I do automation projects for friends on the side and every project starts with what is essentially flipping a bit or driving an output and grows from that. Home automation really is a matter of solving a dozen small problems to resolve the bigger one. To say automating a candle has no tangible benefits is looking at the small problem and failing to see how the larger problem exists outside it.
What does it take to light a pilot light on a burner, heater, dryer, etc? I'm going to guess that the smaller problem involved in the bigger picture here is much the same. I definitely could sell a cellphone controlled burner in my job (though the regulations that sit in place are probably another hurdle.... outside the scope of this discussion though).
And here's the other stupid thing. If people are willing to pay for it then it's not a bad idea. Someone was just clever enough to see if there was a market of people willing to buy the "smaller problem" without thinking of complicated ways to apply it. At a simple level, if its profitable, its useful.
That profit likely drives this business to solve bigger problems. Think of it as a seed funding by creating stupid candles to apply technology to the larger problem. They don't necessarily have 6 or 7 figures of cash sitting out there to solve the big problem but to rope a bunch of people into the candle is enough to get them off the ground running.
On another side of it ask what the person would be doing if they couldn't do that. There's no guarantee they'd gravitate towards something deemed "Beneficial" to humanity.
But I do not think the experienced developers or the inexperienced students are to blame here. To be honest, I do not know who would be.
Here's a company that makes money off this community, which is probably made up of people who think making random crap you can control with your smartphone is fun: https://www.adafruit.com/
Things you don't understand can be fun, including make interesting gadgets that you don't find useful.
My wife purchased about a dozen LED candles. I like them because they're atmospheric and simulate a real candle without me having anxiety about burning my house down. They're fairly annoying to turn off and on though - I've often wondered if there were a slightly more expensive LED candle with remote control.
They cost $13.78 on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/Flameless-Candles-Remote-Control-Pill...
Another point of view would be that people who create frivolous things are, by definition, not particularly creative.
Or maybe I should lighten up.
The GP even says "How much positive impact could those people be having if they were just pointed in another direction?" This isn't being critical of their interests, this is saying they shouldn't be able to choose what they work on.
Nowhere does the article say or imply this.
Yes, the author thinks these are not useful generally and that it's a waste to create them. No, that still doesn't mean or imply they want to ban their creation.
The GP even says "How much positive impact could those people be having if they were just pointed in another direction?" This isn't being critical of their interests, this is saying they shouldn't be able to choose what they work on.
No, it isn't. In no way, shape or form does the verb "point" imply coercion. "Point" means "direct someone's attention".