7 ms·

Ask HN: Does one feel they are contributing positively to society?

37 points by moretai 9y ago

Tomminn 9y ago
It's funny. I have a philosophy that work at its core should be viewed a generous act for society so work-wise that's all I've cared about doing for years. And yet, I've found it hard to actually contribute positive tangible things. The only thing that philosophy has brought me is a kind of smugness about my unnecessary poverty. Honestly, the whole experience has given me quite a reverence for capitalism. At it's best, it helps direct a human being toward a path of contribution. There are problems[1] but I think the thing I've learnt is that the task of finding and following through on something that actually contributes to society is hard, and the fact that capitalism makes it easy is kind of amazing.[2] Left to your own devices you tend to massively underestimate the difficulty of whatever scheme you come up with, and burnout/get demotivated without others around you who are doing the similar work. Ahh well, hopefully I figure how to properly do this "contribution" malarky in the next ten years. [1] Apart from avoiding externalities, the other major issue is that capitalism serves dollar-weighted humans, and with the current wealth distribution that is vastly different from serving humans. [2] Find a job that isn't obviously evil. If you succeed, you're probably contributing positively to society.
tudorw 9y ago
yes, I help individuals and small businesses build sensible web strategies and mentoring where required, my clients are nice people running socially conscious enterprises in interesting and progressive fields, that's positive, for me anyway.
hprotagonist 9y ago
basics science researcher. Yes, but in an abstract sort of way.
- fifnir 9y ago
  You are directly contributing to humanity's knowledge, I can't imagine many way in which someone could be positively contributing more concretely ! (That's what I tell myself about my phd anyway)
  - hprotagonist 9y ago
    well, it's work that is several steps removed from directly impacting an individual. Nobody's ever come to my lab to tell me I saved their life. (but if our work bears fruit, everyone will have better hearing aids!) I worked EMS in undergrad; none of my patients ever found me afterwards to thank me, but we _probably_ saved a life or two. (narcan is magical) it's a fun conversation to have over a few beers.
Pica_soO 9y ago
Im working in automatization. So no! Im a wrecking ball to societys foundation, im taking peoples jobs away or prevent those from existing in the first place. I secretly wish this whole Ponzi scheme would come crashing down to bury this nightmare. I wish i could dress up in some delusional ideology, like others can, that this is for some greater good and 72 virgins after the singularity hits, but logic, that cruel mistress wont allow those too last.
- HD134606c 9y ago
  * 256 virgins
- samueloph 9y ago
  Automatization is one of the best contribution to society that can exit, i can't wait to live in a world where we all acknowledge that not everyone needs to work and we can focus on really important things like NOT reinventing the wheel and spend life on useless jobs. That is at least if everything (or almost) goes as planned and things like universal income become a reality. Also, i thought everyone from hackernews thought this.
  - crispyambulance 9y ago
    > I can't wait to live in a world where we all acknowledge... Why do you think "we" (as a world) will all acknowledge anything together? If anything, the current trajectory of automation is leading to an intensification of the difference between have's vs have-not's. Many powerful people in the "have's" group WANT this, they want another gilded age where you have fantastically wealthy people and serfs. UBI isn't a given and making it a reality is going to get ugly even if it succeeds.
  - logfromblammo 9y ago
    The benefits from automation still exist, even if currently the only way to realize them at scale is to steal from the rich robot owners. Thus, working to increase automation is still useful, because it is likely that we will soon either tax the owners of automated capital more, or economically disenfranchised people will have a bloody revolution, and the new owners of the automated capital will be slightly more inclined to voluntarily share for the next 70 years or so. The end result is that mopping floors and cleaning toilets becomes a robot job, and no human anywhere does it, freeing them up for tasks that actually require human brainpower. I think everyone needs to work, but the BS jobs we have been inventing are not fit for that purpose. Everyone needs to do a thing that is productive by the loosest definition and makes them happy. Like jarring your own pickles. Or making an online comic with stick figures. Or domesticating foxes. When freed of the requirement that people have to do work to perform certain critical functions that keep civilization running, like growing food and paving roads, people can instead put more effort into things that are niche interests. It might be playing video games for 12 hours a day. That's okay. You don't need that guy to raise chickens for your dinner. But you might need him later, when you decide to spend 4 hours every week to play a video game, and you don't want to waste your time on one that is not fun, or too deep for that level of time commitment. That guy will soon become an subject matter expert on video games, and you can trust him to blow away the chaff, because he loves video games. Some people still do the niche stuff even after working 40 hours or more in a week. If you think about what they can do in their leisure time, just imagine what they would accomplish if their hobby was their full time job.
j2bax 9y ago
It's a mixed bag for me. I work in children's entertainment and educational apps. While I feel quality fun educational experiences on devices are positive, I also feel like they are contributing to kids getting addicted to these screens at a young age which concerns me deeply. I'm not really sure where to go from here to address these concerns.
- telebone_man 9y ago
  Out of curiosity, from someone in the education arena.. Would you think augmented-reality style apps would be a step in the right direction? I remember being told it would bring forward the 'outside world' to people otherwise glued to their phones. But then, I drove past a pokemon go party the other day and the only difference was they were all stood outside...
  - j2bax 9y ago
