I think general AI will get to a place where diagnoses can be properly made by computers. I think it’s fairly easy to predict direction but not as easy to predict timing. From chess to jeopardy to driverless cars to everything else we have utilizing AI/ML today, there was at one point where each was considered impossible. I would presume there are several diagnoses that a computer today can make better than a human doctor. I can only assume that at some point the same will be true for even the complex ones.
I do not think the cost of an Amazon Go store would prohibit the technology. The first store may be very cost intensive but over time as the technology improves and network effects are realized as more customers utilize them, the costs will level and stores become profitable. This is the strategy of Amazon long term for many of its other product segments – provide exceptional service independent of financial performance and slowly build both user base and customer patterns to the point where competition simply can not compete.
Bug bounty programs are utilized by the top technology firms and I am happy the DoD has found some way to integrate into open innovation. It is said that the best developers are those that choose their work and are not forced to work on specific programs by way of their employment. Bounty programs are also a better use of government funds since we would essentially be paying for solutions and not paying government workers to do minimal work and hire expensive outside consultants.
Both the industry and education are responsibility for developing the skills needed for this technology to thrive. However, this would come organically as this technology develops and more companies utilize 3D printing.
Consumers are always ready to embrace the change as we use final products and don’t concern ourselves much with the production or manufacturing of them so long as they work.
I agree that open innovation/crowdsourcing is the ideal way to generate better ideas including finding a cure for cancer. But there are reasons I doubt Pfizer can and would implement something of this sort.
One – there’s no benefit to Pfizer if a crowdsourced cure to cancer is reached and thus puts them out of the market for cancer drugs. If the solution can’t be proprietary, there’s no balance to the tradeoff of lost sales of their incumbent drugs.
Secondly – similar to the point above, how will the contributors be compensated? There is no compensation baked into the structure of research, and even if the research is successful, it seems the only way to reward the producers is again crowdsourcing.
In-store 3D printing for Adidas is not necessarily a new frontier FOR Adidas. If anything, it’d be a new frontier for the industry but Adidas isn’t the first mover here. Nike, arguably a luxury brand, has benefited from customizable shoes for at-least the past two years (though I have no knowledge of whether they employ 3D printing in their manufacturing. Nonetheless, customizable shoes is a growing trend and if Adidas can become a cost effective alternative to Nike in this space it would be beneficial.