31 January 2018 at 9:25 #2178
Nice to meet you, I’m Fabio Vantaggiato, and I’m attending the final year of Business Economy at University of Milano-Bicocca, I done my last exam yesterday, and I’m currently working in iBicocca, a project that most of you know.
Thanks to this project I’ve met Marco Pastore and @emanuel96 who partecipated in the past at SVST and then Paolo Marenco in the event.
I’m very exiting to take part in this Forum which provides many interesting topics.
@lucabaldessarini I know this accident, my friends make that trait every day, fortunately they weren’t in that.
It’s very sad say that you go to work and you risk your life, think that there are so many technologies that could avoid disasters.
The train has to break after the impact, because after the 2009 Viareggio disaster the security measures became strict, but not enough.
Like the truck that week ago, near Brescia, explode because the driver (the reconstruction say) was distracted and hit the car in front.
I hate this type of episode because we have the technology (the proximity sensor) common in the majority of newest car, and it costs nearly 500 €, and if a law forces the truck-driver to install this technology in every trucks, many accidents would be avoided.
But to reconnect into the Topic, I want to talk about the worst problem that the self-driving car or the self-driving veichles open, because they save life but they will cause organ shortages.
I share with you this article that talk about the problem of the organ shortages that safer veichles will cause.
Fortunately the UE and many healthy companies are working to create artificial organs thanks to 3D printing.
I invite you if you are interested about that to participate at iBicocca February 2nd, where Gabriele Grecchi talks about the Future of Health.
I share with you the link with the subscription: https://www.eventbrite.it/e/biglietti-ibook-future-health-di-gabriele-grecchi-39353848420?aff=eac2
Have a nice day!
Fabio Vantaggiato1 February 2018 at 9:26 #2179
Good Morning guys! And welcome Fabio!
I’m happy about your discussion on the transportation system, and I would like to share with you this start up that we met in August during the tour:
What do you think about it? Moreover, do you think that Uber and Lyft will be affected by the introduction of this kind of transportation?
Try to insert this start up in what have you said before and tell us what has changed or what, in your opinion, is unchanged.
After this I would like to switch to another topic, yesterday I found this interesting article:
Is interesting the fact that, when we think about innovation, we always make a connection with start-ups, smartphones, computers, tablet ecc.. and not with the cosmetic industry.
So, what do you think about innovation in this industry? And, what do you think about UV Sense? Is this innovation a way to try to close the gap with the cosmetic industry and the pharmaceutical one?
In the end, try to make a connection among the cosmetic industry and the design
Have a nice day!1 February 2018 at 14:49 #2180
Hi everyone and welcome Fabio, it’s great to see you here!
I agree with you about the fact that technology could improve our safety while driving and taking means of transport. Arturo Frixa of Jaguar Land Rover Italia, as some of us were told at iBicocca, said that he was testing a self-driving car in a turnpike and it drove him better than he could have done on his own on a foggy day. As it was stated previously, we can improve people’s lives by connecting all the vehicles, preventing accidents.
I strongly think that IoT with all the sensors could help in public transportation by automatically monitoring means conditions, such as railways. I am of the same opinion of @lucabaldessarini: progress is useless if it doesn’t impact well on people’s lives. Innovation must be carried on for the humans and not for itself, in simple terms a human-focused innovation.
Regarding to what @fabio wrote about organ shortages, I agree with the writer of the article that shows a more efficient algorithm to associate donors and patients. In addition to that more and more examples of researches in organ transplants are arising together with new processes to treat diseases without surgery. Finally, I think we need to prevent accidents and the lack of organs would be fixed in other ways. I don’t want to go off-topic so I’ll stop here, but it would be a great theme of discussion.
Next Future Transportation is very innovative and I think it would be faster applicable than Airbus, Elevate (which are both in need of technology progression at this moment) or The Boring Company solution as it would use actual paths and roads without needing further infrastructures. This is the kind of public means of transport I’d love to take in future: simple, convenient and permeating. In my opinion today’s Uber and Lyft might be affected by that but I think Uber would shift to projects such Elevate and Lyft, recently funded by Alphabet, would develop self-driving cars and solutions similar to Next Future. There are so many players in this market and only time will show the most successful one. Just to end my point of view about the previous topic, I’ve recently come across GetMyCar, a startup aimed to transform already-existing car park in p2p car sharing. Maybe some of you might be interested in reading more about it.