    I think AR and VR have incredible educational potential, but I don't know that it will do anything to decrease screen addiction in children. It will likely only increase it.
robin_reala 9y ago
I did for the last couple of years, working in the public sector for GDS. While personal circumstances changed and I’ve gone back to agency life again, I’d recommend digital transformation of government services to anyone who’s a bit burnt out on the steady diet of startups destined to fail and brochureware sites. The USDS even advertise their open positions as ‘tours of duty’: https://www.usds.gov/join#tours-of-duty https://www.usds.gov/join#tours-of-duty
throwaayaya 9y ago
I don't know what society is. I don't think there's been a society for me to contribute to. All of us have our group of friends maybe, and our work life. But the rampant individualism and abandonment of the family unit leads us to no dialogue between peoples. Things just happen and we react to it. Go accumulate money and take vacation. I can't remember the last time I've seen more than three neighbors within a year time span. So no, I don't think I'm contributing to society. I'm only a student, after all.
- anovikov 9y ago
  I agree that there is no society any longer at least in developed countries. With rise of automation, there is no longer 'common good' and good old Communist class morale comes back into force: what's good for the creative class is bad for the working class. They can have a compromise based on force (compromise in speed with which creative class eats working class), but can't really have an agreement.
- contravariant 9y ago
  Students are the one group capable of making society better educated.
- ElatedOwl 9y ago
  >But the rampant individualism and abandonment of the family unit leads us to no dialogue between peoples. It's not like that everywhere. I live in a midwest metropolitan area (~230k people), when I walk passerbyers always say hi or wave. People are relatively friendly by default. Yesterday an older lady I'd never met before told me about the pace maker she had put in the Friday before. I'm rambling, but if you desire a sense of community or whatever there are parts of the US where this is very much a thing.
  - nicolashahn 9y ago
    I live in San Francisco. Grew up in the South Bay. Last month I took a motorcycle trip up to Seattle along the California and Oregon coastline. I took my time, stopped a lot along the way. I was shocked at how friendly and inquisitive the people from the <5-digit-population towns were. Everyone was polite, seemed genuinely interested in conversation with me (a lot of questions about my motorcycle, but other topics too). Completely the opposite of the urban/suburban areas I was used to. This began immediately outside the greater Bay Area and let up only when going through medium sized towns or larger. Portland and Seattle were much like being back in SF. Anyways, I'm also rambling, but just wanted to add another piece of anecdotal evidence to yours. It's almost enough to make me want to try living in one of these towns for a while, which never really occurred to me before (at 25 it seems like everyone I know wants to be as urban as possible).
cpjfox 9y ago
Assuming of course you mean contributing positively... I felt that way for dozen or so years I was in our Airforce, less about fighting down under, more about helping out. But then... I left for money, now I have a fancy business card, a house, more cars than I can drive at once and habits I couldn't have sustained in uniform, now if I'm contributing, it's not positive, and sleep, it was easier before.
- dontJudge 9y ago
  Spending your money on that stuff is contributing. By purchasing a house you contributed to the housing workers. And contribute more property tax. You supported the salaries of people in the automobile industry. You are literally contributing by consuming. Don't apologize for it. Every idea about society has been tried a dozen times over. Capitalism has the best track record. Some of the worst hell holes on earth had great intentions in the minds of their leaders.
snambi 9y ago
Too philosophical for HN...
- tudorw 9y ago
  I was not aware of degrees of philosophising, is it not binary ?
d--b 9y ago
Working for hedge fund here: nope, I don't feel like I am improving society in any way.
- FLGMwt 9y ago
  No judgement intended in asking, but does the contribution question factor into you deciding to work for a hedge fund? If it does, what keeps you there? I'm curious because I've had a few coworkers come from hedge funds and they left for a lot of reasons.
  - d--b 9y ago
    Sure no problem. No the contribution question was left aside. I went to work for a hedge fund because I wanted to live in NYC and go through the immigration process easily (I'm French). It turned out that the people I work with are very smart and super nice. So overall I don't feel like contributing much, but I kind of sorted the money issue and I work on challenging problems with a bunch of smart guys, so I feel fine.
    - FLGMwt 9y ago
      Thanks for the answer! That's great that you've found work and people you're happy with. Best of luck to you.
anovikov 9y ago
Not really. I am doing custom software development, and it is clearly a zero sum game.
BetaCygni 9y ago
Yes, at least I hope so. I've done my fair share of volunteer work, am involved in politics, and at work we build software for high schools.
m_ke 9y ago
Yeah. I'm working on an app that helps people manage their diet (for weight loss and dietary issues).
JetDogRush 9y ago
Yes! I'm the lead developer for the ground control software for the Mars rovers. The missions are expanding the bounds of human knowledge, and doing my job right means we get more/better science data back from the rovers!
- FLGMwt 9y ago
  That's fantastic! Could I bother to ask if you write at all about it or if your team has a blog or anything like that? I'm quite interested : )
Dayshine 9y ago
Working in public health research, absolutely. I don't save lives myself, but I help collect the data that's used to do so.
FLGMwt 9y ago
I struggle with this. I work for a company which is owned by a big health insurance company and we make consumer-facing applications. Our products have a varying degree of public benefit from online insurance open enrollment (turbotax for benefits) to provider transparency (find doctors and see how much common services cost). In general, I'm glad I'm working on improving consumer experience in one of the more stressful human experiences, but I know at the end of the day, I'm still improving the bottom line of a huge company and enabling the propagation of a broken system. Having things like Juicero exist gives me a little bit of relative ethical reprieve: "at least I'm not wasting a ton of money to make an elitist, wasteful food fad product".
