Thanks for this super interesting piece! Being Chinese myself, I go back and forth on this idea of social credit seeing both the benefits but also worrying about the huge risk of it being abused by corrupt officials. Allowing citizens to appeal is a great idea. It should be monitored by an independent department with checks and balances. Also you bring up an interesting point about whether the Chinese government is using this technology for governance or monitoring. I think it’s hard to separate the two and that there will always be some overlap. However, I don’t think this is that much different from other first world countries.
Thanks for choosing this topic – it’s very interesting! I hope that as the digital world takes over, they continue to keep the physical booths. I agree with some of the above comments that as more stories are collected, there is the concern of quality. Also, I think it’ll be interesting for the company to eventually expand overseas. Of course, that brings with it a whole new level of complexity in terms of overcoming language barriers but I think it has the potential to bring different cultures closer together.
Super interesting! Thanks for bringing this topic up. I also think they should hold these events more often on a broader set of topics to encourage and drive innovation. One of my concerns is how they ensure they’re giving people the right amount of credit and exposure, particularly for people who don’t win but perhaps their idea was the foundation upon which someone else created or thought of something else.
I enjoyed reading about this topic and share many of your thoughts and concerns. I also wonder whether they offer enough value proposition for the long term. As costs comes down over time, UPS and Fast Radius should also consider other value-add services to differentiate themselves from potential competitors and also keep their customers from bringing the technology in-house once they have enough scale and cash flow.
It’s interesting to see 3D printing being used in the healthcare industry. It’s unfortunate that cost seems to always be a gating issue with anything in this industry. How are people paying for the existing treatment options? Do insurance companies cover those and can you negotiate with them to include this new treatment in people’s existing insurance coverage? I do agree that you need to achieve economy of scale first in order to generate enough interest among government, investors and insurance companies. However, I also do worry about long term effects of this treatment that we just haven’t had enough time to observe yet.
As a daily Spotify user, I found this super interesting (and well-written)! It was only just recently that I realized Spotify was using machine learning to recommend these “Daily Mixes” that suited me perfectly. It’s so spot-on that I rarely create my own playlists now. However, I do recognize that I tend to listen to the same genre of music because of that and rarely venture into other genres. Sometimes I like that, other times I’m unsure. So I guess this goes back to the concern you raised – is this putting a box around my musical interests? Also, although Spotify is using the same concept and technology and just applying to the musician side (vs. the consumer side), somehow I feel less open to the idea of musicians/artists/composers using technology to create music based on listener preferences. Perhaps I’m idealistic in thinking that music should be about personal expression and when you use a machine or technology to create it, is it still personal? Who is the actual creator – the machine or the person using the machine? Also, there have been many cases of song or tune plagiarism due to similar melodies or other aspects. How does the technology protect users from falling into these issues? Just some thoughts sparked from your essay!