4 ms·

I don't think the people who work on these "useless" apps are to blame, rather it's the system in which they are brought up in and in case of start-ups, are tau

I don't think the people who work on these "useless" apps are to blame, rather it's the system in which they are brought up in and in case of start-ups, are taught entrepreneurship in. Paul Graham himself says he advises every start-up to "work on something for which they are the initial market"[0], so every YC cycle you get numerous companies which solve the problems of young San Francisco residents ([1] for comic relief), who help you save 30 minutes of your week you can then reinvest into working more on problems which aren't really problems while the world crumbles around you, but you don't really care about that because your Uber driver doesn't drive through those neighbourhoods. Meanwhile, your doctor in the hospital is stuck using some 1980's software, which drains the very life-force out of him by the amount of pain it inflicts with every use, but you'll never need a doctor anyway, not with this healthy-eating/exercising app, plus it's too hard to work on that with the regulations and all, and the carpeting in your apartment is moldy. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6106528 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6106528 [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=guf0kNV7D1w http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=guf0kNV7D1w ps. On an honest note, I've been working both on apps of the "useless" type, and spend most of my time on working on "useful" medical apps, and fuck if it's not easy to see why no one thinks these areas "sexy", so bogged down in regulation and old entrenched players. But I still think, at least in the case of these super incubators, who have the connections, who have the access to the financing, the focus should be on something more than what it is right now.

xradionut 13y ago
"Meanwhile, your doctor in the hospital is stuck using some 1980's software, which drains the very life-force out of him by the amount of pain it inflicts with every use..." Most of the problems with medical software is the doctors and medical administrators themselves. They get so used to be worshiped as Gods That Save Lives, they assume that they Know Everything About Everything. I've seen more software and business talent quit the medical software field than any other....
- carbocation 13y ago
  No, really, I discharged a patient from the hospital late the other day because the software gave me no indication that the 4 pieces of disconnected discharge orders/paperwork were missing a fifth piece that finalized the discharge. Software is a real problem.
  - xradionut 13y ago
    Sounds like it's the paperwork/bureaucracy, not necessary the software that struggles to keep up with red tape. My doctor had to sell her private practice and join a medical business group, just to keep up with the new insurance/government regulations. Healthcare in the US is insane...
    - carbocation 13y ago
      With this particular piece of software, there is a mandatory workflow. It's just not software-enforced. You have to do this series of things in order. And there are landmines - you can but must not insert information into Field X. Seems like the perfect situation for making a software workflow and simply not permitting information to be input into Field X. Etc. Anyway, in this case, I think the software could be improved (modulo my slow learning). Now, in general, I think that software can help us make the bureaucracy / regulation more tolerable by helping to convert medical intent into both medical action and medicolegal documentation. Anyway, your point is very well taken.
- Ensorceled 13y ago
  I've developed for multiple medical companies and applications. This describes exactly 0 of the doctors, radiologists, surgeons, or researchers I worked with. I quit the medical field because it's incredibly hard work and very difficult to succeed because of the additional hurdles (regulation, entrenched interests) unless you are a large corporation. And large corporations suck.
  - xradionut 13y ago
    It describes a significant percentage of doctors, lawyers and airline pilots I've coded for...
  - xradionut 13y ago
    Here's a colleagues blog post on the issues: http://www.midnightdba.com/DBARant/?p=894 http://www.midnightdba.com/DBARant/?p=894
  - vacri 13y ago
    A friend of mine was a QA engineer for a famous children's hospital. He could do absolutely nothing, because every doctor had their favourite vendor with their favourite sales rep that gave them goodies, and they all hated the idea of interoperating and making things more efficient. And once a doctor says "If you change this system, children will die!", that's it, conversation is over. It doesn't matter that everyone knows the doctor is covering themselves, the point is that the only people that can override the doctor are the higher-ups, of which there are few, and all of those are playing their own political game. My friend tells the story of being in one meeting with the various doctors, and one of the elder ones made a snide comment about another doctor 'not being here long enough to understand how things are done in this place' - to which the reply was 'I've been here for 17 years'. Myself personally, I worked as a neurology tech for four years, and the doctors I worked with were a broad mix. Some of them were the sweetest people you could hope to meet. Others were such money-grubbers they directly said to the pharmaceutical reps "don't give us 'gifts', just give us the money directly". In that broad mix were doctors so awesome that they write their own mouse drivers, to doctors that behaved just as xradionut mentioned. Doctors are humans too, there are a lot of them, and they run the same kinds of personalities as other humans.
- napoleoncomplex 13y ago
  Not to discredit your personal experience, but my experience is much closer to Ensorceled's post. All the obstacles I've encountered are on the regulation and/or cronyism of the institutions side. The doctors themselves are stuck in between, having to use shit software which never gets fixed.
- wikiburner 13y ago
  To be fair, that also describes a lot of people in tech. Are you sure who was who? :)
cell303 13y ago
I don't see why so much cynicism is needed to describe perfectly normal economic behaviour.
enraged_camel 13y ago
>>Paul Graham himself says he advises every start-up to "work on something for which they are the initial market" I would bet that there is a gigantic initial market for the cure for cancer.
- _dps 13y ago
  As Hamming says in his excellent essay "You and Your Research", there are two components to an "important problem": an objective one and a subjective one. The objective requirement: in the success-case the project must have a large impact on the community (in Hamming's case, physicists; for strtups, an initial market / society at large) The subjective requirement: the researcher must have "an attack" [0], i.e. a credible approach to a solution that others probably have not tried yet. For the vast majority of SF Bay Area founders of tiny software companies, they have no "attack" on cancer. [0] http://www.paulgraham.com/hamming.html http://www.paulgraham.com/hamming.html
rdouble 13y ago
Current doctors are stuck using 2010 software that drains the very life force out of them.
easytiger 13y ago
> Meanwhile, your doctor in the hospital is stuck using some 1980's software, which drains the very life-force out of him by the amount of pain it inflicts with every use This isn't exactly true but the truth that it hints at is largely about mass standardisation, accountability and global purchasing rules for large organisations. The same applies at telcos, banks etc. You can turn an oil tanker around quickly.