I guess It’s time to switch to another topic and thank you @stefaniatibiletti for sharing that article with us. In 2013 I joined an event called Futuro Prossimo in Genoa, supported by the Festival della Scienza, and the first meeting we took part in was with Roberto Ancorotti, MD at Ancorotti Cosmetics, and Simona Antonini, R&D at Cosmoprof. The first one is the head of a company based in Crema which produces high-end cosmetics for third parties and the second one organises the most important worldwide convention and forum about beauty businesses and innovation in this field. I remember my first thought was it had nothing to do with science technical progression (as far as I meant it at that time) but I was wrong. Ancorotti told us about the using of nanostructures in foundations in order to illuminate the skin, complex processes to manufacture the right texture and the attention needed to satisfy clients expectations as well as employees’ ones. His company puts so much effort in research that its growth rate was 57,1% in 2016 with an estimated profit of € 70 millions in 2017.
Simona Antonini entered in Cosmoprof in 2012 to reduce the gap between cosmetics industries, research and innovation. Her job is about future beauty trends, packaging and machineries development. She stressed the fact that innovation in this field affects also the pharmaceutical one (as @stefaniatibiletti wrote) such as topical drug delivery. This close connection is evident as Cosmoprof also holds Cosmofarma, the leading European event about health and beauty care.
Regarding the submitted article, I do think UV Sense is a great tool to raise awareness about the health impact of UV exposure. I appreciate Guive Balooch, vice president of L’Oréal’s incubator, saying their goal is enhancing consumers’ lives while balancing technology and quality. He used the expression “integrated beauty”, that winks at “integrated circuit”, which is exactly what they did on the nail surface. It’s a great way to have a tool to monitor a health-related issue but wearable and small at the same time – so you can show and use it without seeming awkward.
Another problem with cosmetics is packaging, which has to be eye-catching but this sometimes translates into lot of not recyclable materials or polluting ones. Unilever and P&G are going to make their plastic bottles reusable or fully recyclable or made with recycled elements in the next years. Another solution could be using easily refillable phials and bottles, maybe pushing customers to do it with discounts and coupons.
Waiting for your replies, have a nice day!1 February 2018 at 16:40 #2181
Firstly I want to welcome Fabio joining the conversation, I’m so happy to see new faces here. At the same time, I’d like to point out some statistics concerning what Fabio said about self-drivings cars because personally, I don’t agree with the argument about organs shortages crisis imputed as driverless cars mass-adoption consequence.
Everyday in the world, an average of 3.500 people die of car accident, 1.3 mln yearly, between 20 and 50 mln people remain permanently injured as result of car accidents, and in 93% of cases the accident happens due to human’s fault. So, you can all agree that these are some quite big and dramatic data.
Driverless car at their finest development could cut deaths by over 90%, obviously especially in developing countries, we will have some sort of problems regarding driverless car acquisition rate but on the long term, these cars will be affordable for everyone (Tesla Model 3 for example, starting at 35k$ is already I think a “car for the great multitude”, it has already repeatedly prevented accidents with his autopilot feature and it is not yet a level 5 car on the self-driving scale); but I’d really like to make this fundamental point, even a death accidents reducution by half, would save many more lives than the abolition of murder and war.
I think we can’t see the rising of driverless vehicles as a future cause of organs shortage, but we must see it as an humongous improvement in life prevention worldwide, and this amazing technology fortunately isn’t as far away from now as we may think. Furthermore, if you think that one donor could save up to 8 lives but only 3 out of 1000 people die in a way that allows organ donation you really understand that we need a more efficent and life-preserving way in order to encounter the world demand for organs, which is of course really huge and problematic.
I personally see 3D printing organs as the future, using stem cells together with lots and lots of research improvements in the medicine field. It won’t be easy or simple, but I think that only figuring out some sort of “organ mass production” method, we can at least contain this huge shortage problem.
Moving to the Elisa message, first of all thank you so much for keeping the topic level always so high. I’m pretty surprised about the whole NEXT thing, I’ve seen something on the net sometime ago but I didn’t know it was an Italian startup, so proud of it! Here I believe one of the most important plus is the modular feature, of course they will be electric and of course they will be autonomous but I think that in the versatility of a true “compoundable” vehicle stands the possible keystone solution to the congestion problem; and if numbers are real I think an improvement of less 78% in city traffic would be in kind of a big deal.
