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

The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative makes its first investment

cnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 61 posts

Re: The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative makes its first investment

#41

Post by k__ »

apsec112 wrote: post #11

If Facebook doesn't try to hire more black developers, this proves they're evil, because they must be racists. If they do try to hire more black developers, this also proves they're evil, because now they're exploiting black people to drive down labor costs. Likewise, if Zuckerberg doesn't donate to charity, he is evil because he's selfishly hoarding his wealth; if he does donate, he's evil because he's trying to exp…

Point is: everything can be counted as bad or good.

If he does some charity, it's a non-democratic way to give money to the poor, which is frowned upon by many.

If he would give the money to the government, which will spent it in a democratic way, people are also unhappy, because of all the burocracy that eats up money for dumb things.

Re: The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative makes its first investment

#42

Post by twoarrays »

ucaetano wrote: post #27

"The publication reports that the Initiative is leading a $24 million funding round for the New York-based start up, in which GV, formerly known as Google Ventures, is also involved." So, what's the difference between it and other VC companies, besides being controlled by a single person?

Mainly taxation.

Re: The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative makes its first investment

#44

Post by bko »

Sacho wrote: post #32
bko wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> low-cost contract labor Phrases like that ring to me to describe a two class of people: a "low cost" tier, and a "normal cost" tier. To me this has obvious racist overtones as "low-cost" is often followed by [nationality]. If someone is willing to work harder, she should get the job, but somehow if that same person is willing to work as hard for less money, she is unworthy? Sure the company benefits from a spread b…

They're willing to work for less because in their local economy, the pay is actually good to great. This destabilizes the local economy, creating gentrified districts or entire cities(See: SF) where only the privileged laborers for a foreign economy can afford to live. It will also lead to a sharp increase in luxury good prices due to new demand, driving the bar for middle-class living out of reach for local workers.…

> This destabilizes the local economy, creating gentrified districts or entire cities(See: SF)

So paying people more and giving them jobs destabilizes the local economy because these people now have money and spend more on housing and other items? And if they're paid less, they're being exploited?

> The skilled workers hired by the foreign economy become a brain drain - the government has invested resources into their education, but no one in the local economy can afford them, thus they'll never create goods for it to improve local technology levels.

Doesn't the government prefer rich denizens and a higher tax base? Isn't this how education is funded and higher salaries and tax base partially the point of investing in education?

> but no one in the local economy can afford them, thus they'll never create goods for it to improve local technology levels.

Aren't digital good mostly global in nature? Don't poor countries benefit from Facebook/Google/Apple/etc?

Re: The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative makes its first investment

#45

Post by dsacco »

Since the article is very light on real details or reporting, I'll post a bit from the original WSJ article.

Chan Zuckerberg is specifically leading a $24M Series B Round in Andela.

Andela was founded in 2014 and has about 200 developers currently studying with them. There are about 50 mentors working to teach those developers full-time. It has rejected almost all of the applicants; about 40,000 people applied, which means only about 0.5% are actually accepted to study. Those who are accepted to study become "Andela fellows" and learn web and mobile development over four years.

According to Andela, they'd like to train 100,000 developers over the next ten years. They are hopeful they can do this with the African population, 60% of which consists of younger people under the age of 25, many of whom are unemployed or underemployed. Andela's clients pay "about half the annual salary for entry-level developers in major U.S. tech markets." With no specific numbers to go on, it's hard to estimate that. Maybe $50k - $60k? Apparently Microsoft is a client company.

It appears Andela will mostly use this cash infusion to expand into new African companies and scale up.

Could we kill this story or change the URL to the much better WSJ article? I don't understand why this is on the front page. The article has almost no detail or substance. As it stands, it's just flamebait that's getting the usual "Zuckerberg is evil" vitriol. I've never seen a messageboard triggered more easily than HN is when his name or company is brought up.

I'd also like to propose to the HN community that we be a bit more accepting of paywall URLs, because the difference between this CNET, ad-ridden article and the WSJ article (and the possible discussion opportunity around each) is huge.

Re: The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative makes its first investment

#46

Post by pmyjavec »

k__ wrote: post #41
apsec112 wrote: post #11

If Facebook doesn't try to hire more black developers, this proves they're evil, because they must be racists. If they do try to hire more black developers, this also proves they're evil, because now they're exploiting black people to drive down labor costs. Likewise, if Zuckerberg doesn't donate to charity, he is evil because he's selfishly hoarding his wealth; if he does donate, he's evil because he's trying to exp…

Point is: everything can be counted as bad or good. If he does some charity, it's a non-democratic way to give money to the poor, which is frowned upon by many. If he would give the money to the government, which will spent it in a democratic way, people are also unhappy, because of all the burocracy that eats up money for dumb things.

