Thanks for sharing! It’s super interesting to read that Siemens is making Additive Manufacturing a priority among their Digital Initiatives but from the article I wonder if it is being done more to generate buzz than truly offer others with the ability to leverage the technology to manufacture more efficiently. Specifically, I think the key question the author raises is whether the network Siemens is creating has the power to actually “amplify” the existing processes of those it is looking to serve. Given the risk in the entire space of 3D printing in actually reaching broad commercialization I do believe that Siemens is in a unique position to act as a market leader and now is the time to build these relationships with other multinational companies.
Very interesting read. Given all that’s been in the news lately about Tesla, including the insane push for the roll-out of the latest Tesla car, it’s quite surprising to read that Tesla has no intention of filing any patent lawsuits under their open innovation policy. This seems incredibly benevolent given the value of IP in this industry when you first think about it. Yet, on second thought, unlike other industries there are very few auto manufacturers who survive worldwide and I imagine the electric vehicle space will eventually pan out in a similar manner where brand value — above IP will determine the ultimate winners. If this is the case, then Tesla’s open innovation policy is clearly brand-additive and something they should continue to promote.
On a side note, I was curious whether this policy drove more collaboration in the industry overall and found that this was sadly not the case — The article linked below describels a patent lawsuit that Tesla is facing today from a hydrogen trucking company. (https://techcrunch.com/2018/11/14/nikola-trucking/).
Wow! This article poses an extremely interesting (and slightly eerie!) question when it comes to transforming the consumer experience to AI driven voice technologies. The business case for building out these types of technologies are clear — reducing labor, but I wonder whether commercializing these technologies is really as close as Baidu would like. When I think of the chat bots that even the most sophisticated of companies have today I am still extremely skeptical. The classic case is of course Microsoft’s twitter bot (https://www.theverge.com/2016/3/24/11297050/tay-microsoft-chatbot-racist) which, when unleashed on the open web quickly turned into any marketer’s worst nightmare. I wonder what Baidu can do to ensure that as this technology is deployed it truly does build trust with the consumer — one offensive interaction could be fatal.
Great article! When I’ve heard about 3D printing and additive manufacturing in the past it’s usually with the idea that these technologies will follow the same trajectory as say human genome sequencing where the cost exponentially decreased as the technology matured eventually allowing for commercialization. It was definitely interesting to read here that the reality is that nobody really knows how diffusion of the technology will play out. Given that this is the status of the industry on the whole and Autodesk is not alone in facing these challenges, it makes sense to me that they should identify clients where Dreamcatcher can both be of use (i.e. leverage existing technology) and also add signification brand value to Autodesk. The partnership between the 3D printing company Carbon and Adidas comes to mind (https://www.forbes.com/sites/andriacheng/2018/05/22/with-adidas-3d-printing-may-finally-see-its-mass-retail-potential).
Awesome article. As Farrah mentions, Google is well poised to remain a leader in the ML/AI space due to the wealth of data and captive audience they have across all various facets of our life. The final question raised regarding whether Google should play a role in “humanizing” AI and ML is a particularly thought-provoking one. Humanizing the technology can mean a lot of different things, but for me, the one that means the most, particularly for a company who aims to make the world’s information “universally accessible” is to democratizing the basic technology so folk’s even understand how ML/AI works. I know that Google is investing in this because I have tried poking around on its’ Google AI website (https://ai.google/education/) marketed to both those new to coding and seasoned ML practitioners.
Super interesting article! I had no idea that Alexa opened up its APIs to third-party developers but after reading this piece it’s clear that Alexa would not have gained the traction it has so far without this approach — particularly in terms of coming up with new use cases. In terms of how Alexa can maintain it’s market position moving forward as well, I actually happened to read today about Amazon’s Alexa Fund, a VC fund for fueling the development of voice-based technologies. The announcement (https://techcrunch.com/2018/11/13/amazons-alexa-fund-invests-in-on-demand-parking-service-parkwhiz/) was specifically about an investment in Parkwhiz, a service that integrates with Alexa such that when a user is about to leave their home they can reserve a garage spot at their destination. I find it pretty incredible that Alexa can be used to disrupt traditional spaces such as parking, and it seems like open innovation will continue to play a key role in exploring these use cases.