I don't think his point is to replace Hilbert's list. I think his point is to think about specific problems that are worth the effort to solve. It seems like he

I don't think his point is to replace Hilbert's list. I think his point is to think about specific problems that are worth the effort to solve. It seems like he made an effort to distinguish his list (and the exercise itself) from Hilbert's: > Technology doesn’t have to be high-tech. It can simply be the hard work of finding generous solutions to important problems, big or small. > Our next steps might be far more effective than simple resolutions, which are easily ignored or pushed aside. > As citizens, creators and consumers, each of us can also propose a more global list. Forgive me for saying so, but your response strikes me as a bit ironic -- losing sight of the larger theme by focusing on technically correct but less important details seems to be exactly the type of thing the author is hoping to discourage.