mezod 9y ago
Thanks for bringing up this nice discussion. My answer right now would be a timid yes. But in no way in an impactful way, even to very few, so I still feel I need to work on this regard. Now, I want to merge this topic with one that comes naturally to HN: startups. I keep feeling like the projects that are for the good make no money, and that the easy money is to be found in negative or maybe irrelevant solutions. I know this is not 100% accurate, and that's why I keep trying to think of projects I can pursue, make a living on, that feel just RIGHT. But hell is this hard.
makmanalp 9y ago
I work in international development - studying why some developing countries prosper, learning lessons from that, and seeing if it can be applied elsewhere. We do a mix of theoretical paper-publishing and also small policy engagements. Nothing I do (data munging / backend / ops / web dev / bit of data visualization) single handedly saves anyone or improves anything, but I think it helps the people actually working on this stuff, so there's that.
protomyth 9y ago
Well, yes. I am currently working at a Tribal community college. We're trying to help the next generation get a start.
jqbx_jason 9y ago
I think there are a lot of cases where people (likely yourself) contribute positively to society but don't realize it. There are so many facets to how technology can interact with someone's life during some circumstance. Some of these positive circumstances may not be obvious or frequent- but that doesn't mean your efforts aren't worthwhile or that you shouldn't look at your work from different angles and appreciate your positive contributions. IMO affecting one stranger's life positively is worth celebrating. Ex. I work on on a social music app[1] in my spare time. From my perspective I'm just making it easy for devs to share music while they work: marginal contribution to society at best. But a little while ago I got an email from a father who thanked me for the building something which gave him the opportunity to reconnect with his daughter across the world. Remembering nice stories like that help keep me motivated and hopefully you can find some nice stories in your line of work as well :). [1] https://www.jqbx.fm https://www.jqbx.fm
- suff 9y ago
  It is true that contribution can often seem intangible. However, if you lower the cost of goods, or increase productivity in any way, you have helped large numbers of people. Repeat that for 20 years and you have probably helped a few million, or if you are lucky a few hundred million people.
lightbyte 9y ago
Not really. If I were to disappear forever the company I work for would easily continue on with all current work with probably no noticeable change.
- dx034 9y ago
  That can be a very good sign. People like to feel important but it's very dangerous to be irreplaceable. Key man risk is often underestimated and can kill companies.
- marcosdumay 9y ago
  That means you are replaceable (most of us are), it tells nothing about the consequences of your work.
occultist_throw 9y ago
In a way, I am through my work. However it is primarily from doing tickets of people complaining about $feature or $bug or $access_rights. It certainly feels soul-sucking doing it. And most certainly does not feel like positive contributions. But I know that what I work on, many millions of people count on in the end. And my hands are a small part of that. In the grand stream of things, I've done more actionable and powerful work outside of my job I attend 5 days a week. If I had more time, I could push more innovation in many areas. The money would be nice as well. It's a hard choice, balancing money and time. I yearn for the days when we finally have UBI or something guaranteeing us the rights to live without being coerced into selling our bodies and minds. Because right now, I feel there's little between me selling my body and mind and that of a prostitute selling theirs. I just don't do sex as work, so it's somehow "better". And having rights to live for everyone would allow me to work much more in automation tech without the ethical qualms that I am putting many more people out of work - and thusly depriving them of living. Automation tech can work for a limited amount of people (now), or it can work for everyone. Perhaps I'm just an idealist.
dangom 9y ago
I believe that simply treating others the way we'd like to be treated is a positive contribution to society. Treating others with respect, and trying to keep common places clean already goes a long way for society as a whole.
- afoot 9y ago
  I guess sometimes it's the smallest of things that can make a genuine difference.
jonkiddy 9y ago
Yes. My job is to automate tasks at a cancer research institution.
RightMillennial 9y ago
Of course I do. I work, pay my taxes, donate some to charity and fundraisers, and contribute to the economy as a consumer.
afoot 9y ago
No. Like many, I help in a number of small ways I'm sure, and perhaps I've even made a big impact on a few lives for the better, but I can't help but think I should be able to scale up and do more for a far, far greater number of people.
dm319 9y ago
This is a such a great question. I find it fascinating that 'contributing positively to society' is not necessarily related to; financial compensation, legality or societal status. Not implying it should of course, many of us don't have the option to choose our jobs too easily. But some of us certainly are in a position to choose a job which pays higher but has less moral standing. My next door neighbour works for a pay-day loan company, and seems to be well rewarded. I don't know if he considers this question. Another friend of mine moved from accounting into private equity, with much higher pay. Similar to the high-achieving doctors who go into cosmetic plastic surgery. Is there any incentive to consider your contribution to society?
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
hacker93 9y ago
Hell yes, Jacques Fresco and his project Venus definitely fit to this category. They contributes by educating the world the ill effects of current monetary system infers we all are circling our way slowly to destruction. He calls for change to the resource based economy and envisions a great future. It is not an Utopia as many think so. But it is feasible when we push our way to it collectively.
zie 9y ago
There is a reason I work in public government, and it isn't the pay. :)
11235813213455 9y ago
