>we should focus on problems where our resources can go further - e.g. in helping the global poor.
I'm not convinced that the right people to help the "global poor" are Silicon Valley technologists. Scientifically-minded entrepreneurs focused on profit but with idealistic rhetoric attempting to "help" cultures they know nothing about has, historically, not worked out great.
In spite of the radically different culture, Uber has improved transportation. It turns out putting Indians into a car and charging them money works a lot like doing the same for Americans.
Facebook and Whatsapp have improved communication.
At work, Slack, Salesforce and Jira work the same as any western office.
Why, exactly, do you think other cultures and the global poor can't use SV technologies?
All those technologies were first developed in the US, for an American target audience, then exported to other countries. Other things also developed in the West and then exported: electricity, vaccines, et cetera. I agree that that's generally been a good thing.
The parent comment, however, seemed to imply that technologists should focus on "solving global poverty" instead of solving local problems. This represents a fundamental shift, because at that point SV technologists are attempting to solve problems they personally do not have experience with.
All the examples you provide solved problems that SV itself had- transportation, communication, etc.
I didn't interpret the article as defining things like Uber as solving "local" problems. But if you do, then the article is simply wrong because SV is manifestly solving local problems.
I agree that silicon valley technologists are not well informed about the problems of the poor (or other important problems) and too often use the rhetoric of doing good whilst not thinking carefully enough about how to actually do that.
But I don't think concentrating on local problems is the right solution given that there are much more important non-local problems to solve. Perhaps entrepreneurs should concentrate on profit and then donate what they earn. Alternatively, they could learn about important problems and partner with experts in those problems to avoid naively doing more harm than good.
Colin Woodward wrote "American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North America (ISBN-13: 978-0143122029)" and basically, the people who settled the center of the tech industry were Yankee Progressives, the sort who send third sons to be missionaries around the world. You have to accept the premise that somehow, the past stains present-day thinking more than is easily explainable, but this does not stop people who have demographically interesting professions from using this sort of thing.
I'm not convinced that the right people to help the "global poor" are Silicon Valley technologists. Scientifically-minded entrepreneurs focused on profit but with idealistic rhetoric attempting to "help" cultures they know nothing about has, historically, not worked out great.