This is a really great article. I think the concept of open innovation in urban planning makes a lot of sense in terms of identifying problems. It seems as though it may be a tricky tool for decision-making. As you identified it doesn’t seem as though a simple majority is the best mechanism for making calls with respect to very complex, interlinked systems. As I read this, I wondered also whether the system might be used to identify extant problems in urban design. It may be that there are small issues that planners are unaware of.
This is a really interesting article. I’m not completely sure I understand what incentivizes people to participate in a product development exercise on behalf of a ‘for-profit’ company (unless I have misinterpreted what Natura does). I think the gamification element of their Cocrianda Naturo programme is really interesting but over the long term it seems to me that participants may wish to be compensated.
Really enjoyed this article! One of the interesting questions that I think you raise is in relation to what value-add additive manufacturing brings to the construction industry. When you deal with heavy, low value items like construction materials it certainly seems that it would make sense to do as much ‘manufacturing’ as possible on site. Another question may be to what extent it makes sense to actually ‘own’ rather than ‘lease’ the intellectual property required to carry this forward. I’m not quite sure how you’d cost it but it may be interesting to consider.
Really interesting article. I would look at this from the perspective of the DoD underwriting the advances in technology on behalf of society. This is, I think, a fairly well established path towards innovation. From rocketry, to processed foods to the internet the broader economy has benefited from substantial defense spending. It seems to me that the taxpayer should be happy to underwrite the technologies discussed here for both the ethical reasons you discussed and the attendant economic benefits.
Really interesting article. I think one interesting dimension of Ant Financial’s application of machine learning to credit scoring is the political dynamic inherent in China. Beyond socio-economic stratification there is always the concern that an element of political control will be injected to machine learning algorithms to reward those who behave in a desirable way (vis a vis the government).
Really interesting article. It seems to me though that competitors will struggle to get their hands on a comparable data-set. I appreciate that this advantage is probably not unassailable forever but it’s probably worth noting that they have a huge lead on potential competition.
Really enjoyed your article. I found the bit about DARPA funding particularly interesting. I think it speaks to the increasing need for the United States to proactively deal with global food security issues in order to mitigate conflict.