Uber and Lyft at this point will obviously be gifted with a full autonomous cab fleet, and maybe we’ll also see the arise of personal self driving sharing platforms. In my opinion if the Next technology will take place in this time frame, let’s say around 2030, it will be a true breakthrough in the short-distance trips market, and cab companies will truly struggle fighting the modular thing, maybe also starting themselves their compoundable cab. But Uber for example, coming back to the Elevate project, could find a big new market share (may along with AirBus and other competitors) in the flying cars field, better covering this way mid/long-distance trips faster than a Next vehicle.
In the second place, if Next technology will maybe merges with The Boring Company one, they could create the true heaven of traffic efficiency, fast electric autonomous modular vehicles travelling on multiple layers underneath the city surface will take you whenever you want in minutes. Oh my god, I’m so excited about the future.
Coming to the new topic, I think what L’Orèal did with the UV sense is simply awesome, along with many other companies whom with their open innovation and in-house incubators are surfing the startup wave of disruption. I’ve to be really honest, I didn’t know anything about this Oréal’s Technology Incubator before now, but reading the article I was simply atonished and fascinated by the life-philosophy around design and technology of both the Guive Balooch, VP of the incubator, and Yves Behar, the designer of UV sense. Introducing this extremely versatyle werareble gadget in their yet consolidated huge market share they can truly improve millions of lives. With this product they can deeply improve a world general misconception around extended sun exposure, which represents today 86% of melanoma cancer as well as one of the main causes of prematurely ageing.
In the end, I’m fully convinced that design plays a crucial role in the world improvement throughout innovation, and like Yves Behar said: “Design accelerates the adoption of new ideas”. I’ve always believed that if you can create something technically useful but also beautiful as hell, you can easily fly over the adoption rate curve. History gives us countless examples about that, companies like Apple, which in the 70’s, thanks to the one and only Steve Jobs, started its mission to put a computer in everyone house, and the only way to do that was to shape with the hands of Johny Ive, a cold and complex device into a piece of art.
Tesla did the same, completely disrupting people ideas around electric vehicles, historically slow and ugly and now faster and nicer than ever before. Using design I think you can truly touch people heart, making them fall in love at first sight with your product. Like Apple users do after product launches, standing hours and hours inline only waiting to touch with hands on the latest device. Like Tesla fans, waiting outside showrooms to place their order for a car they had to wait 2 years in order to drive it, the Model 3, the same for the recent Roadster model.
In conclusion, I deeply believe that good design truly improve people lives in a way we can’t even explain sometimes, because it touches something very deep and fragile in ourselves.
Have a nice day guys!
Luca Baldessarini5 February 2018 at 13:55 #2182
Hi every one,
I want to specify that I hope the self-driving car can spread as soon as possible but I think We have to invest in the 3 D printing organs because we need this technology.
@lucabaldessarini our statistic is different, I don’t have deep knowledge in that, but some people has confirmed that.
Next future, interesting topic, I think Next Future compare to the Uber service is cheaper and easier to apply in the next 10 years, as they have already said Uber is better for the medium distances and Next Future for the city transportation.
I think they aren’t in the same market segment, Next Future is for the majority of population, and the Uber Service has a premium price that the majority of people they can’t afford it, but this is my personal opinion.
I hope in the next future the UBER transportation can be used by everyone.
Until the car will be considered as a property and not as a service, this Startup won’t take off.
Go on, I never heard UV Sense, thank you @stefaniatibiletti to have started this topic.
It’s a fantastic technology because is quite invisible, the best innovation is that it doesn’t need to be charged.
In the point of view of life improvement, most people are UV sensitive, and if they can gather data, they can offer the best solution for the user.
UV sense accumulate data, this data will be analyzed and the app could suggest the best cream not to get a sunstroke.
But on the other end this sensor can’t relevate the user’s skin type, in this case the data provide this sensor could not be enough accurated.
Thank you for your knowledge sharing, It’s a very interesting forum.
Have a nice day!7 February 2018 at 10:39 #2187
Thank you @fabio for pointing out the theme of data usage to provide the best solution for the consumer. In the product industry, among which cosmetic one, the consumer is, in fact, the focus of the business. Sentiment analysis (or opinion mining) has been becoming more and more used to get information about market trends and tendencies. It is based on people’s social network behaviour and it shows how popular a product is, giving brands new advice and paths to take to improve themselves. In my opinion this is very useful, since issues such as tests on animals, potential-allergic ingredients or animal-derived ones might push customers to look for new kinds of cosmetics tailored for them. For this reason I think also small businesses can enter this market, finding their own niches while responding to specific consumers’ needs.
