I really enjoyed reading this post. I think your first question is critical, do beauty companies risk losing their competitive edge by opening R&D, the highly guarded crown jewel of many beauty companies, to the public domain? Another question I have is, how does the cost structure of open innovation programs compare to traditional R&D? Crowd sourcing seems like a very inexpensive way to conduct research, but on the other hand, joint ventures and partnerships might actually be more costly than traditional research conducted in-house.
I really enjoyed reading this post. I’m impressed that you were able to identify such a specific application for additive manufacturing / soft robotics. I wonder if there is much demand for this sort of technology as it relates to the collection of soft-bodied sea organisms? As such, I think your question is a good one – should ABB aim to develop a solution that addresses a broader range of applications across industries, foremost focusing on scale and cost efficiency? To me, it seems that a lot of investment would be required to create such a technology, so to the extent it could be as broadly marketed as possible, I think that would better insure demand and commercial success.
I really enjoyed this post. It’s inspiring to hear about companies like Zyrobotics that are democratizing access to health and support services such as speech therapy. Your point about the lack of internet access in other parts of the world is a good one. Since Microsoft is clearly working to improve the lives of others by supporting companies like Zyrobotics, I think their efforts to get more people online would be well received. In contrast, I’ve seen other technology companies receive backlash as they connect more people to the web – for example, is was Facebook’s Internet.org initiative socially-motivated, or were they purely trying to create additional users for their product? Again, I don’t think Microsoft would face such harsh criticism, since the benefits of these disability-oriented programs are so obvious, it’s just food for thought!
I really enjoyed this post. As economically valuable as machine learning might be for a company like Chevron, I think your concerns about national security are warranted. I wonder, could Chevron use machine learning to improve safety? You mention that it has the potential to improve safety, but also acknowledge that Chevron and other companies in the industry tend to be slow adopters of new technology given safety concerns. I wonder if machine learning could help to predict hazardous situations? Would Chevron and other major oil and gas companies ever consider sharing data to avoid safety incidents in the future? Naturally these firms are concerned about their employees’ well-being, but should also be incentivized financially to minimize accidents that would result in lawsuits or fines.
I really enjoyed reading this article. I found it very encouraging that such incredible technology is being developed. The ability to fabricate whole organs reminded me of headlines that I’ve seen about the creation of autonomous vehicles and the impact it will have on organ donation. According to a recent Forbes article, least 40,000 people in the U.S. were killed in motor vehicle accidents in 2016. The one positive outcome for society is the number of organs available for donation as a result – it’s estimated that 20% of all organ transplants are the result of a car accident.
While this case seems focused on liver transplants caused by nonalcoholic fatty liver disease due to obesity and other non-accident related issues, I wonder will similar technology be created for other organs? As one form of technology minimizes the loss of human life and the number of organs available for transplant, could a different form of technology create a sustainable transplant alternative?
I really enjoyed reading your post. The comparison to Apple and the effect that the App Store had on the iPhone’s success is particularly interesting and original. You mentioned that consumers are increasingly tech-savvy, I definitely agree. Particularly as millennials are beginning to save money and learn to invest, it is important for financial firms to innovate to meet their needs. As millennials become more educated on personal finance, do you think there will be any type of course-correction or fear that technology is playing too prominent a role? For example, would consumers initially embrace an open-source platform, but then worry that their data was being distributed too freely? Privacy and safety seem paramount when it comes to personal finance so I wonder how the increasing integration of technology and finance will play out over our lifetimes.