xradionut 13y ago

"Meanwhile, your doctor in the hospital is stuck using some 1980's software, which drains the very life-force out of him by the amount of pain it inflicts with every use..." Most of the problems with medical software is the doctors and medical administrators themselves. They get so used to be worshiped as Gods That Save Lives, they assume that they Know Everything About Everything. I've seen more software and business talent quit the medical software field than any other....

carbocation 13y ago
No, really, I discharged a patient from the hospital late the other day because the software gave me no indication that the 4 pieces of disconnected discharge orders/paperwork were missing a fifth piece that finalized the discharge. Software is a real problem.
- xradionut 13y ago
  Sounds like it's the paperwork/bureaucracy, not necessary the software that struggles to keep up with red tape. My doctor had to sell her private practice and join a medical business group, just to keep up with the new insurance/government regulations. Healthcare in the US is insane...
  - carbocation 13y ago
    With this particular piece of software, there is a mandatory workflow. It's just not software-enforced. You have to do this series of things in order. And there are landmines - you can but must not insert information into Field X. Seems like the perfect situation for making a software workflow and simply not permitting information to be input into Field X. Etc. Anyway, in this case, I think the software could be improved (modulo my slow learning). Now, in general, I think that software can help us make the bureaucracy / regulation more tolerable by helping to convert medical intent into both medical action and medicolegal documentation. Anyway, your point is very well taken.
Ensorceled 13y ago
I've developed for multiple medical companies and applications. This describes exactly 0 of the doctors, radiologists, surgeons, or researchers I worked with. I quit the medical field because it's incredibly hard work and very difficult to succeed because of the additional hurdles (regulation, entrenched interests) unless you are a large corporation. And large corporations suck.
- xradionut 13y ago
  It describes a significant percentage of doctors, lawyers and airline pilots I've coded for...
- xradionut 13y ago
  Here's a colleagues blog post on the issues: http://www.midnightdba.com/DBARant/?p=894 http://www.midnightdba.com/DBARant/?p=894
- vacri 13y ago
  A friend of mine was a QA engineer for a famous children's hospital. He could do absolutely nothing, because every doctor had their favourite vendor with their favourite sales rep that gave them goodies, and they all hated the idea of interoperating and making things more efficient. And once a doctor says "If you change this system, children will die!", that's it, conversation is over. It doesn't matter that everyone knows the doctor is covering themselves, the point is that the only people that can override the doctor are the higher-ups, of which there are few, and all of those are playing their own political game. My friend tells the story of being in one meeting with the various doctors, and one of the elder ones made a snide comment about another doctor 'not being here long enough to understand how things are done in this place' - to which the reply was 'I've been here for 17 years'. Myself personally, I worked as a neurology tech for four years, and the doctors I worked with were a broad mix. Some of them were the sweetest people you could hope to meet. Others were such money-grubbers they directly said to the pharmaceutical reps "don't give us 'gifts', just give us the money directly". In that broad mix were doctors so awesome that they write their own mouse drivers, to doctors that behaved just as xradionut mentioned. Doctors are humans too, there are a lot of them, and they run the same kinds of personalities as other humans.
napoleoncomplex 13y ago
Not to discredit your personal experience, but my experience is much closer to Ensorceled's post. All the obstacles I've encountered are on the regulation and/or cronyism of the institutions side. The doctors themselves are stuck in between, having to use shit software which never gets fixed.
wikiburner 13y ago
To be fair, that also describes a lot of people in tech. Are you sure who was who? :)

cell303 13y ago

I don't see why so much cynicism is needed to describe perfectly normal economic behaviour.

enraged_camel 13y ago

>>Paul Graham himself says he advises every start-up to "work on something for which they are the initial market" I would bet that there is a gigantic initial market for the cure for cancer.

_dps 13y ago
As Hamming says in his excellent essay "You and Your Research", there are two components to an "important problem": an objective one and a subjective one. The objective requirement: in the success-case the project must have a large impact on the community (in Hamming's case, physicists; for strtups, an initial market / society at large) The subjective requirement: the researcher must have "an attack" [0], i.e. a credible approach to a solution that others probably have not tried yet. For the vast majority of SF Bay Area founders of tiny software companies, they have no "attack" on cancer. [0] http://www.paulgraham.com/hamming.html http://www.paulgraham.com/hamming.html

rdouble 13y ago

Current doctors are stuck using 2010 software that drains the very life force out of them.

easytiger 13y ago

> Meanwhile, your doctor in the hospital is stuck using some 1980's software, which drains the very life-force out of him by the amount of pain it inflicts with every use This isn't exactly true but the truth that it hints at is largely about mass standardisation, accountability and global purchasing rules for large organisations. The same applies at telcos, banks etc. You can turn an oil tanker around quickly.