"Point is: everything can be counted as bad or good."

I don't think so...

Re: The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative makes its first investment

#47

Post by Sacho »

bko wrote: post #44
Sacho wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're willing to work for less because in their local economy, the pay is actually good to great. This destabilizes the local economy, creating gentrified districts or entire cities(See: SF) where only the privileged laborers for a foreign economy can afford to live. It will also lead to a sharp increase in luxury good prices due to new demand, driving the bar for middle-class living out of reach for local workers.…

> This destabilizes the local economy, creating gentrified districts or entire cities(See: SF) So paying people more and giving them jobs destabilizes the local economy because these people now have money and spend more on housing and other items? And if they're paid less, they're being exploited? > The skilled workers hired by the foreign economy become a brain drain - the government has invested resources into thei…

> So paying people more and giving them jobs destabilizes the local economy because these people now have money and spend more on housing and other items? And if they're paid less, they're being exploited?

You're not paying all people more, just some of them. The rest get to enjoy rising prices for good housing and luxuries that they won't be able to afford with their local pay.

> Doesn't the government prefer rich denizens and a higher tax base? Isn't this how education is funded and higher salaries and tax base partially the point of investing in education?

Unless you're planning to turn all Nigerians and Kenyans into software developers, this isn't really the case. Just higher taxes may pay for the education the government invested in you, but the investment is made with a hope that you would do more than break even. Without skilled technological leaders driving progress forward(because they're busy driving someone else's progress forward), you'll stagnate, which means the costs of global goods gets worse for your population,

> Aren't digital good mostly global in nature? Don't poor countries benefit from Facebook/Google/Apple/etc?

Yes - which is why most poor countries can't afford them.

Re: The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative makes its first investment

#48

Post by k__ »

pmyjavec wrote: post #46
k__ wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Point is: everything can be counted as bad or good. If he does some charity, it's a non-democratic way to give money to the poor, which is frowned upon by many. If he would give the money to the government, which will spent it in a democratic way, people are also unhappy, because of all the burocracy that eats up money for dumb things.

"Point is: everything can be counted as bad or good." I don't think so...

Most people don't think so, that's the fundamental problem in the world.

Re: The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative makes its first investment

#49

Post by glenneroo »

ucaetano wrote: post #30
wodenokoto wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As of right now, the second highest top comment is the "exploiting black people" thing. I think the parent did well in exposing how people seemingly want to make a witch out of Zuckerberg no matter what he does.

Sadly Zuckerberg himself seems to provide plenty of ammunition for those claims: - Aggressive disregard of privacy on FB - Using deception and dirty tactics to make the FB app run continuously on the background of your phone - Manipulating timeline results - Manipulating trending topics - Naming a for-profit arm of the company ".org" - Publicly attacking net neutrality activists by buying gigantic ads across India -…

Don't forget the walled garden approach to Oculus Rift games/apps.

Re: The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative makes its first investment

#50

Post by bko »

Sacho wrote: post #47
bko wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This destabilizes the local economy, creating gentrified districts or entire cities(See: SF) So paying people more and giving them jobs destabilizes the local economy because these people now have money and spend more on housing and other items? And if they're paid less, they're being exploited? > The skilled workers hired by the foreign economy become a brain drain - the government has invested resources into thei…

> So paying people more and giving them jobs destabilizes the local economy because these people now have money and spend more on housing and other items? And if they're paid less, they're being exploited? You're not paying all people more, just some of them. The rest get to enjoy rising prices for good housing and luxuries that they won't be able to afford with their local pay. > Doesn't the government prefer rich d…

> You're not paying all people more, just some of them. The rest get to enjoy rising prices for good housing and luxuries that they won't be able to afford with their local pay.

Correct, gains are never distributed equally. This has been tried and failed. You can keep everyone poor or allow some to accumulate wealth.

In regards to modern technology not benefiting poor countries, please note that more people in Africa have a mobile phone than access to electricity [0]. Across the seven countries surveyed, roughly two-thirds or more say they own a cell phone. Ownership is especially high in South Africa and Nigeria, where about nine-in-ten have a cell phone [1]. I think you're understating the positive impact western technology is having on transforming the lives of poor Africans.

[0] http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/04/tech/mobile/africa-mobile-opin...

[1] http://www.pewglobal.org/2015/04/15/cell-phones-in-africa-co...

Post reply on HN