Few people are, else the planet's health wouldn't degrade so fast. The population is growing fast, most people in developed countries have a high fingerprint on environment (as 40% of the pollution is residential (source: https://www.airparif.asso.fr/pollution/air-et-climat https://www.airparif.asso.fr/pollution/air-et-climat in french sorry), it matters a lot) So the best individuals can do, I think, to contribute positively to society, is reducing their fingerprint on environment, and educate others, children, ...
logfromblammo 9y ago
That is heavily dependent on what you think "society" means. Is it the entire human population of the Earth? Just the people of your own nation? The people in your hometown? Just rich and influential people? Most of the time, I'm contributing to my own nuclear family by exporting my labor and importing other people's money. And that's "society" enough for me. Other people can derive some ancillary benefit from what I do, but for the most part, the majority of them have been quite rude to me for no readily apparent reason beyond my general homeliness, so I stopped trying to satisfy them a long time ago. The only contributions I feel are valuable in the ultra-long term are development in more efficient space launch technologies, space habitats, space propulsion, and ecological remediation here on Earth. But I don't do any of those things, so I don't value my own work very highly. I'm just workin' for The Man, and he doesn't love anybody or help anyone except Himself.
elevensies 9y ago
Yes. I'm working to advance technology. Technology creates the economic surplus that makes everything good possible, it is the reason the old aren't starving and children aren't working the fields. Also, I'm part of a country that has one of the highest standards of living in human history which was built on immense toil over thousands of years by my ancestors and millions of others, which only continues to exist based on mutual support between myself and many others. I may question the value of what I'm working on at the moment, but I don't question the value of knowledge, technology, and the society that allows me to pursue it.
ameliaquining 9y ago
I'm a software engineer at a very large adtech vendor. The basic argument for display ads not being evil is that they give journalists and other content creators a way to get paid for their work. A lot of people, concerned about incentive distortion and other problems with ads, would rather see this happen through alternative models like subscriptions or microtransactions, but it's not clear to me that that can work. In particular, the amount that publishers would have to charge in order for such models to be revenue-competitive with ads far exceeds the average reader's willingness to pay—which suggests that ads provide a significant consumer surplus. The question that currently worries me a bit is where that surplus comes from. One possibility is that the cost to consumers of being shown ads is much greater than it appears, because ads strongly influence consumers' behavior in ways that directly oppose their own interests. (Note that this is different from the hypothesis that publishers manipulate readers' behavior to maximize ad revenue; this is about the what advertisers do directly.) Obviously there's some of this going on; the question is whether it's enough to negate the consumer surplus. (Some also argue that there should be zero tolerance for this, even if the consumer comes out ahead, because it undermines their ability to navigate the tradeoffs in their own interest; I won't get into that argument here.) I think this hypothesis can't yet be ruled out, and if true certainly means that I'm making the world worse, but I'd like to see stronger evidence for it before I believe it with much confidence. In particular, lots of people who argue strongly for it seem to be basically motivated by their own aesthetic revulsion towards ads, and rarely present much real evidence. Another hypothesis is that advertisers are basically engaging in a dollar auction against one another, paying more than they should for ad inventory because if they don't their competitors will, and/or because they can't measure the effectiveness of their ad spend well enough. (Obviously we try to give advertisers the tools to measure and understand the effects of what they're doing, but some argue that it still doesn't work well enough for that purpose.) The proceeds from this dollar auction effectively wind up subsidizing publishers, readers, and me. If this is true, then I think I'm making society better, by moving wealth from things like consumer product marketing (less socially valuable) to things like journalism and content creation (more socially valuable). Such an arrangement may not be stable in the long term, as greater competition increases selection pressures against companies that waste money like this, but I'm okay with crossing that bridge when I get there. There are likely other possible explanations that I haven't thought of. Two other relevant factors in defense of what I do: 1. My job in particular is significantly about defending users' interests. As HN readers are well aware, there are a lot of ways that display ads these days just plain suck for users, and much of what I work on is about finding ways to make that less true. 2. I donate a significant fraction of my salary to the most socially valuable causes that I can find, and I intend to increase that amount a lot more once I've got a financial safety cushion built up for myself. I don't think I could do much more social good than this while still working on pure technology. I do think I could do a lot more social good if I took a job that involved significantly less programming and more of other kinds of less-pleasant work that I'm worse at. I frequently feel bad about not doing that, but it does seem reasonably likely that I'd burn out if I did.
thraxil 9y ago
Spent the last 17 years working for a university, writing custom code to support teaching, learning, and research programs. I've written code for projects related to climate modelling, tracking polar ice movement, studying traffic related air pollution, optimizing electrical grid construction in developing countries, helping law practitioners understand collateral consequences, improving counseling for domestic abuse victims, supporting HIV counseling (deployed in a successful study in clinics in South Africa), and teaching world leaders to detect and properly react to pre-genocidal warning signs. Currently looking for a new gig and wondering whether I'd be able work on shitty adtech and still look at myself in the mirror.

