Definitely not Fedor
That’s a great article on one of the paths a future of food industry can take. While sharing author’s optimism about the possibilities of 3D printing in food production I’d like to argue that 3D printed food is not likely to become an overall trend in nearest future. The technology itself is clearly exciting, however in order to use this efficiently the company has to use it in production of complex forms (as all the easy ones are cheaper to just mold) which will in turn put additional costs on the transportation and packaging aimed at preventing beautiful chocolate (or any other food) models from collapsing.
Great article on the future of the overall national defense industry. Thinking of the author’s recommendations and raised questions I would not be concerned about data transfers as current technologies of end-to-end encryption are really secure. The question that I would raise is how far should we go in replacing spare parts with a 3D printer and a stock-up of “raw material”. Wouldn’t it be safer and more reliable to just carry some amount of drone details that are often replaced than only having a #D printer?
Thank you for raising and exciting topic that is both on the tip of the tongue and in some part continues the class discussion in our section. I really like the solutions proposed for solving the potential CPG flee issue, both of them are realistic and easily executed. Thinking further on this problem I’d argue that even “let them go” scenario actually won’t hurt Amazon. Right now they are exposed to a huge amount of data which is generated internally, but it’s not the only data they are using – the huge data-gathering companies are still on the market (Nielsen, for instance) and data from them can still be used in case CPG companies quit on Amazon. This will definitely drive the costs up, but the process of creating private label substitutes for top brands is already unstoppable.
This is an amazing idea that will probably turn around the entire healthcare industry. Thinking of the way it is implemented I see a possibility the people may be changing their behavior knowing what data is used for making predictions on their health conditions which in turn may influence their insurance costs. Such behavior changes may be both positive (like running more to have better data on one’s fitness tracker) and negative (like actually refusing to use fitness tracker at all so that the system has less information on a person).
Thank you, that is a great article and it raises a whole set of right and exciting questions. Besides the obstacles and concerns described in the text I was left wondering whether reinventing a toilet was a right aim for open innovation challenge. Gathering a variety of cutting-edge ideas that will bring future of toilets to the country that currently lacks basic ones seems like an inefficient investment. There definitely is a problem the has to be solved, but maybe the solution lies not in the high technology, but rather is distribution and taking a fully non-for-profit approach/
Thank you for a great deep dive into flavor crowd sourcing activities in PepsiCo. I enjoyed reading this piece and like your thought on the next steps of this process. The one thing which appears questionable to me is the idea of crowd sourcing the prototypes. Specifically for Lays PepsiCo currently uses the only one type of potatoes which is patent protected and it is illegal for other companies and individuals to use. Therefore if we crowd source the sampling it won’t be Lays due to different potatoes.In case other companies and individuals will be allowed to use the very same potato type Lays may lose its key competitive advantage.