[1123581321]

I down voted this comment because it is based on counterfactual anecdotes (those companies do have popular and well-liked products), and builds on those anecdotes to insult people who believe those statistics, and then tries to inoculate itself against criticism by accusing downvoters and flaggers of responding irrationally. The attempt to frame a predictable response as an unreasonable one hurts the discussion without offering anything in return.

I do agree that world-changing is a term used in contexts such as disease eradication. Certainly disease eradication changes the world more than avoiding a stay in a hotel. However, world-changing as a term is not restricted to the most impactful change to which it has been previously attached. For a typical programmer, making something that lets millions of people have an easier workday, vacation or home life should count as changing the world, even if it is a bit mundane.

[mgkimsal]

What's interesting is how we now view what is 'mundane'. Pretty much my entire 'normal' life in 2016 - in which pretty much everything is mundane - is beyond what many fiction writers were capable of thinking of just 30 years ago. Instant/live audio/video communication with people around the planet - for essentially free (24/7!) - is now taken as 'mundane'.

I know most of us 'know' this at one level - well, many do, anyway - but given the infrastructure we build on, most of what we end up building is somewhat 'mundane' by comparison.

Lastly, I'm of an 'older' generation. Those younger than me do not remember a time when what's 'mundane' now was ever exciting/new/revolutionary. Much like having grown up with color TV, telephones and refrigeration and not being able to imagine a world without those, my younger family really can not imagine a world without near-free 24/7 access to info/communication.