there was not description of how test was conducted but sample of 17 for 2 nights does not make the results very confident to me. the half that took the spray might have randomly having better memory unless they switched them next night.
This is a great initiatives and I am supporter of any kind of philanthropy but saving accounts is not the best way you can help those people. I have been to these places, not to say people do not have any money , they have nothing to eat. Saving account will not provide them with food unless you deposit the money and educate them on how to use it wisely. They have to be fed first and educated, then come saving.
Having actually worked in one of "these places" (in microcredit in Uganda and evaluated programs in Kenya) I can tell you that providing a safe place to bank is one of the best ways to help people. I suppose the first step is to define what you mean by "these places".
If you're talking about a war torn country or a country that is ruled under a radical ideological agenda (e.g. Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Iran or North Korea) and/or with high inflation, yes, I'd agree that savings probably aren't really going to be important to them.
For the vast majority of developing countries however, most are not starving on a day to day. However, they may make a lot more money one day but none the next - so it's this variance that creates risk and why financial services of all types (credit and savings) help to smooth out the risk. To get a sense of the risk, try imagining yourself living in a room without locks in a neighbourhood with a high level of crime - what would you do with any extra cash you had? Contrary to popular belief, the poor often have an immense capacity to save - in the microcredit I worked at, there were those who joined to borrow small amounts of just so that they could access the network and save.
You got a good point there, but education is integral part of the process as well. Some people do not know how to save and have no trust to any institutions. They need to get help to overcome that barrier
People respond to incentives - that is the the fundamental idea on which economics is based. The poor aren't as helpless/stupid as much of the developed world makes them out to be. This was one of my frustrations while working in the developing world. While I now work largely in China at least in China they don't assume that in order to help the poor that education comes first - they have first provided the conditions that businesses can meet the needs and employ the poor (one of the reasons China's growth exceeds much of the developing world and especially those who rely on "aid").
We claim that providing financial services will provide empowerment (which it does), and then we try to force them to conform with our view half a world away with how they should spend and save their money by structuring financial products according to our needs as opposed to theirs. They don't need an education to save - that the service exists and incentives to save exist are enough as they will quite quickly educate themselves in that regard. No level of "education" will disabuse someone (anyone let alone a poor person in the developing world) of the notion that their government isn't corrupt or that they can "trust" an institution. Trust is earned. What you will have, like in any society, is first the incentive/need, then the early adopters and then word of mouth and that's how institutions earn trust.
It is irrational but it shows how our mind work(what is sometime is irrational and does not always work according to statistics). On the bike you feel like you have more control because you can control one factor is yourself directing the bike and possibility avoid the accident(in your mind). On the plane you have no control in any directions. No matter what happens you are helpless and bets you can do is pray
what else do they expect? they got what VCs wanted in down economy, safe bets that will likely to bring some steady(not crazy) returns. How many start ups do you know that pitched to make greater improvement and change the world right at their first launch day? how many of them have changed the world? how many of them were looked at as serious candidates to do that? you see where I am getting. It is a nature of the beast, you do not know something is going to change the world until it did because the world evolved along with the idea.
Those that are so certain of themselves often don't allow the more creative thinkers the luxury of being uncertain. They demand action, right now, and typically their foolish brand of action.
Familiar feelings, ha ha. I believe it is human nature to occasionally doubt what you and whether directions you are heading is a right path. I have heard it countless number of times. Though at any given period of time you have to have predominant focus otherwise you will get lost in your choice and will never try either path. The way I solve it, I just act upon the situation, circumstances and intuition coupled with my desires at particular moment of making a decision. I wanted to get PHD in CS but ended up getting master because I was not sure what to concentrate in. Well, now I am in the business world wondering what is next(I might still go for PHD but likely in different field than I though or have successful start up if not both) . I have changed my directions several times but unless you try one you will never know if it is something for you or not.(and there is no negative outcome, you learn on the way plus get understanding if these is something you want or do not). Just try what you believe is desirable and most optimal at this point, listen to your intuition and keep your eyes and mind open to opportunities when they are to come(you will know it).
Other thing I noticed, is depending what direction you chose your priorities change so your choose are likely to change along the line. The only thing that works against you is time but that what our life is about.
Interesting that you mentioned philosophy, being technical with analytical mind, lately I started to get in more and more into philosophy; wonder if is a normal evolutionary trend for hackers or it is just me…
So far I have been quite fortunate to try many technical things, due to a variety of internships (6!) at a seriously varied set of companies. I have tried to pursue what you mentioned, being open to new and interesting paths that present themselves.
I'm glad that there are other people out there like me, and that compulsively trying new things is not necessarily a hindrance.
Also, on your comment about philosophy: I think that on some level, all hackers are philosophers. The field of philosophy itself is often marginalised by technical people (and perhaps rightly so), but the application of logic and analysis is universal in the hacker world view.
One important thing is we are all so different even though we share same commonalities. So you have to make that chose and the best advice in the world might not suit to you.
I agree that thoughts cannot control the world with our thoughts, however keep in mind that Since the early 1930's, psychologists have known that the brain emits electromagnetic waves . There is no scientific evidence that it has any impact on materialistic outcome but there is no evidence that it does not either. I know it is totally unscientific and I would say more philosophical thinking but there is a possibility that someday we will discover that our thought might have some impact on the outer world. This is one of the main concept that new age philosophy manipulates. Also our thoughts not only control our action as far as our body goes but also effect biochemistry of our brain that might affect how our body reacts to it. For example depressing thought might lead to certain physiological disorders.
Many discovered facts that are known today did not have any evidence years ago what does not indicate its absence today. Absence of results of searching industries is not an indicator thus it takes many years and many intermediate discoveries before some hypothesize are proven. Keeping mind open to possibilities is the engine of progress and discovery.
Most of the points are valid and it is always very important to get quality people for a seed start up more then any other stage because people is the most important part of the business where none can be wasted vs. corporate world. However getting T-shaped people who can carry many hats might not solve the problems. Most of the time is is hard to find specialist who can do something else without compromising on what they are expert in(if you do find one - they tend to be expensive) so I would rather go for specialist especially if it is tech star up and hire another general; person who can ware many hats.
Interesting pictures of the environment. I truly like the new way of business and work environment created by new start ups as well by old and very successful like Google. BY no means it is much more pleasant and productive than corporate environment. But to answer the question: I would rather work for myself and create my own environment the way I want it.
I second that notion. There's nothing like working for yourself, and being able to create something special to present to the world in your own way. And watch is grow and succeed. I love startup business and enjoy being a founder. Its my passion. I'm the type of person that would much rather create my own company to compete with Facebook and Twitter, and capitalize on their opportunities than be employed by them.
