unono
There's a better approach than what the blog outlines - imagine that you have infinite wealth and begin to build what you personally want.
In most cases you will not be able to create the whole thing, but you can tackle a piece of the problem.
Example - you want a flying car. Imagine that you have 1 trillion dollars at your disposal. What would you do? Hire engineers. How would you hire them? What software is required. Look around, if it does not exist already, that's your first product. If it the hiring problem is already adequately solved, look for the next thing. How do those engineers communicate? etc.
These series of questions will lead to finding niches of opportunity, and it is always a software problem (organizing workflows).
Personally, I'd want to see self-directed curriculums with a core of entrepreneurship and computing.
Even if there is variability of pay, at least society would be far richer, so being poor wouldn't suck so bad.
There is an 'unlimited demand' for programmers skills because of demand ran out, there would be no work left (we'd have a singularity/post scarcity) - programmers automate work.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/06/21/155515613/how-much...
That's $120,000 over k-12 (not including pre-school). Is $120,000 and 12 years not enough to teach every kid entrepreneurship and coding?
As I wrote in another comment, the current education system is 19th century stuff and it's amazing a lot more people aren't astounded why it still exists.
Yelp has already demonstrated why crowdsourcing is so important. The public often rails against the government, but most of the bad stuff is done by everyday people and they need to be held accountable.
If everyone was a businessman, they'd be earning more than government set minimums.
Teaching metrics should be about how successful people turn out as adults, not some test scores at year end.
Until the government education system can show it's success in that, I'd hold off funding them.
What has shown success are private schools http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405270230382220457746...
Where are the proper studies (with 1000s of participants) showing teachers can do a better job than babysitters who hand out an ipad with learning software to every student?
The teaching system is a 19th system. It's like if the tech industry continued on with using telegraphs and morse code for everything.
Meanwhile, fisherman, who hold the most dangerous job, have a median salary of $25,000.
Firefighters, whose job is to enter dangerous buildings, $45,000.
Fast food workers, $18,000.
The first country or state to disband the current teaching system and replace with a competitive system will skyrocket to success. This is a no-brainer, but it's so to difficult implement because there's so many of the 'government handout' teachers voting they swamp the rest of us.
He openly admits he's tough, but that's out of wanting all of his investments to succeed.
Same with the app. It needs to be excellent, something Steve Jobs would be proud of, and it will make dent in the universe.
This is big, heady, stuff, and we'll kill the ed business with it. I like nothing better than to see government jobs disappear.
I think your argument comes from the traditional 'liberal arts' education angle.
I'm coming more from vocational type place. More of a rentacoder/odesk done more comprehensively.
Anyway, adios
http://www.popsci.com/gadgets/article/2012-11/teenage-gamers...
Khan academy is definitely not it. They teach traditional curriculum which is isn't useful to business.
The app is definitely isn't the easy part - it is basically the whole part. The current education system is a failure for 2 reasons
- unanalyzed teaching
- unmotivated students
Apps solve both problems, every user interaction recorded and analyzed, gamification.
You can turn it around even and starting hiring those students yourself and create your own megacorp with the best employees and make megabucks.
If you can show employers that your app truly tests useful abilities they would be lining up. The current education system fails at producing workers with the right skills and employers are always complaining abou this.
A free app.
The data points of the app users are sold to employers.
Employers pay big money to find employees. Students pay big money to get educated to get a job.
Hackers roll in with apps that allow students to do courses for free on the smartphone/tablet, sell the info of the students to employers, who then hire the students. Everyone wins. Hackers are proclaimed heros.
Google car expense is overplayed. In mass production and with competition the cost would go way down.
Also, if the government makes the 'homeless' drive to specific places out in the desert or something, that's better than the current situation where you're exposed to other homeless and dangerous people.
I actually wouldn't mind going 'homeless' for a while to save money on rent, but currently it's really dangerous to do so. Moving to low rent places is also usually more 'dangerous', especially with children. With a driverless car you can just take your family out into the desert or forest and pretend you're camping.
The current system of full-time rv-ing is quite hard because of parking restrictions and because sending kids off too school and getting groceries from out of town is hard, and because the rv's are too small. With self-driving rv's you can have a few of them to space out in.
There was something about reading books and magazines before the web came, a gamified experience, because you could more visibly see your progress. On the web you might have read the equivalent of a 1000 page book but you never get the sense of that.
InstaToiletPaper is a pretty good startup if existed. When you run out of toilet paper you really want it quick. A drone could fly through a small window and it get it to you. You'd pay $10 for a single roll.
Spoonrocket's cars have builtin heaters that keep food warm, only 2 menu items a day, and really quick delivery. If they actually expanded nationwide they'd kill burger/pizza joints, or at least force them to innovate.
As other commenters have said, psychiatry/psychology is an ineffective field and also expensive.
The self-help industry is kind of related to psychology/psyciatry, is unregulated, and a $11 billion a year field.
I gave a mention of a documentary that came out recently about people building apps in this category of self help/health/life monitoring kind of stuff. Some terms to google to find out more are what I typed in the OC.