This was a design-by-committee project that didn't have a clear singular problem it was trying to solve. Reading their goals they intentionally mixed the simple aspect of a "911" for human rights workers with a mishmash engagement-type soft goals.
Just looks like a recipe for failure regardless of funding.
Another way to look at it, it was a success if measured in terms of raising awareness of the problem.
It also seems like they were trying to abuse/repurpose OS level functionality (the power button). I imagine that was difficult on Android, and the article completely fails to acknowledge that this is actually impossible on iOS.
"Despite our best efforts, we have not been able to secure any substantial external funding for the project since being awarded £100,000 as runners-up in the Google Global Impact Award in June 2013. In part, this is due to what in hindsight was a short-lived boom in funding and excitement around “tech 4 good.”"
There's a lesson here somewhere for those who are optimistic about changing the world.
Right, just like get power first, and once you've consolidated it then you can do all the good you promised. The amount of charitable people in the world clearly doesn't cover everyone's needs or else there would be no point in further charity.
You also lose perspective, because all the skills you've gained to make money are really only applicable to making money, and by that point your social community will only be people making lots of money and then the only problems you'll be solving are the ones for people with resources. The best minds in the world are focused on figuring out how to make people click ads and make money in the stock market.
Sure there's outliers, and the most famous are the ones of people who have "won".
Not just Gates, but on the off chance Musk actually makes it to a permanent Mars settlement, it will be the best thing that's happened to humans since the printing press, if not fire.
...and kept thousands of workers in poverty despite the massive success of his company through monopolistic business practices, killed a few workers putting down a strike, and built a country club that damaged a dam, causing a flood that killed upward of 2000 people.
Donations are nice, but it's not obvious to me that Carnegie was a net positive (or Gates or Musk, for that matter).
I really appreciate it when people produce thoughtful looks at project failure like this. If I had Too Much Money, I'd definitely fund an annual prize for the best startup-ish project failure reports. There's no better source for information on advancing the state of the field, but so much is lost when companies just quietly shut down.
Also to note is that organisations like Amnesty are incredibly inefficient and big money wasters. Paying mid level employees 5000k net + 2000 for rent is not exceptional. So I'm skeptic when they need "more money".
> help us use technology to prevent unlawful detentions
I thought they were talking about the Firefox Extension called Panic Button from ~10 years ago that we used in school to hide games and show an education site 'Preventing detentions'!
Just looks like a recipe for failure regardless of funding.
Another way to look at it, it was a success if measured in terms of raising awareness of the problem.