This is the kind of post that happens when someone gets so wrapped up in startup land that they lose all context of the "real world."
These "first world problem"-solving companies he's talking about are really just B2B companies made to help the ACTUAL, real-world problem solving companies do their jobs more easily. No customer cares about MailChimp. No consumer thinks about Twilio. They're not solving first-world problems, they're solving BUSINESS problems.
Downplay the importance of those companies all you like, but making one company's business operations better in turn allows that company to reach out and help more people.
This is all well and good, but I think the point is that there is an imbalance, and very few tech startups are going after the big problems these days.
There are some notable ones, but it seems to be the road less traveled.
> This is all well and good, but I think the point is that there is an imbalance, and very few tech startups are going after the big problems these days.
But, my point is that these companies are indirectly going after the big problems by taking care of the little things. There are companies of 1 to 2 people who can now outsource almost every physical aspect of their service so that they can focus on their core product. Do I hire a team of sysadmins and technicians to maintain a server farm to 1) pay, 2) train, 3) meet with regularly, or do I simply host my service on AWS? One could argue that AWS is nothing but a first-world solution, but hey, it's responsible for hosting a HUGE number of companies! These "small", "iterative", "derivative" services can have a huge impact on industries. Just because they're not devoted to saving Africa or rescuing animals or ending world hunger doesn't mean they're not important.
> There are some notable ones, but it seems to be the road less traveled.
It's funny that you mention the 'road less traveled'. People use that phrase in allusion to Robert Frost's "The Road Not Taken," where the narrator opines about coming to a fork in the road and wondering about how his life would be different had he taken the other path.
The funny part is that Frost was really being sarcastic and basically saying that it makes no difference which road you'll take. So yes, you can "go after the big problems" consciously and take that "road less traveled," but in the end, BOTH paths can result in solving big problems (or not solving anything).
The impression I got was that the author was mostly upset with entrepreneurs patting themselves on the back for changing the world for the better with their "innovation" when they haven't actually done much to make the world better (though they may have innovated).
Most big problems cannot be solved, except theoretically, with information processing. In other words, software and computer networks and data mining and such will not actually solve the problem, although it might begin to provide some insight. Real problems are physical, and require physical things (like people and machines and other stuff) to solve them. It is also much harder to scale physical solutions, although software can also help. Whereas, you can often solve the whole problem if it is made of information, and you can throw enough CPUs and algorithms at it.
These "first world problem"-solving companies he's talking about are really just B2B companies made to help the ACTUAL, real-world problem solving companies do their jobs more easily. No customer cares about MailChimp. No consumer thinks about Twilio. They're not solving first-world problems, they're solving BUSINESS problems.
Downplay the importance of those companies all you like, but making one company's business operations better in turn allows that company to reach out and help more people.