[joelrunyon]

I think a lot of startups are solving important problems that might not be obvious.

Any Musk startup - Tesla (electric vs. oil consumption), SpaceX (building space "colonies"), SolarCity (alternate energy), Paypal (payments).

You also have Uber (limiting cars on the street & oil consumption), AirBnb (better utilization of current buildings rather than building additional hotels). Even stuff like meerkat, etc could potentially be used in lieu of expensive meetings across country (further travel & ancillary costs).

I do agree that "change the world" is an overprevalent mission statement & too broad to be useful, but many are solving problems in a way that might not be obvious at first.

[MichaelGG]

AirBnB is more about exploiting cost differentials by avoiding regulation, isn't it? When i use it, and the people I know making money on it, are exactly taking advantage of this versus "better utilization". In fact, it's actually the opposite, at least in places like SF, because units that would otherwise house residents are now being used to house hotel guests.

[joelrunyon]

> AirBnB is more about exploiting cost differentials by avoiding regulation, isn't it?

That's a story one-side uses and in SF that can certainly be the case.

But, in some cases, I think people would rather stay in places that are less "developed" or taken over by hotels and stay at local BnBs.

[monort]

For the purpose of "better utilization" there is no difference between residents and tourists. Airbnb puts more people into the same space.

[pavlov]

If Meerkat is a productivity enhancer, then surely Yo is one as well - when people don't have to write text messages, it saves time for something else.

[joelrunyon]

Live streaming tech can certainly use push forwards.

Communication methods that people laugh at (AIM instant messaging) can be reappropriated into something useful (hipchat, slack) years later.

[semi-extrinsic]

Oh, FFS. Tesla has done a fine job at showing electric cars are feasible, for sure. But without real innovation and progress in emission-free baseload electricity generation (i.e. fission or fusion) it has negligible effect on reducing GHG emissions.

[semi-extrinsic]

Anyone care to explain why I get downvoted for stating an accepted fact? Take e.g. the IEA Blue Map scenario (50% reduction in GHG emissions by 2050), which depends heavily on electric vehicles. It also requires a 320% increase in nuclear power generation.