$50 Android smartphones are enhancing the lives of millions, maybe? Titling it this way sounds like they are some sort of addictive drug or natural disaster.
You should not underestimate the life changing effects (aka disruptive) the availability of cheap smartphones had for large groups of the population in Africa (where many still live on less than $2 a day).
Many for the first time could pay / receive money directly e.g. without a middleman who collects percentages - most people still don't have bank accounts and can now do their payments / get paid via smartphones.
They can now communicate (long distance - private, business, emergency, political), some started new businesses around these smartphones, some became rich (some even billionaires without the sleaze) and can now provide their families with a much more solid basis to survive. There are now more people with access to mobile phones than to electricity in many parts of Africa.
These smartphones are also having an impact on the daily lives of many in developed countries. Many of the smartphone payment systems that are available since recently / will become available soon have been field-tested in Africa.
"A disruptive innovation is an innovation that helps create a new market and value network, and eventually goes on to disrupt an existing market and value network (over a few years or decades), displacing an earlier technology. The term is used in business and technology literature to describe innovations that improve a product or service in ways that the market does not expect, typically first by designing for a different set of consumers in the new market and later by lowering prices in the existing market."
So the thing being 'disrupted' is the old way of doing things, the old telcos, the old money markets etc.
It sure seems like the first comment in every story is some simple criticism or nitpick. It is starting to make this community look petty.
This is really great news, these are devices that we can develop for, and provide some incredibly useful utilities. Look for some interesting startups to come out of Africa taking advantage of this, and producing utilities for people in that part of the world.
I've noticed the same trend, and have similar concerns. It's not that a clarification or correction isn't necessarily a high-content comment, but it's far from guaranteed to be the highest.
I think the "minor gripe" is actually HN's version of the meme reply: easily digestible, doesn't take much effort, and easy to agree with. Just as reddit's frontpage is dominated by imgur links, so too are the comments on HN dominated by easy criticisms.
I've said this before: for any given story there will be people who disagree with it, and the way HN is currently designed, upvoting a critical post is their only way to express that disagreement.
I completely agree with your dislike of the word being used that way. Having said that, you may not be far off with the "addictive drug" comment; anecdotally, I can tell you that I know people living below the poverty line who spend on the order of 30% of their gross salary to have a mobile phone (Southern Africa).
The circumstances which lead to that are probably pretty complex, but I'd say they include: a not very competitive market, geographical and other factors making mobiles the only effective technology for communications, marketing and social norms making mobile phones almost a necessity, a lack of basic financial education for many, etc. While I'm sure that people's lives are enhanced in many ways, I'm also sure that there are more responsible ways of spending the little money they do have.
The circumstances which lead to that are probably pretty complex
The main one being the massive desire and need of human beings to communicate with each other, and to feel empowered about their lives. Don't downplay that, there is nothing irresponsible about that.
I didn't mean to downplay that, and I do agree to some degree. But when you're having trouble providing basics for your family (as many people around these parts do), spending on flashy electronics is irresponsible.
I heard stories about hospitals locking cables into wall sockets because else people will use the power to charge there phones. So I think it can be disruptive. But I agree its a bit over the top to use the word disrupt in the context of the article.
$50 Android smartphones are enhancing the lives of millions, maybe?
Why don't you give up all internet/communication access and tell us how much of an impact it has on your life (yes that includes any laptop/pc at home).
Or do you think African people are special & different from us Western people and don't have the same desires?
True, IMO. They didn't disrupt anything because there was nothing to be disrupted. It's not like they had our version of Verizon, Comcast and DirectTV offering services in their village.
Smart/cellphones made it possible for them to get connected, if it was for wires, good luck waiting.
Your point is different than his, in that it's not actually a "disruptive technology", as there was no incumbent technology to disrupt. To your point - maybe it's disrupting the old dumbphones in the same way the iPhone did in the western world? Or simply disrupting the old ways of communicating (by mail, etc)?
Also, his point was that the "disruptive" word is what doesn't sound right here, as it sounds like "phones are disrupting the lives of Africans", which has a completely different meaning. I also kind of disagree with him here, because it's pretty obvious that Jimmy Wales was talking about technological disruption, and how it's a good thing, and not about "ruining people's lives", which I guess it's what someone else could understand from this title, but doesn't sound very likely.
$50 Android smartphones are enhancing the lives of millions, maybe? Titling it this way sounds like they are some sort of addictive drug or natural disaster.