Furthermore, technology applies in cosmetics also in the choice process: let me be more clear. L’Oréal Paris with Make-Up Genius, a smartphone app, aims to bring a virtual mirror wherewith customers can see themselves with make-up on using augmented reality so be helped while choosing the products. Something similar was achieved before by Luxottica that allows you to virtually try sunglasses on and see how they fit. I do think augmented reality could really make the difference in the customer’s experience by helping them in the choice of the product which suits their needs the best, becoming a powerful retention tool for buyers at the same time. Have you ever tried something like this? Personally I tried the one by Luxottica quite a lot years ago when I thought it was astonishing.
Finally, innovation in cosmetics refers not only to the products, but also to the tools. Dennis Morrison, a NASA scientist, and his team designed a drug-filled microcapsules system suitable to treat cancers and infections in 2002, while studying microgravity effects on astronauts. Farouk Shami, founder of Farouk System, a haircare company, was looking for nanoceramic materials to enhance hairstyling tools. They started to work together and produced a new ceramic which releases negative ions when heated to make hair smoother and softer. In this way their irons with this coating are beneficial for fibers.
Later, Farouk Shami improved his products thanks to another NASA research: one method to keep surfaces clean in spacecrafts is using silver nanoparticles as the latter acts as a sterilizing component. This technology was incorporated in their hair tools in order to make them self-disinfecting. At last Dennis Morrison entered Farouk System as vice president, showing the possible paths to new applications of scientific research. This is an example of scientific research with an unpredictable application and it shows that science, if carried on well, is always worth it and is an essential requirement for innovation.
I agree with @lucabaldessarini about design pushing new technologies’ adoption in general. Camillo Olivetti, founder of Olivetti in 1908, considered the product appearance very important. This would have helped typewriters to go out from offices while reaching living rooms. His son, Adriano Olivetti, followed this idea while enlarging his factory, making design one of the main point of their production. I wanted to say something about them because their works were the example of Italian quality and innovation not only focused on the final purpose (the writing act in this case), but also on research in materials and new shapes that could highlight the belonging to a brand at the same time, such as the famous bitten apple from Cupertino.
Can’t wait to hear from you all, have a nice day!7 February 2018 at 21:40 #2188
Hi there, how is it going?
I’d like to bring to light something very interesting and strange at the same time to discuss here, concerning what @l-stevenazzi said about the “opinion mining” and also further.
On one hand, you see giants like Facebook spending tons of money hiring full-time market researchers to monitor Zuckerberg’s likability on the web, in order to always be at the customer level. Tech titans like Google, Microsoft and pretty much every other tech titan out there are also constantly ubiquitous on social networks, trying to answer to each comment of every single customer or hater. On the other hand, Apple is absolutely absent from social media (no tweets, no posts of their products, no comments section available on their YT videos), except for commercials, always giving customers products they don’t even know they want.
In my opinion that’s a pretty interesting thing to think about, obviously Apple will do so much Big Data research throughout other channels that we can’t even imagine, but in the social age of the meta-data, being able to not caring about the “social sphere” at all and instead hardly trying to anticipate the future, I truly think is privilege of few. What do you think about that?
Coming back in topic, I personally believe that companies which businesses are in markets “less famous/cool” around the Startup ecosystem such as cosmetics, like @stefaniatibiletti correctly said before, have instead a true hidden disruptive potential. They own a huge amount of market share in their field. They affect customers at some sort of “inner” level, communicating concepts around beauty, aging, youth, touching them really deep in their minds; so, starting open innovation this way from inside out I think definitely is a good strategic choice for them. Besides, I believe they have some kind of “responsibility” towards their customers because, in the end, they work on products that will effectively get in touch with them and their health. Taking advantage of it, alongside with the startup mindset, I think it is the true turning-point that has led to designing products like UV sense.
Ultimately, L’Orèal-like companies, with their innovation centers can indeed make them mark in the future of healthcare by implementing, for example, the interaction between wearables and A.I. improving, as a result, the whole world of diagnostics.
How about @elisa? Who might knows a lot more than us about this specific industry.
I want to say one last thing about the packaging, introduced by @l-stevenazzi few messages ago, because that’s also I think, a theme worth discussing. Regarding this topic, one of the most recent eco-friendly and innovative ideas I’ve seen around the tech world is the one behind the Precious Plastic project, and I loved it from the very beginning. This idea is pretty simple, they want to spread the recycling religion, and in order to do that, they teach people how to build an entire “Plastic Recycling Center” the DIY way. Lots of people joined their forum and started to do their own goods, giving this material another purpose, and selling them through their platform.
