Great comment. There are probably many, great, socially beneficial things for technical-entrepreneurial people to do in healthcare (a field I worked in for a long time), education, and poverty. But "industry" is the wrong level of analysis for social benefit -- the analysis has to go to specific problems and impact.
Ten years ago, one would very frequently come across essays decrying the alienating nature of the internet, how it dehumanized us and isolated us. They would argue that online relationships are inveterately shallow but displace our fraying real-word relationships with friends and family. But: Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, etc. alongside broadband, wireless, cell-phone cameras, etc. seem to be doing something very meaningful to reverse the (real, though possibly exaggerated) problems those essays described. And by correcting these problems and strengthening the social fabric, we may be indirectly reducing problems in healthcare, education, and poverty.
Again, the problem with the article is not really misprision of social networks, the problem is analyzing social impact at a level where Twitter = Zynga = LinkedIn.
Ten years ago, one would very frequently come across essays decrying the alienating nature of the internet, how it dehumanized us and isolated us. They would argue that online relationships are inveterately shallow but displace our fraying real-word relationships with friends and family. But: Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, etc. alongside broadband, wireless, cell-phone cameras, etc. seem to be doing something very meaningful to reverse the (real, though possibly exaggerated) problems those essays described. And by correcting these problems and strengthening the social fabric, we may be indirectly reducing problems in healthcare, education, and poverty.
Again, the problem with the article is not really misprision of social networks, the problem is analyzing social impact at a level where Twitter = Zynga = LinkedIn.