4 ms·

What a waste! Government agencies should provide data, supporting services, etc. when needed, they should not be developers of solutions, because, due to their

by Jun8 12y ago

What a waste! Government agencies should provide data, supporting services, etc. when needed, they should not be developers of solutions, because, due to their very nature, they cannot do it. Curiously enough, money is not a motivator in this realm for better work, it's like watering the Sahara in the hopes that suddenly vegetation will sprout. What Zuckerberg should have done is to put out $10M-$20M of that money as prizes for small non/for-profit startups to come up with ingenious solutions. Then, after this survival of the fittest mode ends, push money into the promising ones.

kjjw 12y ago
And then we'd be reading about the folly of the scheme's over-reliance on the private sector. They were not aiming at the root of the problem: massive poverty and massive inequality. In fact I'd go further, $100 million is nothing. What is probably needed is billions of dollars worth of investment in public services.
- Jun8 12y ago
  Call me pragmatic but I see those problems to be not (easily) solvable. Rather than endlessly debate about what the cause is, my proposal would be to involve young, energetic outsiders to come up with solutions and move quickly to implement them. Not all of these will be workable but some will (remember the Go entry from yesterday and how Monte Carlo methods are much better in developing strong AI compared to truing to come up with good computer strategies? Similar approach).
  - Iftheshoefits 12y ago
    "Young, energetic outsiders" in the "startup set" are disproportionately likely to also be in the set of individuals from privileged backgrounds; in America this means they're also more likely to be white and male. They haven't got the empirical foundation necessary to even comprehend the depth or scope of the problems, much less devise "ingenious" solutions to them.
    - Karunamon 12y ago
      They haven't got the empirical foundation necessary to even comprehend the depth or scope of the problems How ironic. You write off an entire group of people because of their background as not being able to understand a problem and then throw out the privilege (AKA: "You are being preemptively blacklisted from this argument) card. In a thread about education. Seriously?
      - Iftheshoefits 12y ago
        Note that "not having the background to understand a problem" isn't the same as "incapable of understanding a problem." However, having the capability and having the experience are two different things. If a group of people haven't got the background to understand a problem, they aren't likely to produce a solution that is viable. I don't see how that's a controversial statement. We "exclude" on this basis all the time in our every day lives (e.g. by selecting doctors for solutions to medical problems, as opposed to, say, firemen or physicists), because it's entirely rational and the empirically correct thing to do.
        Karunamon 12y ago
        The answer to that is to get people the background to understand a problem. People go to to med school to become doctors, you don't automatically blacklist everyone of a particular socioeconomic/racial background (NB: there's a word for this..) as being incapable of having the background necessary to be a doctor.
        Iftheshoefits 12y ago
        Yes, and "incapable" isn't anything I suggested applied to "young, energetic" types. That was an equivalence you drew while your knee was jerking.
        Karunamon 12y ago
        No, you merely suggested it applied to "privileged" white males.
  - orthecreedence 12y ago
    Call me pessimistic, but I think the last thing underprivileged education needs is a bunch of douchey "fail fast" startup types "disrupting" a problem they could never understand.
    - Jun8 12y ago
      No, they need every bit of help, even from douchey people who can get off their asses and try to help rather than wisecracking on HN. Have you ever done something to help underprivileged kids? If so, try provide feedback rather than witticisms.
- at-fates-hands 12y ago
  >>> They were not aiming at the root of the problem: massive poverty and massive inequality. While this is completely true, you also have to factor in politics. Take a look what's happening in NYC right now. You have charter schools that are doing incredible work in low income areas and De Blasio wants to shut them down: "Bill de Blasio, who repeatedly singled her out on the campaign trail as the embodiment of what he saw was wrong in schooling, and who last week followed his word with deed, canceling plans for three of her schools in New York City while leaving virtually all other charter proposals untouched." http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/05/nyregion/de-blasio-and-builder-of-charter-school-empire-do-battle.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/05/nyregion/de-blasio-and-bui...
acdha 12y ago
> What Zuckerberg should have done is to put out $10M-$20M of that money as prizes for small non/for-profit startups to come up with ingenious solutions. What kind of solution would a startup come up with for a kid who doesn't sleep under the same roof three nights running or who doesn't have a single role model who succeeded at school and is doing well professionally because they live in an area which has been systematically screwed over (race, class, etc.) for so long that everyone they know has given up? There are a few areas where the tech-world style approach could help — building better software for class management, lesson planning, etc. if for no reason other than reducing the amount going to huge, under-delivering enterprise software vendors – but most of the problems are areas where we've chosen not to invest as a society: jobs, housing, medical care — critically long-term disability care — etc. Ask a teacher how it feels when a bright student starts missing school because their family was evicted or is being pressured not to go to college because their family wants them to watch a younger/disabled sibling while the parents are at work. The best use for that $100M probably would have been opening some sort of high-headcount employer in the area to help break the cycle — even a call center job is a big step up if it provides a consistent, livable income.
- IanDrake 12y ago
  >The best use for that $100M probably would have been opening some sort of high-headcount employer That assumes these people are employable or want to work. We agree the biggest problem for these kids is family life, I just don't think that will stop with employment or even just handing their parents money.
  - acdha 12y ago
    > That assumes these people are employable or want to work. Do you have any reason to believe that we have a huge population of parents who aren't willing to work to provide for their families? Skills can be a challenge but it almost always comes down to other factors like whether jobs are available in their area, transportation and child care availability, and whether things like public assistance benefits were set up in a way which penalizes anyone who gets a job.

by Jun8 12y ago

kjjw 12y ago

And then we'd be reading about the folly of the scheme's over-reliance on the private sector. They were not aiming at the root of the problem: massive poverty and massive inequality. In fact I'd go further, $100 million is nothing. What is probably needed is billions of dollars worth of investment in public services.