37 points by moretai 9y ago

It's funny. I have a philosophy that work at its core should be viewed a generous act for society so work-wise that's all I've cared about doing for years. And yet, I've found it hard to actually contribute positive tangible things. The only thing that philosophy has brought me is a kind of smugness about my unnecessary poverty. Honestly, the whole experience has given me quite a reverence for capitalism. At it's best, it helps direct a human being toward a path of contribution. There are problems[1] but I think the thing I've learnt is that the task of finding and following through on something that actually contributes to society is hard, and the fact that capitalism makes it easy is kind of amazing.[2] Left to your own devices you tend to massively underestimate the difficulty of whatever scheme you come up with, and burnout/get demotivated without others around you who are doing the similar work. Ahh well, hopefully I figure how to properly do this "contribution" malarky in the next ten years. [1] Apart from avoiding externalities, the other major issue is that capitalism serves dollar-weighted humans, and with the current wealth distribution that is vastly different from serving humans. [2] Find a job that isn't obviously evil. If you succeed, you're probably contributing positively to society.

tudorw 9y ago

yes, I help individuals and small businesses build sensible web strategies and mentoring where required, my clients are nice people running socially conscious enterprises in interesting and progressive fields, that's positive, for me anyway.

hprotagonist 9y ago

basics science researcher. Yes, but in an abstract sort of way.

fifnir 9y ago
You are directly contributing to humanity's knowledge, I can't imagine many way in which someone could be positively contributing more concretely ! (That's what I tell myself about my phd anyway)
- hprotagonist 9y ago
  well, it's work that is several steps removed from directly impacting an individual. Nobody's ever come to my lab to tell me I saved their life. (but if our work bears fruit, everyone will have better hearing aids!) I worked EMS in undergrad; none of my patients ever found me afterwards to thank me, but we _probably_ saved a life or two. (narcan is magical) it's a fun conversation to have over a few beers.

Pica_soO 9y ago

Im working in automatization. So no! Im a wrecking ball to societys foundation, im taking peoples jobs away or prevent those from existing in the first place. I secretly wish this whole Ponzi scheme would come crashing down to bury this nightmare. I wish i could dress up in some delusional ideology, like others can, that this is for some greater good and 72 virgins after the singularity hits, but logic, that cruel mistress wont allow those too last.

HD134606c 9y ago
* 256 virgins
samueloph 9y ago
Automatization is one of the best contribution to society that can exit, i can't wait to live in a world where we all acknowledge that not everyone needs to work and we can focus on really important things like NOT reinventing the wheel and spend life on useless jobs. That is at least if everything (or almost) goes as planned and things like universal income become a reality. Also, i thought everyone from hackernews thought this.
- crispyambulance 9y ago
  > I can't wait to live in a world where we all acknowledge... Why do you think "we" (as a world) will all acknowledge anything together? If anything, the current trajectory of automation is leading to an intensification of the difference between have's vs have-not's. Many powerful people in the "have's" group WANT this, they want another gilded age where you have fantastically wealthy people and serfs. UBI isn't a given and making it a reality is going to get ugly even if it succeeds.
- logfromblammo 9y ago
  The benefits from automation still exist, even if currently the only way to realize them at scale is to steal from the rich robot owners. Thus, working to increase automation is still useful, because it is likely that we will soon either tax the owners of automated capital more, or economically disenfranchised people will have a bloody revolution, and the new owners of the automated capital will be slightly more inclined to voluntarily share for the next 70 years or so. The end result is that mopping floors and cleaning toilets becomes a robot job, and no human anywhere does it, freeing them up for tasks that actually require human brainpower. I think everyone needs to work, but the BS jobs we have been inventing are not fit for that purpose. Everyone needs to do a thing that is productive by the loosest definition and makes them happy. Like jarring your own pickles. Or making an online comic with stick figures. Or domesticating foxes. When freed of the requirement that people have to do work to perform certain critical functions that keep civilization running, like growing food and paving roads, people can instead put more effort into things that are niche interests. It might be playing video games for 12 hours a day. That's okay. You don't need that guy to raise chickens for your dinner. But you might need him later, when you decide to spend 4 hours every week to play a video game, and you don't want to waste your time on one that is not fun, or too deep for that level of time commitment. That guy will soon become an subject matter expert on video games, and you can trust him to blow away the chaff, because he loves video games. Some people still do the niche stuff even after working 40 hours or more in a week. If you think about what they can do in their leisure time, just imagine what they would accomplish if their hobby was their full time job.

j2bax 9y ago

It's a mixed bag for me. I work in children's entertainment and educational apps. While I feel quality fun educational experiences on devices are positive, I also feel like they are contributing to kids getting addicted to these screens at a young age which concerns me deeply. I'm not really sure where to go from here to address these concerns.

telebone_man 9y ago
Out of curiosity, from someone in the education arena.. Would you think augmented-reality style apps would be a step in the right direction? I remember being told it would bring forward the 'outside world' to people otherwise glued to their phones. But then, I drove past a pokemon go party the other day and the only difference was they were all stood outside...
- j2bax 9y ago
  I think AR and VR have incredible educational potential, but I don't know that it will do anything to decrease screen addiction in children. It will likely only increase it.

