a direct problem, secondary benefits have to considered.

Let's take Dailybooth (YC Summer 09)which was mentioned in this article. Whilst the creator may have just created the site because it sounded like a "fun" idea the value of the website is with the micro community that thrives.

Heck, I'll even go as far as saying Dailybooth has helped to save lives. It's dedicated users consists of a subsection of society that may be outcasted in real life. Lets take a teenager who lives in a small town, whom may feel more accepted in a city but has no similar peers within a small town. Dailybooth facilitates this teenager to connect and belong to like-minded individuals people whom they have never met before. Over time real friendships are created over a shared connection which is the website and community.

I heard of actual stories where a teen attempted to commit suicide due to being perceived as an outcast. In this case Dailybooth has facilitated friendships and connections with similar peers which in turn reduces the feeling of being outcasted in a small town, thus indirectly reducing the chances of suicide.

There are even a number of Dailybooth users who travel across different countries to facilitate in real friendships and connections. It allows for boundaries of prejudice to be broken.

So Dailybooth may not be solving a direct problem. But does it have value in our society? I would argue is certainly does.

(I have researched extensively into the userbase and mechanics of Dailybooth and have been involved in it's community)

Re: Bread and Circuses: The State of Web App Startups

#27

Post by tgriesser »

alex1 wrote: post #24
tgriesser wrote: post #7

It really depends on whether you look at the startup as the means or the end. For example, while the creation of Microsoft did not directly fix the problem of healthcare or hunger, it allowed for Bill Gates to create his foundation, and thus indirectly created a ton of good for the world. Same goes for Facebook, yes of course keeping up with your friends has no direct impact on real issues, but the fact that 110m wen…

In some ways, Facebook does have a direct impact on real issues. It is much easier now for non-profits to get their message out to people, through Facebook. Applications like Causes makes it easier for organizations that do have an impact on real issues to collect donations from Facebook users.

Agreed, I actually think all of them have direct impacts, it seems however the author is implying that if the app is not built specifically for the means of doing something altruistic it is in some way greedy or frivolous or something.

I'm arguing that the applications doesn't have to be directly focused on a particular issue, and it still has legitimate uses as you pointed out, and make real world changes that are on the scale that the author thinks that technology apparently should be used for.

Re: Bread and Circuses: The State of Web App Startups

#28

Post by techiferous »

Yelp is not fluff. It solves the problem of information asymmetry in the marketplace.

Since Yelp makes it easier to tell lemons from businesses that shine, it makes the market more efficient. This means your money goes further. Which means you have more of it to spend on education, health insurance, etc.

Re: Bread and Circuses: The State of Web App Startups

#29

Post by waterlesscloud »

This is shallow thinking.

Facebook and the various other social apps do in fact address serious societal problems and needs.

There's been a trend for several decades of people in modern society growing further apart. It's been lamented at great length in numerous studies and publications. It's a natural consequence of the other choices our societies are making, becoming more mobile in both work and home. People move more than they did, they change jobs more than they did, and thus they change social circles more than they did.

Social Networks compensate for all that. They do in fact bring people closer together than they would be otherwise. Certainly much of the interaction appears superficial, but if you think that indicates it's meaningless, that's because you don't understand social interaction. Even casual, seemingly superficial interactions bring us closer. They help us define our communities.

On Facebook I'm friends with people I haven't seen in 20+ years. Yes, most of our interactions seem superficial. But they aren't just that, they're tying us all closer to where we came from. And sometime it's more than that. That friend of yours from high school struggling with cancer? It means something to them that 50 people post well wishes weekly. It helps them. It's meaningful.

I lost track of many people in my life, without really meaning to. It's just how things work. Facebook et al help me correct that. They keep me in touch. Sure I have my "real-life" friends, but it's also nice to have the extended group.

I lost track of these people. My 13 year old niece will never lose track of someone unless she wants to. Think about that. Tell me that's not transformative.

Shallow thinking.

Re: Bread and Circuses: The State of Web App Startups

#30

Post by jeromec »

timr wrote: post #22
replicatorblog wrote: post #15

I didn't find the reasoning in this article very sound and the heated "high school angst" quotes hurt its credibility. e.g. "These products feed and profit from our bovine adoration of mindless time-wasting." That said, to address her point, I don't understand why tech start ups would be the answer to everything, especially a complex problem like homelessness. Homelessness isn't going to be solved by some RoR hacker…

"Homelessness isn't going to be solved by some RoR hacker creating a website that matches the homeless with available space. Rather it is the challenge for social workers, mental health practitioners, etc." I think you're missing the larger point: when the best and the brightest technological minds are chasing the instant riches of social networks for dogs, they're not creating new antibiotics, energy efficient cars,…

But there are bright minds working on new antibiotics, energy efficient cars, cheaper building materials etc. Some of the best and brightest minds are also smashing atoms in particle accelerators, charting the cosmos, composing symphonies, educating new minds, and, yes, pushing the limits of computer connectedness to make many lives on this planet just that much nicer. There are different ways to contribute to the world. Some leave a more significant mark than others, and in different ways. People do what they are drawn to, and I think that allows them to reach their fullest potential.
Post reply on HN