4 ms·

Never mind pointless apps – our best minds should be solving real problems

31 points by plg 10y ago

chrisscastaneda 10y ago
> Many of these companies will fail, but here’s the real tragedy: the time and talent wasted on problems that aren’t really problems at all. There is something demented about such a huge flowering of creativity and innovation being focused on the minor inconveniences of the cash-rich and time-poor. So true.
ex3xu 10y ago
For those who are looking to read more on this point of view: The Unexotic Underclass: http://miter.mit.edu/the-unexotic-underclass/ http://miter.mit.edu/the-unexotic-underclass/ Silicon Valley's Unchecked Arrogance: https://thedevelopmentset.com/silicon-valley-s-unchecked-arrogance-d86cbb8db52#.8md7zxpxa https://thedevelopmentset.com/silicon-valley-s-unchecked-arr... And someone less related, another Guardian article about the son of Neil Postman who wrote Amusing Ourselves To Death, although this one covers the political side moreso than the market's trend towars pursuing triviality: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/feb/02/amusing-ourselves-to-death-neil-postman-trump-orwell-huxley https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/feb/02/amusing-oursel...
- lithos 10y ago
  At one point making technology meant getting to the moon, now it means making adult baby sitting tools.
plg 10y ago
The lede is this argument that our best minds should be solving real problems ... but the substance of the argument --- at least one part of it --- is that governments should be funding Science at a higher level, so that all of these smart people have the option to "solve real problems" The counter argument of course is some of these "trivial problems" end up being homomorphic with (or at a later date contribute to) "real problems" but for me the main message is that in the absence of real options (i.e. pursuing basic or applied science) is it so surprising that the best minds flock to silicon valley to make tons of money?
arjie 10y ago
Nope. Progress will come through a thousand people solving a thousand unimportant problems. No one built a better ship to build a better ship. They built it so that they could go buy more black pepper and then more nutmeg and mace. Flavouring the food of the comfortably off is what built modern trade and civilisation. Nobody set out to build a trade network that would lift millions into prosperity. All they set out to do is get a little coffee. Silly problems are what drive society. Your desire to watch crappy TV will launch a satellite. I don't use a single one of these so-called mom startups. Let me tell you, though. The day any society chooses to have its neurosurgeons go grocery shopping instead of neurosurgery solely so that they're not using mom startups is the day that it starts to fail.
- plg 10y ago
  Trickle-down scientific progress via babysitting apps and ways to trick web browsing consumers to click on ads? Maybe. I get your argument. But it's not all or nothing. I think my argument is that IF there was more government funding for Science, THEN it's likely more smart people would directly pursue important scientific advances, right now, rather than pursuing the next great app, and hoping that maybe the technology will one day trickle down.
  - RugnirViking 10y ago
    I understand what you are saying but I thought I would add a few specific examples of trickle-down technology that has come from such things: > ways to trick web browsing consumers to click on ads Ad networks tracking people use often use/fund cutting edge AI research to match people to what they want to buy > babysitting apps This one is a little more general but the microcomputing insights gained from the funds generated by smartphone sales (which most people soley use for such menial apps) are arguably one of our greatest drivers of progress

31 points by plg 10y ago

> Many of these companies will fail, but here’s the real tragedy: the time and talent wasted on problems that aren’t really problems at all. There is something demented about such a huge flowering of creativity and innovation being focused on the minor inconveniences of the cash-rich and time-poor. So true.

ex3xu 10y ago

For those who are looking to read more on this point of view: The Unexotic Underclass: http://miter.mit.edu/the-unexotic-underclass/ http://miter.mit.edu/the-unexotic-underclass/ Silicon Valley's Unchecked Arrogance: https://thedevelopmentset.com/silicon-valley-s-unchecked-arrogance-d86cbb8db52#.8md7zxpxa https://thedevelopmentset.com/silicon-valley-s-unchecked-arr... And someone less related, another Guardian article about the son of Neil Postman who wrote Amusing Ourselves To Death, although this one covers the political side moreso than the market's trend towars pursuing triviality: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/feb/02/amusing-ourselves-to-death-neil-postman-trump-orwell-huxley https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/feb/02/amusing-oursel...

lithos 10y ago
At one point making technology meant getting to the moon, now it means making adult baby sitting tools.

plg 10y ago

The lede is this argument that our best minds should be solving real problems ... but the substance of the argument --- at least one part of it --- is that governments should be funding Science at a higher level, so that all of these smart people have the option to "solve real problems" The counter argument of course is some of these "trivial problems" end up being homomorphic with (or at a later date contribute to) "real problems" but for me the main message is that in the absence of real options (i.e. pursuing basic or applied science) is it so surprising that the best minds flock to silicon valley to make tons of money?

arjie 10y ago

Nope. Progress will come through a thousand people solving a thousand unimportant problems. No one built a better ship to build a better ship. They built it so that they could go buy more black pepper and then more nutmeg and mace. Flavouring the food of the comfortably off is what built modern trade and civilisation. Nobody set out to build a trade network that would lift millions into prosperity. All they set out to do is get a little coffee. Silly problems are what drive society. Your desire to watch crappy TV will launch a satellite. I don't use a single one of these so-called mom startups. Let me tell you, though. The day any society chooses to have its neurosurgeons go grocery shopping instead of neurosurgery solely so that they're not using mom startups is the day that it starts to fail.

plg 10y ago
Trickle-down scientific progress via babysitting apps and ways to trick web browsing consumers to click on ads? Maybe. I get your argument. But it's not all or nothing. I think my argument is that IF there was more government funding for Science, THEN it's likely more smart people would directly pursue important scientific advances, right now, rather than pursuing the next great app, and hoping that maybe the technology will one day trickle down.
- RugnirViking 10y ago
  I understand what you are saying but I thought I would add a few specific examples of trickle-down technology that has come from such things: > ways to trick web browsing consumers to click on ads Ad networks tracking people use often use/fund cutting edge AI research to match people to what they want to buy > babysitting apps This one is a little more general but the microcomputing insights gained from the funds generated by smartphone sales (which most people soley use for such menial apps) are arguably one of our greatest drivers of progress