In order to assess what are the main elements that need to be changed for the game to remain relevant for years and years, I would look further in traditional sports and see what are the main elements that constantly change and what are the ones that don’t. From my perception, I would argue that the rules of the game hardly change. I believe the key to League of Legends to become a traditional game is less on design, rules, innovation but more on the ecosystem itself: Promoting iconic players, creating habit of watching the sports between kids that could be passed on to other generations, etc. As mentioned by the author, when it comes about creating new products and new experiences, there are firms like Valve that can better manage this process than Riot Games.
Responding to the question, investments in this type of technology could only be made by firms as big as THC. However, at the same time, while the investments needed to apply this type of technology are still considerably high, I find it hard to get a clear benefit from this technology besides as a marketing tool. My impression is that the price you would have to charge for these chocolates would be similar or higher than premium chocolate brands. Besides, I believe that consumers of premium food products are more interested in taste than in shape. Therefore, I wouldn’t further explore the use of this technology at THM unless the prices for implementation went drastically down in the future.
Using the concept of open innovation, I would include not only the user of the app to further understand pain-points and explore other possibilities of consumption, but I would also try to involve people in finding a solution to control the use between teenagers. I imagine not only customers interested in the product, but also retailers, parents, and other people that are not the direct Jull’s consumer have a lot to contribute to the idea. Creating better methods to control product access between teenagers should be more effective than the idea of promoting different uses for Juul. Before doing this, I would conduct a more careful assessment if the concept of open innovation in e-cigarette could create a bad reputation for the firm since it’s such a controversial topic.
Great article. Incredible how 3D printing is a perfect fit for Nike product development process, increasing speed of iterations between Nike Lab and Athletes. To the question asked, Nike can certainly leverage its developing 3D technology in order to perform better on the 2X Direct pillar. In my perception one of the sub-components of reaching an effective direct-to-customer channel is also by offering customization and that’s how 3D technology can be certainly helpful in the future. Since this technology might still face some problems with scaling at first, delivering highly customized products for clients willing to pay a premium for it might be a great strategy to be recognized as the 3D technology Sports brand and Start experimenting new approaches for commercialization of this new technology.
I believe machine learning will certainly change how VCs currently do sourcing. In my perspective,the importance of big networks will be less relevant, and the information and capabilities to assess good deals will become more accessible. Fewer funds will have an edge to source better deals, there will be more competition for deals and therefore the value created for investor in this funds tend to become lower. However, funds not only invest in ideas but also in people. For the later, machine-learning might be helpful to eliminate biases, as mentioned in the article, but I believe funds will still have to use perception/gut as an factor to have an edge in this business and remain competitive.
The key point to answer the question if AI can actually replace an Artist is how disruptive new musics have to be in order to be successful.
Since AI will work only on past data to create new content, one could argue that AI will hardly create something disruptive in the music industry. On the other hand, as the article mentioned, since there are several different controllable variables when creating music content (rhythm syncopation, beats per minute, etc), different combination of this attributes might create something that could be seen as disruptive content in the Industry. However, in this case, there won’t be any historical data that will prove the success of this new combination, making AI less useful. Moreover, there are several other factors besides music attributes in an Artist that are probably powerful indicators
of an artist’s success likelihood (lyrics, looks, etc). These can also be hard to create using exclusively AI. Thus, I see AI more as an ally of music creation process than as a substitute.