robin_reala 9y ago

I did for the last couple of years, working in the public sector for GDS. While personal circumstances changed and I’ve gone back to agency life again, I’d recommend digital transformation of government services to anyone who’s a bit burnt out on the steady diet of startups destined to fail and brochureware sites. The USDS even advertise their open positions as ‘tours of duty’: https://www.usds.gov/join#tours-of-duty https://www.usds.gov/join#tours-of-duty

throwaayaya 9y ago

I don't know what society is. I don't think there's been a society for me to contribute to. All of us have our group of friends maybe, and our work life. But the rampant individualism and abandonment of the family unit leads us to no dialogue between peoples. Things just happen and we react to it. Go accumulate money and take vacation. I can't remember the last time I've seen more than three neighbors within a year time span. So no, I don't think I'm contributing to society. I'm only a student, after all.

anovikov 9y ago
I agree that there is no society any longer at least in developed countries. With rise of automation, there is no longer 'common good' and good old Communist class morale comes back into force: what's good for the creative class is bad for the working class. They can have a compromise based on force (compromise in speed with which creative class eats working class), but can't really have an agreement.
contravariant 9y ago
Students are the one group capable of making society better educated.
ElatedOwl 9y ago
>But the rampant individualism and abandonment of the family unit leads us to no dialogue between peoples. It's not like that everywhere. I live in a midwest metropolitan area (~230k people), when I walk passerbyers always say hi or wave. People are relatively friendly by default. Yesterday an older lady I'd never met before told me about the pace maker she had put in the Friday before. I'm rambling, but if you desire a sense of community or whatever there are parts of the US where this is very much a thing.
- nicolashahn 9y ago
  I live in San Francisco. Grew up in the South Bay. Last month I took a motorcycle trip up to Seattle along the California and Oregon coastline. I took my time, stopped a lot along the way. I was shocked at how friendly and inquisitive the people from the <5-digit-population towns were. Everyone was polite, seemed genuinely interested in conversation with me (a lot of questions about my motorcycle, but other topics too). Completely the opposite of the urban/suburban areas I was used to. This began immediately outside the greater Bay Area and let up only when going through medium sized towns or larger. Portland and Seattle were much like being back in SF. Anyways, I'm also rambling, but just wanted to add another piece of anecdotal evidence to yours. It's almost enough to make me want to try living in one of these towns for a while, which never really occurred to me before (at 25 it seems like everyone I know wants to be as urban as possible).

cpjfox 9y ago

Assuming of course you mean contributing positively... I felt that way for dozen or so years I was in our Airforce, less about fighting down under, more about helping out. But then... I left for money, now I have a fancy business card, a house, more cars than I can drive at once and habits I couldn't have sustained in uniform, now if I'm contributing, it's not positive, and sleep, it was easier before.

dontJudge 9y ago
Spending your money on that stuff is contributing. By purchasing a house you contributed to the housing workers. And contribute more property tax. You supported the salaries of people in the automobile industry. You are literally contributing by consuming. Don't apologize for it. Every idea about society has been tried a dozen times over. Capitalism has the best track record. Some of the worst hell holes on earth had great intentions in the minds of their leaders.

snambi 9y ago

Too philosophical for HN...

tudorw 9y ago
I was not aware of degrees of philosophising, is it not binary ?

d--b 9y ago

Working for hedge fund here: nope, I don't feel like I am improving society in any way.

FLGMwt 9y ago
No judgement intended in asking, but does the contribution question factor into you deciding to work for a hedge fund? If it does, what keeps you there? I'm curious because I've had a few coworkers come from hedge funds and they left for a lot of reasons.
- d--b 9y ago
  Sure no problem. No the contribution question was left aside. I went to work for a hedge fund because I wanted to live in NYC and go through the immigration process easily (I'm French). It turned out that the people I work with are very smart and super nice. So overall I don't feel like contributing much, but I kind of sorted the money issue and I work on challenging problems with a bunch of smart guys, so I feel fine.
  - FLGMwt 9y ago
    Thanks for the answer! That's great that you've found work and people you're happy with. Best of luck to you.

anovikov 9y ago

Not really. I am doing custom software development, and it is clearly a zero sum game.

BetaCygni 9y ago

Yes, at least I hope so. I've done my fair share of volunteer work, am involved in politics, and at work we build software for high schools.

m_ke 9y ago

Yeah. I'm working on an app that helps people manage their diet (for weight loss and dietary issues).

JetDogRush 9y ago

Yes! I'm the lead developer for the ground control software for the Mars rovers. The missions are expanding the bounds of human knowledge, and doing my job right means we get more/better science data back from the rovers!

FLGMwt 9y ago
That's fantastic! Could I bother to ask if you write at all about it or if your team has a blog or anything like that? I'm quite interested : )

Dayshine 9y ago

Working in public health research, absolutely. I don't save lives myself, but I help collect the data that's used to do so.