I sincerely believe that if you can figure out really useful products made via recycling processes, you can really make some impact out there, and personally, I think that we can no longer allow ourselves to throw away so much waste without even thinking about it. The U.S.A leads the unenviable list about per capita plastic consumption with nearly 70 kg/person, Europe comes second with “only” 50 kg/person. If everyone could have is own tool so as to make his own recycled items, alongside with big companies recycling programs and projects, we can for sure make this world a better place for the generations to come.
Finally, thanks @l-stevenazzi again for quoting Mr. Olivetti, he is the true representation of what a genuine entrepreneur should be, all managers and politicians in our country should be inspired from him and Italy might be in better conditions.
Bye for now,
Luca Baldessarini10 February 2018 at 6:50 #2287
I would like to add just one thing about the plastic problem, one year ago I known Alberto Bertone, CEO Acqua Sant’Anna, he talked about his Bioplastic Bottle, I share with you the link.
This Bioplastic is a particular polymer obtained from the fermentation of sugars contained in the corn, it’s 100% biodegradable in 80 days.
I hope that in a few years this type of plastic will become common in every object.
Thank you <span class=”handle-sign”>@</span>lucabaldessarini and <span class=”handle-sign”>@</span>l-stevenazzi for all yours comments, they are so interesting.
Have a nice week-end!
Fabio VantaggiatoElisaParticipant@elisa11 February 2018 at 20:41 #2288
Hi guys! Sorry for the absence but as you know I am in the middle of winter session 🤓
first of all I’d like to welcome Fabio in our small but stimulating group 🙂
I want to begin with Next programme to enter in the market with this so innovative car sharing. I think is a pretty good idea, it makes more “public” the private transportation system, I also think that companies such as Uber would be affected by this new way to respond to travel necessities. But market is so dynamic and who knows, maybe there will be a partnership between them.
Passing to the other topic, in my opinion, as a girl, I don’t think I’d like to buy it. Ok, it has an important meaning knowing UV levels and prevent skin problems and diseases and so on, but why should I wear it? I don’t think women would want to know constantly about their receiving UV levels. It would be a product for a very selected segment that maybe needs it really. Most of cosmetic products are also against UV, not only sun creams (for example day cream etc).
What about boys? They could not wear it, is it fair?
Maybe I’m wrong and maybe I’ll have one, who knows 🙂
hope to hear from you soon!12 February 2018 at 11:40 #2289
Good Morning Guys!
Nice to see all of you discussing here, and I’m glad to see that you have liked the new topic.
First of all, here you can find an article about the connection among health and technology, and how some important features can be added to existing technology:
And a first question has arose in my mind while reading the article, why we are always looking for inventing something new, something that maybe is not so crucial for our daily life instead of pursuing a continuous improvement of what we already have? What do you think about it? Do you agree?
Thank you so much Elisa for pointing out really important problems connected with wearable devices: Are you willing to wear it? How do you feel about wearing it?
So here you can find some inputs :
Here we are going to touch another important topic, the collection of personal data and the privacy. How do you feel about it?
In the end I would like to share with you this interesting article that speaks about the new gloves for F1 drivers:
And if you are not a F1 fan.. an article that tells you why you should become one and a connection with the first article in this post:
Have a nice week 🙂12 February 2018 at 17:18 #2290
Firstly, concerning what Elisa said, that’s right, maybe you won’t use the UV Sense every time you go out. But think about your summer holidays in the seaside, or when you go out for a walk exploring the mountains, you’re constantly and most of the time unconsciously exposed to the dangers of UV rays. Personally, I would find it very useful to have such important information, for example when I do mountaineering in the alps with my dad. More than one time I’ve come back burned by the sunlight, amplified by the snow on the glacier, and maybe something like UV sense could have prevented me from such danger. So, in the end, I would wear it anyway.
Wearables, yes. I’ve listened to a podcast from TechCrunch about this specific topic just the other day. They were more specifically talking about the enormous results that the Apple Watch has shown concerning detection of health problems. What an amazing thing, a device that is already helping you in so many fields and areas can finally support you also in the most critical and important one, your health. More to the point, the Apple Watch in its latest tests has proved a diabetes detection accuracy of 85%, that’s kind of big deal guys.
