Interesting topic! I hadn’t thought about 23andMe being a use of crowd sourcing before. I was particularly interested in the correlations being run between certain genomes and self-declared illnesses. Do you worry about the biases associated with self-reporting medical conidiations and how that may skew the data being examined? Depression in particular is an illness that I imagine goes frequently undiagnosed or people chose to report incorrectly.
Similarly surprised by BOC’s use of open innovation, but think some of the risks may be mitigated since this is a one-way flow of information. As you pointed out, BOC clearly needs to be cautious of “Malicious global organizations and individuals using information to pose a threat to Canada’s financial system.” I feel like they have mitigated most of their risk by only receiving information rather than contributing to the open source as well. Potentially they can vet and hire those who’s contribute meaningfully to PIVOT.
I thought your question of what is the most effective way to transition the traditional footwear model towards a stockless, made-to-order model is the crux of the problem.. a bit of chicken or the egg. I was curious where the best place to begin selling might be and thought of running stores that already offer services to chose the best shoe given your running style, foot build, etc.
I believe Brooks running shoes is entering the same market and “is aiming to offer this service for the price of a Brooks Levitate, which is $150.” What do you think is driving the large price differential between their 3D shoe and Adidas?
I was surprised that clear aligners only represent 15% of the existing orthodontics market. What do you think it is keeping clear aligners from competing more directly with traditional braces? How do you think 3d printing will have to adapt to handle the more extreme cases of crooked teeth or do you think it has come as far as it will?
It seems that many consumers, and women in particular seem to prefer a hybrid solution (financial advisors available via phone and email). Do you think that the same technology used in the digital-only option should be the same technology used in the premium option? Since the premium option is combined with a team of live advisors should it allow for greater customization?
Very interesting that the “Most Compatible feature” makes it 8 times more likely for users to exchange phone numbers. 8 times more likely than 1/500? That’s not encouraging odds.
I am interested in how these statistic compares to other online dating apps. While dating apps are relatively new, sights like match.com have been around longer. How do you think their machine learning compares to that of the apps? They are harnessing even more data from users so I would be interested if that is helpful in creating successful matches or if the self-reported data given to those websites is biased in the same way you discuss above.