FLGMwt 9y ago

I struggle with this. I work for a company which is owned by a big health insurance company and we make consumer-facing applications. Our products have a varying degree of public benefit from online insurance open enrollment (turbotax for benefits) to provider transparency (find doctors and see how much common services cost). In general, I'm glad I'm working on improving consumer experience in one of the more stressful human experiences, but I know at the end of the day, I'm still improving the bottom line of a huge company and enabling the propagation of a broken system. Having things like Juicero exist gives me a little bit of relative ethical reprieve: "at least I'm not wasting a ton of money to make an elitist, wasteful food fad product".

mezod 9y ago

Thanks for bringing up this nice discussion. My answer right now would be a timid yes. But in no way in an impactful way, even to very few, so I still feel I need to work on this regard. Now, I want to merge this topic with one that comes naturally to HN: startups. I keep feeling like the projects that are for the good make no money, and that the easy money is to be found in negative or maybe irrelevant solutions. I know this is not 100% accurate, and that's why I keep trying to think of projects I can pursue, make a living on, that feel just RIGHT. But hell is this hard.

makmanalp 9y ago

I work in international development - studying why some developing countries prosper, learning lessons from that, and seeing if it can be applied elsewhere. We do a mix of theoretical paper-publishing and also small policy engagements. Nothing I do (data munging / backend / ops / web dev / bit of data visualization) single handedly saves anyone or improves anything, but I think it helps the people actually working on this stuff, so there's that.

protomyth 9y ago

Well, yes. I am currently working at a Tribal community college. We're trying to help the next generation get a start.

jqbx_jason 9y ago

I think there are a lot of cases where people (likely yourself) contribute positively to society but don't realize it. There are so many facets to how technology can interact with someone's life during some circumstance. Some of these positive circumstances may not be obvious or frequent- but that doesn't mean your efforts aren't worthwhile or that you shouldn't look at your work from different angles and appreciate your positive contributions. IMO affecting one stranger's life positively is worth celebrating. Ex. I work on on a social music app[1] in my spare time. From my perspective I'm just making it easy for devs to share music while they work: marginal contribution to society at best. But a little while ago I got an email from a father who thanked me for the building something which gave him the opportunity to reconnect with his daughter across the world. Remembering nice stories like that help keep me motivated and hopefully you can find some nice stories in your line of work as well :). [1] https://www.jqbx.fm https://www.jqbx.fm

suff 9y ago
It is true that contribution can often seem intangible. However, if you lower the cost of goods, or increase productivity in any way, you have helped large numbers of people. Repeat that for 20 years and you have probably helped a few million, or if you are lucky a few hundred million people.

lightbyte 9y ago

Not really. If I were to disappear forever the company I work for would easily continue on with all current work with probably no noticeable change.

dx034 9y ago
That can be a very good sign. People like to feel important but it's very dangerous to be irreplaceable. Key man risk is often underestimated and can kill companies.
marcosdumay 9y ago
That means you are replaceable (most of us are), it tells nothing about the consequences of your work.

occultist_throw 9y ago

In a way, I am through my work. However it is primarily from doing tickets of people complaining about $feature or $bug or $access_rights. It certainly feels soul-sucking doing it. And most certainly does not feel like positive contributions. But I know that what I work on, many millions of people count on in the end. And my hands are a small part of that. In the grand stream of things, I've done more actionable and powerful work outside of my job I attend 5 days a week. If I had more time, I could push more innovation in many areas. The money would be nice as well. It's a hard choice, balancing money and time. I yearn for the days when we finally have UBI or something guaranteeing us the rights to live without being coerced into selling our bodies and minds. Because right now, I feel there's little between me selling my body and mind and that of a prostitute selling theirs. I just don't do sex as work, so it's somehow "better". And having rights to live for everyone would allow me to work much more in automation tech without the ethical qualms that I am putting many more people out of work - and thusly depriving them of living. Automation tech can work for a limited amount of people (now), or it can work for everyone. Perhaps I'm just an idealist.

dangom 9y ago

I believe that simply treating others the way we'd like to be treated is a positive contribution to society. Treating others with respect, and trying to keep common places clean already goes a long way for society as a whole.

afoot 9y ago
I guess sometimes it's the smallest of things that can make a genuine difference.

jonkiddy 9y ago

Yes. My job is to automate tasks at a cancer research institution.

RightMillennial 9y ago

Of course I do. I work, pay my taxes, donate some to charity and fundraisers, and contribute to the economy as a consumer.

afoot 9y ago

No. Like many, I help in a number of small ways I'm sure, and perhaps I've even made a big impact on a few lives for the better, but I can't help but think I should be able to scale up and do more for a far, far greater number of people.

dm319 9y ago

This is a such a great question. I find it fascinating that 'contributing positively to society' is not necessarily related to; financial compensation, legality or societal status. Not implying it should of course, many of us don't have the option to choose our jobs too easily. But some of us certainly are in a position to choose a job which pays higher but has less moral standing. My next door neighbour works for a pay-day loan company, and seems to be well rewarded. I don't know if he considers this question. Another friend of mine moved from accounting into private equity, with much higher pay. Similar to the high-achieving doctors who go into cosmetic plastic surgery. Is there any incentive to consider your contribution to society?

