Very fascinating to learn how Nike and their competitors are utilizing 3-D printing to enhance their manufacturing and product development.
To answer your question, I think that Nike should focus on refining and perfecting their footwear brands before broadening their scope to other areas. Nike is a brand built on performance and reliability, which is something that may be called into question with these new manufacturing techniques. It was stated that 3-D printing can actually enhance performance through lighter, frictional-resistant customization; however the average consumer may be skeptical about the durability of the product. This is particularly important for the target market of distance runners that you identified that Nike will likely focus on in the short-term. Perception is very important when informing customers of this new, innovative technology, so I believe continuing to partner with high-performing athletes can showcase the external benefits of producing footwear with this 3-D printing technology.
This was a very interesting insight into how 3-D printing could potentially disrupt the immense and very established industry of automotive vehicles.
I agree that this technology enables customer customization, but one concern that I have for each of the companies adopting this customization is how far they are willing to deviate from their original design and at what point of customization can a Ford vehicle no longer be identified as a Ford vehicle? Is the generally uneducated consumer able to determine the best design for their future vehicle, aside from purely aesthetic functionalities? Will Ford be able to brand themselves and be identifiable on the road if everyone’s vehicle is slightly different?
In response to your question about how Ford can leverage this technology to become a substantial player in the autonomous vehicle market; I believe that internal customization is a great way to differentiate itself compared to its competition. This enables them to retain their image whilst not sacrificing the safety or hindering the artificial intelligence technology of these future vehicles.
You mention a vast array of ways that Emirates Airlines can use machine learning to differentiate themselves in the airline market. I agree that there are many applicable uses of this technology, but I was most intrigued by how they can utilize this information to anticipate external factors beyond their control.
Weather is a significant influencer in an airline’s ability to deliver and serve their customer base. Currently, forecasters are able to look at historical trends to determine what they could expect for the future, and this information can be utilized by airlines to bolster their flight offerings in an anticipation of cancellations and delays. However, I think a potential issue that could create a reason for pause would be that researchers often can’t say how or why deep learning algorithms arrive at a given result. Given the lack of tangible outputs and trends, airlines might be more cautious to extend their resources to prepare for events as fickle and seemingly unpredictable as weather.
This is a very innovative way for Glossier to generate new ideas and figure out exactly what is being demanded from their consumer base directly!
In your article you discuss four ways to crowd source problem solving. One of the examples you provide is the use of contests to spark innovation and community input. It seems that this is an avenue that Glossier has not yet pursued and could be an interesting way to keep users engaged as the brand continues to grow. One concern would be that contests could potentially discourage continued input from the Into the Gloss community, but I would be interested to hear your take on the idea. This could potentially be a strategy for other beauty brands that have not yet built up the same collaborative platforms as Glossier.
As you note, alcohol impairment, drowsiness, and distracted driving are responsible for a significant number of fatalities in the US and beyond. In fact, approximately 90% of motor vehicle crashes can be at least in part attributed to human error .
I agree that a significant percentage of these instances can be mitigated or avoided by the Automative AI that Affectiva is developing. I do also believe that there are multiple hurdles that this company faces including public perception of privacy violations and the impending threat of autonomous vehicle technology.
Another concern I have is the potential for false positive diagnosis of driver misbehavior. If the technology incorrectly identifies unsafe driving procedures, this could be met with annoyance by the drivers and the auto companies that are making these ultimate monitoring decisions. Because the burden likely falls on companies like GM or Ford, they might be hesitant to adopt this technology.
 Smith, Bryant Walker. (2013, December 18). Human Error as a Cause of Vehicle Crashes. Retrieved from http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2013/12/human-error-cause-vehicle-crashes
One of the barriers you note is diminished motivation to contribute to the platform due to the rigorous parameters set forth in the design process. This has the potential to stifle creative ideas on the basis of inexperience or limited technical knowledge.
As you stated, there have been platforms created to help software developers find others to improve and refine on their designs; however, I think that this could be further promoted and formalized by LEGO itself. Under their Lego Ideas umbrella, LEGO could facilitate a message board of sorts that pairs creators with doers. I would expect that this would result in an increased number of submissions at a superior level of design.
Another idea could be creating a competition at college campuses around the world. LEGO hopes to innovate for the next generation of users to differentiate itself from its digital media competition, so what better way than by reaching the people who are closest to its target market.