Comments on: Giving to charity (part 2) http://thesisprocrastination.com/2009/05/23/giving-to-charity-part-2/ Sharing my opinons on life, the universe and everything while putting off more worthwhile endeavours. Wed, 02 Jun 2010 19:27:05 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Sally http://thesisprocrastination.com/2009/05/23/giving-to-charity-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-1193 Sally Sat, 23 May 2009 19:30:05 +0000 http://thesisprocrastination.com/2009/05/23/giving-to-charity-part-2/#comment-1193 I think giving to charity is a good idea in principle. Who you give your money or time to, is your prefence. For me, the fundamental part of giving is to give; to recognise that there are others in need and we have the ability to help and we are willing to help. The root of it comes from the compassion within each one of us. Then the practical part comes in, as how we've been brought up, which is the more efficient way of helping; what would help most; who should get more help than others, not that life has different worthiness but it's just that we've been trained to make the same resource last more; to do less but get more. Efficiency matters. So for some, for a small amount of money, we could feed a village of people but it's not even enough to send a dying child to Disneyland. When others don't even have the choice to think about "quality" of life but simply to keep alive, they seem more important. For others, letting people filfull their dreams before they die is more important. It's all preferences and what we believe are the ones need more help. It doesn't mean you won't give a few dollars here and there for various different charities when you see them collecting money in the mall or on the street. For me, I think ultimately, it comes down to education, after you've taken care of some basic needs. But that's just me. I think giving to charity is a good idea in principle. Who you give your money or time to, is your prefence.
For me, the fundamental part of giving is to give; to recognise that there are others in need and we have the ability to help and we are willing to help. The root of it comes from the compassion within each one of us.

Then the practical part comes in, as how we’ve been brought up, which is the more efficient way of helping; what would help most; who should get more help than others, not that life has different worthiness but it’s just that we’ve been trained to make the same resource last more; to do less but get more. Efficiency matters.

So for some, for a small amount of money, we could feed a village of people but it’s not even enough to send a dying child to Disneyland. When others don’t even have the choice to think about “quality” of life but simply to keep alive, they seem more important. For others, letting people filfull their dreams before they die is more important.

It’s all preferences and what we believe are the ones need more help. It doesn’t mean you won’t give a few dollars here and there for various different charities when you see them collecting money in the mall or on the street.

For me, I think ultimately, it comes down to education, after you’ve taken care of some basic needs. But that’s just me.

]]> By: DougTan http://thesisprocrastination.com/2009/05/23/giving-to-charity-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-1191 DougTan Sat, 23 May 2009 17:41:15 +0000 http://thesisprocrastination.com/2009/05/23/giving-to-charity-part-2/#comment-1191 As I was reading I begin to think, is Sarah going to say the way to solve the world's problem is condom? And looks like I was partly right :) As a developer, there is a set of logics that govern my thinking. One which is get to the root of the problem and resolve it there. Sending a dying kid to Disneyland is great, but perhaps even better is to find the cure of what is killing the kid at the first place. Looking deeper takes more time and money, and the result are not always visible. Some works will benefit mankind, but they are not label as charity. Another train of thought that comes with developer is the notion of upgrade. You can keep fixing that damn COM code, but sooner or later you realise it's better to rewrite it in .Net. How is this apply to charity? Well if we keep all our focus on developing countries, then we are forever living in the delphi land. Someone out there is working on ground breaking software developing technic that will change the way we write code. Support the effect of this one person may not solve the problem we are facing in our current system, but it will benefit the next generation of systems. Helping this one man may in term saved million (lines of code). As I was reading I begin to think, is Sarah going to say the way to solve the world’s problem is condom? And looks like I was partly right :)

As a developer, there is a set of logics that govern my thinking. One which is get to the root of the problem and resolve it there. Sending a dying kid to Disneyland is great, but perhaps even better is to find the cure of what is killing the kid at the first place.

Looking deeper takes more time and money, and the result are not always visible. Some works will benefit mankind, but they are not label as charity.

Another train of thought that comes with developer is the notion of upgrade. You can keep fixing that damn COM code, but sooner or later you realise it’s better to rewrite it in .Net. How is this apply to charity? Well if we keep all our focus on developing countries, then we are forever living in the delphi land. Someone out there is working on ground breaking software developing technic that will change the way we write code. Support the effect of this one person may not solve the problem we are facing in our current system, but it will benefit the next generation of systems. Helping this one man may in term saved million (lines of code).

]]>