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

hacker93 9y ago

Hell yes, Jacques Fresco and his project Venus definitely fit to this category. They contributes by educating the world the ill effects of current monetary system infers we all are circling our way slowly to destruction. He calls for change to the resource based economy and envisions a great future. It is not an Utopia as many think so. But it is feasible when we push our way to it collectively.

zie 9y ago

There is a reason I work in public government, and it isn't the pay. :)

11235813213455 9y ago

Few people are, else the planet's health wouldn't degrade so fast. The population is growing fast, most people in developed countries have a high fingerprint on environment (as 40% of the pollution is residential (source: https://www.airparif.asso.fr/pollution/air-et-climat https://www.airparif.asso.fr/pollution/air-et-climat in french sorry), it matters a lot) So the best individuals can do, I think, to contribute positively to society, is reducing their fingerprint on environment, and educate others, children, ...

logfromblammo 9y ago

That is heavily dependent on what you think "society" means. Is it the entire human population of the Earth? Just the people of your own nation? The people in your hometown? Just rich and influential people? Most of the time, I'm contributing to my own nuclear family by exporting my labor and importing other people's money. And that's "society" enough for me. Other people can derive some ancillary benefit from what I do, but for the most part, the majority of them have been quite rude to me for no readily apparent reason beyond my general homeliness, so I stopped trying to satisfy them a long time ago. The only contributions I feel are valuable in the ultra-long term are development in more efficient space launch technologies, space habitats, space propulsion, and ecological remediation here on Earth. But I don't do any of those things, so I don't value my own work very highly. I'm just workin' for The Man, and he doesn't love anybody or help anyone except Himself.

elevensies 9y ago

Yes. I'm working to advance technology. Technology creates the economic surplus that makes everything good possible, it is the reason the old aren't starving and children aren't working the fields. Also, I'm part of a country that has one of the highest standards of living in human history which was built on immense toil over thousands of years by my ancestors and millions of others, which only continues to exist based on mutual support between myself and many others. I may question the value of what I'm working on at the moment, but I don't question the value of knowledge, technology, and the society that allows me to pursue it.

ameliaquining 9y ago

I'm a software engineer at a very large adtech vendor. The basic argument for display ads not being evil is that they give journalists and other content creators a way to get paid for their work. A lot of people, concerned about incentive distortion and other problems with ads, would rather see this happen through alternative models like subscriptions or microtransactions, but it's not clear to me that that can work. In particular, the amount that publishers would have to charge in order for such models to be revenue-competitive with ads far exceeds the average reader's willingness to pay—which suggests that ads provide a significant consumer surplus. The question that currently worries me a bit is where that surplus comes from. One possibility is that the cost to consumers of being shown ads is much greater than it appears, because ads strongly influence consumers' behavior in ways that directly oppose their own interests. (Note that this is different from the hypothesis that publishers manipulate readers' behavior to maximize ad revenue; this is about the what advertisers do directly.) Obviously there's some of this going on; the question is whether it's enough to negate the consumer surplus. (Some also argue that there should be zero tolerance for this, even if the consumer comes out ahead, because it undermines their ability to navigate the tradeoffs in their own interest; I won't get into that argument here.) I think this hypothesis can't yet be ruled out, and if true certainly means that I'm making the world worse, but I'd like to see stronger evidence for it before I believe it with much confidence. In particular, lots of people who argue strongly for it seem to be basically motivated by their own aesthetic revulsion towards ads, and rarely present much real evidence. Another hypothesis is that advertisers are basically engaging in a dollar auction against one another, paying more than they should for ad inventory because if they don't their competitors will, and/or because they can't measure the effectiveness of their ad spend well enough. (Obviously we try to give advertisers the tools to measure and understand the effects of what they're doing, but some argue that it still doesn't work well enough for that purpose.) The proceeds from this dollar auction effectively wind up subsidizing publishers, readers, and me. If this is true, then I think I'm making society better, by moving wealth from things like consumer product marketing (less socially valuable) to things like journalism and content creation (more socially valuable). Such an arrangement may not be stable in the long term, as greater competition increases selection pressures against companies that waste money like this, but I'm okay with crossing that bridge when I get there. There are likely other possible explanations that I haven't thought of. Two other relevant factors in defense of what I do: 1. My job in particular is significantly about defending users' interests. As HN readers are well aware, there are a lot of ways that display ads these days just plain suck for users, and much of what I work on is about finding ways to make that less true. 2. I donate a significant fraction of my salary to the most socially valuable causes that I can find, and I intend to increase that amount a lot more once I've got a financial safety cushion built up for myself. I don't think I could do much more social good than this while still working on pure technology. I do think I could do a lot more social good if I took a job that involved significantly less programming and more of other kinds of less-pleasant work that I'm worse at. I frequently feel bad about not doing that, but it does seem reasonably likely that I'd burn out if I did.

thraxil 9y ago

Spent the last 17 years working for a university, writing custom code to support teaching, learning, and research programs. I've written code for projects related to climate modelling, tracking polar ice movement, studying traffic related air pollution, optimizing electrical grid construction in developing countries, helping law practitioners understand collateral consequences, improving counseling for domestic abuse victims, supporting HIV counseling (deployed in a successful study in clinics in South Africa), and teaching world leaders to detect and properly react to pre-genocidal warning signs. Currently looking for a new gig and wondering whether I'd be able work on shitty adtech and still look at myself in the mirror.