Jun8 12y ago
Call me pragmatic but I see those problems to be not (easily) solvable. Rather than endlessly debate about what the cause is, my proposal would be to involve young, energetic outsiders to come up with solutions and move quickly to implement them. Not all of these will be workable but some will (remember the Go entry from yesterday and how Monte Carlo methods are much better in developing strong AI compared to truing to come up with good computer strategies? Similar approach).
- Iftheshoefits 12y ago
  "Young, energetic outsiders" in the "startup set" are disproportionately likely to also be in the set of individuals from privileged backgrounds; in America this means they're also more likely to be white and male. They haven't got the empirical foundation necessary to even comprehend the depth or scope of the problems, much less devise "ingenious" solutions to them.
  - Karunamon 12y ago
    They haven't got the empirical foundation necessary to even comprehend the depth or scope of the problems How ironic. You write off an entire group of people because of their background as not being able to understand a problem and then throw out the privilege (AKA: "You are being preemptively blacklisted from this argument) card. In a thread about education. Seriously?
    - Iftheshoefits 12y ago
      Note that "not having the background to understand a problem" isn't the same as "incapable of understanding a problem." However, having the capability and having the experience are two different things. If a group of people haven't got the background to understand a problem, they aren't likely to produce a solution that is viable. I don't see how that's a controversial statement. We "exclude" on this basis all the time in our every day lives (e.g. by selecting doctors for solutions to medical problems, as opposed to, say, firemen or physicists), because it's entirely rational and the empirically correct thing to do.
      - Karunamon 12y ago
        The answer to that is to get people the background to understand a problem. People go to to med school to become doctors, you don't automatically blacklist everyone of a particular socioeconomic/racial background (NB: there's a word for this..) as being incapable of having the background necessary to be a doctor.
        Iftheshoefits 12y ago
        Yes, and "incapable" isn't anything I suggested applied to "young, energetic" types. That was an equivalence you drew while your knee was jerking.
        Karunamon 12y ago
        No, you merely suggested it applied to "privileged" white males.
- orthecreedence 12y ago
  Call me pessimistic, but I think the last thing underprivileged education needs is a bunch of douchey "fail fast" startup types "disrupting" a problem they could never understand.
  - Jun8 12y ago
    No, they need every bit of help, even from douchey people who can get off their asses and try to help rather than wisecracking on HN. Have you ever done something to help underprivileged kids? If so, try provide feedback rather than witticisms.
at-fates-hands 12y ago
>>> They were not aiming at the root of the problem: massive poverty and massive inequality. While this is completely true, you also have to factor in politics. Take a look what's happening in NYC right now. You have charter schools that are doing incredible work in low income areas and De Blasio wants to shut them down: "Bill de Blasio, who repeatedly singled her out on the campaign trail as the embodiment of what he saw was wrong in schooling, and who last week followed his word with deed, canceling plans for three of her schools in New York City while leaving virtually all other charter proposals untouched." http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/05/nyregion/de-blasio-and-builder-of-charter-school-empire-do-battle.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/05/nyregion/de-blasio-and-bui...

acdha 12y ago

> What Zuckerberg should have done is to put out $10M-$20M of that money as prizes for small non/for-profit startups to come up with ingenious solutions. What kind of solution would a startup come up with for a kid who doesn't sleep under the same roof three nights running or who doesn't have a single role model who succeeded at school and is doing well professionally because they live in an area which has been systematically screwed over (race, class, etc.) for so long that everyone they know has given up? There are a few areas where the tech-world style approach could help — building better software for class management, lesson planning, etc. if for no reason other than reducing the amount going to huge, under-delivering enterprise software vendors – but most of the problems are areas where we've chosen not to invest as a society: jobs, housing, medical care — critically long-term disability care — etc. Ask a teacher how it feels when a bright student starts missing school because their family was evicted or is being pressured not to go to college because their family wants them to watch a younger/disabled sibling while the parents are at work. The best use for that $100M probably would have been opening some sort of high-headcount employer in the area to help break the cycle — even a call center job is a big step up if it provides a consistent, livable income.

IanDrake 12y ago
>The best use for that $100M probably would have been opening some sort of high-headcount employer That assumes these people are employable or want to work. We agree the biggest problem for these kids is family life, I just don't think that will stop with employment or even just handing their parents money.
- acdha 12y ago
  > That assumes these people are employable or want to work. Do you have any reason to believe that we have a huge population of parents who aren't willing to work to provide for their families? Skills can be a challenge but it almost always comes down to other factors like whether jobs are available in their area, transportation and child care availability, and whether things like public assistance benefits were set up in a way which penalizes anyone who gets a job.