Social problems tend to require a different, fuzzier toolkit that involves emotional labour. Especially when you're working with areas that are not broadly understood. You're starting from the assumption that only those types of solution are valid, whereas most social change is neither scientific nor technological but word-driven and operating in the emotional domain.

Starting from the assumption that every worthwhile problem must have a scientific or technical solution is exactly the hammer looking for nail that comments here are complaining about.

I'm not arguing that emotions are to be ignored, or that the area is understood. It's not. But still, science is literally, if broadly, defined as the method of figuring things out that actually works.

Maybe the OP was just meaning to criticize the app idea, but the way they wrote, it looks like a general criticism of technology as a problem solver - criticism I believe is naïve and unwarranted.

> most social change is neither scientific nor technological but word-driven and operating in the emotional domain

I disagree with that, but that's a longer discussion about technological determinism.

>If you know of any other effective way of solving problems other than applying broadly understood science and technology

I think it's possible to believe in the efficacy of science and technology, while at the same time doubting that crossing OKCupid with TaskRabbit will usher in "a utopia that would fulfill people's need to be needed by each other" (which is the concept that started this whole subthread)

Or course. I also doubt the effiacy of that particular idea. But the OP started going about "HN's technomyopia", which is a quite broader thing than just an app idea.