Science - all fields.
Too numerous to list. The problem with most of my ideas is they are all large scale - they require large scale participation and lots of work to get off the ground which can make startups difficult.
This member doesn't have any favorite talks yet.
TEDCred score: +0.30 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.
A comment on Talk: Malcolm Gladwell: Choice, happiness and spaghetti sauce
A comment on Conversation: How are we going to get out of debt?
In practise, we have to ask is this possible? What level of long term growth is realistic? While in principle there is no immediate shortage of energy available, there is certainly going to be major scarcity in the resources we currently use the most, such as oil.
As a previous commenter said, a simple solution is simply to consume less - aka living below your means. (This principle can be applied on all scales, from the individual to the national government level). But this is easier said than done. It is difficult to change all our habits at once, but if we start now, making all the small changes we can and finding solutions to the larger challenges then we can certainly turn things around in our lifetimes.
A comment on Talk: Eve Ensler: Suddenly, my body
The passion in this talk is directed towards giving all those bodies a voice.
A comment on Talk: Jeremy Gilley: One day of peace
A comment on Talk: Seth Priebatsch: The game layer on top of the world
The real point should be not so much "making the world gamelike" but attempt to re-design our systems of incentives and rewards in a way that is more comprehensible, predictable and therefore psychologically rewarding. Especially in this increasingly chaotic world where bankers can make huge incomes while screwing the economy, while others die of disease due to factors beyond their control. This tends to completely scatter our conceptions of reward.
I agree with previous commenters, that simplistic progress bars and status indicators are very short term and are unlikely to produce long term benefit. I'm not sure if the young man giving the talk understands this.
A comment on Talk: Craig Venter unveils "synthetic life"
A comment on Talk: Louise Fresco on feeding the whole world
The problem is that a one-size fits all approach to food production - bread production with various additives is far from the ideal. Food intolerances/sensitivities/allergies are surprisingly common, especially for major staples such as wheat and milk.
Instead of relying on flawed 20th century one-size-fits-all agricultural systems, we should instead be taking advantage of our technology, not just to move towards both more sustainable agricultural methods. But also diets that more actively consider both physiological needs in general, but also physiological differences and taste preferences between individuals. This is the next step we need to take to further reduce the incidence of many diseases. Considering scale is important, but not the necessarily the most important thing we need to consider.
A comment on Talk: Michael Specter: The danger of science denial
Secondly, given the small risk of getting measles in the USA for example and the risk of complications vs the risk of complications of the vaccine, the results are actually in favour of not getting certain vaccines, at least for the individual.
Another example is the reported rate of serious reactions to the HPV vaccine (an example of a new high quality vaccine), vs the annual rate of cervical cancer diagnoses attributed to the virus. Both are in the same ballpark! But the benefit (currently) is still to have the vaccine, since the rate of cancer diagnosis compounds.
A comment on Talk: Michael Specter: The danger of science denial