Having taken a few (graduate) courses in development economics, I&#x27;ve decided that development is not for me, and my skills simply don&#x27;t apply.  I think the same applies to most people in tech.  As the article points out, there are simple low tech things that would make a big difference, and while actually scaling these is hard, it&#x27;s probably the best value for money way to get improvements.  There may be some technology involved (e.g. mosquito nets, or the Green revolution) but it won&#x27;t be something that a software engineer would be good at building.<p>I think that to maximize the benefit one has on the world, it&#x27;s necessary to step back from frantic guilt, and consider the underlying economics.  Development takes expertise and money.  People in tech can help indirectly by growing the economy, thus providing more money to do these things (and also donate money they earn directly).  In my rough estimation, anything in tech has large positive externalities, while finance is slight negative (mostly because a lot of profits in finance are syphoned of people who are irrationally willing to pay for active management of their investment).