141–150 of 153 posts
I think the article is not attacking Facebook or Twitter. It's attacking the infinite clones of them. I'll give you a problem: There isn't a PHP Qr Code decoder in the web. Why hadn't anyone gave a damn about it? Because it's hard, take time and you simply don't know how to start and how to monetize. I'll give you another problem: Google don't happen to give the best search result. You'll (in many cases) get SEO spam…
Alright, a few of the top comments point out the good of the Foursquares and Facebooks of the world. Except, that's not the point - on anything beyond the personal scale the question is not, "which of these two do we want?" but "how much of each do we want?" She asks: "How well are our resources allocated?" I think there's a strong case that we're under-invested in some of the largest problems of society - personally…
I also have to ask: Where are all the education startups? We have a massive, high-speed communication tool and I don't see much changing with respect to education. There are a few things out there (the Khan Academies of the world), but they're very few and far between.
I think Jolie's right, to some extent -- we are selfish, and the demands of selfish people make us think we are creating things of value. It's easier to create something for pleasure and gratification or to solve an obvious problem than to entirely overhaul a nationwide, endemic problem with hundred year old roots, red tape up the wazoo and a severe shortage of cash.
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…
Many of them are already out there for those motivated to seek them. With MIT's stuff online, you can learn from them for free. A lot of more basic stuff is also out there if you know how to look for it.
But there are a lot of teachers out there who have their education budgets spent on crazy toys and scoreboards that don't do the kids a whole lot of good. Educational software is a mixed bag, though I have fond memories of Number Munchers. I don't know if that led me to learning as much math as I did, but it sure didn't hurt.
Right now, a lot of money is wasted on new versions of textbooks. Most of the underlying material hasn't changed and isn't really going to, except for the meddling of various government types who want to add or delete things they disagree with from the curriculum. Most of the publishers have been around for ages. I have to think there's some opportunity for someone to automate certain kinds of tests.
For example, simple math tests could more easily be randomized and each student could have their own set of problems (no more photocopies with kids cheating off the guy next to them). Word problems can be autogenerated. Stuff like that.
Unfortunately, most of my knowledge comes second-hand. My mother was a teacher, but she's dead now, so whatever I know about the problems they face has probably gotten out of date. But I have a feeling that education money, especially their tech budgets, getting spent on things that do little good is something that probably hasn't changed. I have to think that there are still quite a few things that could be improved.
So stop living in a world of bread and circuses. I don't use foursquare because I get no value. Nor do most people I know. I use Twitter for work, nothing else. I produce, I do not consume. I am not special. There are lots more like me. There is an entire world of startups focused on societal betterment -- some with the stated goal of just being self-sustaining rather than profit centers. in finance: kiva, prosper, e…
Here’s a problem: Many Americans can’t afford medical care.
Here’s another problem: Many Americans can’t afford a decent education, and many parts of our public school system suck.
Here’s another, even more pressing problem: Many Americans are homeless. Many can’t afford to eat.
...
I would like to propose that technologists apply their ample skill to solving the real problems of humanity, not just the perceived problems of their very privileged social set.
How about we broaden our scope to beyond "Americans," which I believe she actually means "United States Citizens." Don't forget all the other countries and continents doing much worse than we are.
It occurs to me that my latest project actually gets me off the hook from this guy. Problem: People in developing countries have to work for 3rd world wages, selling products and services to people who really can't afford to buy anything. Thus, they are doomed to remain poor by western standards. Solution: Jason's website that lets them teach Spanish online to rich Americans, and doesn't let them pay themselves less…
OTOH, people in 3rd world countries that have fast internet access and get to know your startup aren't probably the ones interested in teaching spanish to americans. I know I won't.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the article, "Those relatively comfortable “problems” of modern life have already been solved to death, beginning with Alexander Bell and ending (sort of, for now) with Mark Zuckerberg, Sergey Brin and Larry Page. Many of the apps we have nowadays — the successful ones, at least — revolve around game mechanics, addiction, self-reference, and narcissism. Even apps I use and actually like quite a lot fall into thi…
The most charitable reading I can give it still has it missing the point and not understanding what it is that's being built up with all these companies. Facebook, as I've said, restores and maintains social connections. This is absolutely not a minor thing, it's life-altering. Perhaps it's too early on in the process to understand that, but 10 or 20 years from now, everyone will get it when they look at who has been…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…