Thanks for the article – In connection to the question, considering that this technology is very new, Emirates will be able to get a first-mover advantage even if competitors can access the research data, especially if Emirates’ concern on innovation and providing a high-quality service to their customers continues to be their priority. Eventually, most airlines will implement ML and only those that prioritize and pursue technological innovation and are able to convert this into a valuable asset, will outstand and maintain their competitive advantage.
I think that basic research should be open to everyone and I believe that creating platforms that facilitate the access to this basic research is absolutely essential to avoid situations as the ones that you mention (Ebola). However, in my view, only the “inventor” of the profitable innovation should benefit from it, even if it is based on prior basic research. Plus, I believe that this policy should incentivize researches to go a step further and find ways to apply the conclusions of their studies.
This is an interesting issue. I think that open innovation in the supply chain will only work with suppliers with whom Dell has had a long-lasting relationship, and who exclusively (or largely) serve Dell. To your question about how to incentivize suppliers to share innovation ideas with Dell ahead of its competitors, I think that the best way to do it is through generous profit sharing agreements or through some sort of vertical integration (i.e. Dell being a shareholder of the supplier).
This technology will probably revolutionize the construction industry. However, I would be very interested in analyzing and understanding better the economics of this business model, as I wonder if this technology will actually result in cheaper housing because:
(i) housing prices is often highly influenced by land prices;
(ii) I guess that companies like Counter, which offer customizable houses, will probably charge a premium to its customer; and
(iii) renting this machine in developing countries could be more expensive than using labor to build houses in areas with low labor costs.
Plus, if the implementation of this technology is generalized, I believe that governments and labor unions should start thinking how to retrain construction employees.
Melissa! It is available in France! As a user of Invisalign, and having compared the costs of different orthodontic treatments, I have to say that the technology has not reduced the prices of dental treatment. Instead, additive manufacturing has allowed the development of a product that is more convenient for patients, and hence Align (and dentists) are charging higher prices!
However, having used traditional (metallic) orthodontic treatments and Invisalign, I must admit that the accuracy of teeth movement is better achieved with the metallic treatment. Plus, the dentist sometimes has to manually adapt the aligners to react to slower than anticipated teeth movement. This suggest that the technology has room for improvement. I agree that using the data from patients (comparing predicted teeth movement to actual teeth movement) should be very useful for Align to improve the product.
I completely agree with your recommendation about learning efficacy. Analyzing student’s reactions in class can provide invaluable insight to the instructor on how well he/she is teaching, hence enabling improvement in teaching effectiveness.
To your question on the need for a human touch in education, I believe that machines can help to teach hard skills and concepts. However, I believe that teaching soft skills and developing student’s emotional intelligence will be increasingly important in the future, and in this space, human touch is fundamental. Therefore, I don’t think that machines will be able to fully replace instructors/teachers in education.