This offers an intriguing glimpse into our future kitchens. It seems to go against the trend of natural/organic food, but I can see the advantages of printed food that you lay out. At least 3D printed food seems a more appealing alternative than Soylent ;). One problem I foresee could be fiber: Will these printers be able to handle / incorporate the fibers that we need in our diet?
Great article! I definitely did not associate the Pharma industry with open innovation, so it was very interesting to read about a successful example.
I agree with your recommendation that CO-ADD needs to establish credibility going forward, but I wonder if collaborating with big pharma companies is the way to go. You mention that CO-ADD was able to attract many researcher because there were not strings attached. Wouldn’t that competitive advantage disappear if they partner with a pharma company?
Great article! I was particularly intrigued by your first recommendation, as I agree that Unicef should establish norms and guidelines to guarantee that they ‘Do no harm’. As you mention, data is fundamental in many of the innovations discussed in this essay, e.g., the Facebook data used for Zika in Brazil. Therefore I wonder how privacy legislation such as GDPR will change the effectiveness of open innovation at Unicef in the future
Great article! I agree with Liz that monetization will be crucial for Pinterest. Advertisements on their platform are an option, but could be risky as they interfere with the user experience. I see more opportunities in selling their data/insights to third parties. Example use cases for those third parties that come to mind are forecasting demand in products, predicting fashion trends, and identifying relevant customer segments.
With respect to the open questions you mention, I don’t I agree with the first one: Why wouldn’t Pinterest’s business be scalable in the future?
That header image really freaks me out! 🙂 But that’s beside the point. This is a fascinating technology. I agree with your recommendation to take the company private. They should be focused on development & not share prices at this point
This was a thought provoking read, thank you! I wonder if crowding will really become an issue. Even if all trading would be done by machines, wouldn’t the markets be self-correcting? If everyone/all machines want to buy the same stock, prices of that stock go up, and the related alpha will disappear. If I follow this logic the markets would become even less volatile than with human investors, because all investors are now fully rational