Moreover, in the September Keynote, Apple also revealed that the Watch can now also detect strange arrhythmias tracking your heart performances mostly 24/7, giving you this way important prevention information about possible heart attacks. Obviously, there’s the huge battery life problem, which can strongly affect data monitoring and detection, but I think that in the long term we can get rid of it. Mainly developing more and more over batteries technologies, building Gigafactory-like industries with humongous R&D budgets and implementing solar powered devices. Furthermore, I also think that improvements like wider wireless charging, like the one presented by Pi charging https://www.picharging.com (who won the TC Startup Battlefield in San Francisco this year), can definitely make wearables more useful. For example, if we could have rooms, offices, squares, full of long-distance wireless charging technology routers, you understand that everyone could exploit smart devices so much longer, giving them some sort of endless power.
Moving to the hot privacy theme, fortunately, it is recently increasingly at the center of tech debates, but that’s not enough. We want devices more and more self-customized and big companies take advantage of it, making fortunes around the big data gold rush. I personally think that here there is an underlying problem, let’s try to use Elon’s first principle method in order to analyze the whole picture. Since the tech boom back in the nineties, we started to use devices and creating data over data like never before. Moving from the early days, we’ve seen the spread of countless new software and hardware companies, who started to monetize in a completely new way. So between then and now, mostly subsequently of the rise of social networks and wearables/IoT industries, we’ve witnessed this sort of slow but steady abduction of our data. Now that we’re fortunately starting to understand the whole thing we have to put some limits and regulations of this fundamental property.
One of the ideas that I’ve loved so much is the creation of some kind of personal black box database in which we can store and monitor all of our big data. Like a personal cloud where we can see all our available information, being able to sell them and monetize on them the way we want, with the companies we like. Of course, here there will be a problem concerning the company side, cause the won’t have anymore an ongoing stream of data, causing them a super volatile business model. We may have only a small percentage of every use of our information between companies, and that will be a tremendous accomplishment because, in the end, I think it’s really important that we finally can get our privacy back under our control.
F1, in the first place I’ve to say that I watch it sometimes mainly because my grandmother is a truly super-fun of it. She watches literally every race of the circuit, and she’s just crazy about the Ferrari Team. That being said I’ve never heard of the “smart gloves” of riders so thanks Stefania for the hint. These are awesome, being able to monitor real-time the main driver’s vitals is a true improvement for the race analysis and studies. Also pretty interesting the article about how the F1 developments lead to so many improvements in other fields. For example, the KERS tech, which is kind of the same regenerative brake technology used by Tesla which additionally applies it also to the engine when the driver takes his foot off the gas pedal. Developments like this one are so important, because they positively affect electric and hybrid veichels autonomy, allowing their greater use and their wider adoption.
Finally, I want to say something in relation to what Elisa suggested about inventions. Of course, we’ve to admit that, especially lately, we faced a huge new “fashion wave” of inventions and startups, and we’ve to be more than ever aware of the spread of solutionism. We have to stay focused on true innovations and obviously keep improving our previously technologies in order to make them perfect. But at the same time, I think that if we stop inventing new stuff and dreaming big we cannot make progress towards the future of our species. We need to have so many streams of ideas in order to select the important and fundamental ones. In the end, even though I admit that I’m often too much of a perfectionist, I think that like the Facebook’s COO Sheryl Sandberg says, we must focus on the fact that “done is better than perfect”, especially in business.
Have a nice day!
Luca Baldessarini13 February 2018 at 17:42 #2291
Hi everyone, it’s great to read from you all here!
@elisa is right about the fact that only a small amount of consumers might be helped by something like UV Sense, but I think the ones who really need to know about their sun exposure because of skin problems could benefit a lot from that. It is discreet and doesn’t require charging so they only have to put it on. Personally, if I had had skin issues, I would use it, but of course I would prefer something manlier, maybe the UV Patch (which is a a patch created before UV Sense, but unfortunately it has a heart shape, so I’d prefer a UV Patch that looks like a common patch). I think its great feature is to make people realise how much sun exposure can damage skin and lead to cancer. This health-related aim is connected to the wearables theme @stefaniatibiletti arose. We have the opportunity to bring a small object with us that monitors various parameters among which heart rate for example. In my opinion this is a powerful tool to allow people to know something more about their health condition, pushing them to take other examinations if required. This would be an example of technology impacting people’s lives in a positive way. The only problem left would be battery lasting as @lucabaldessarini highlighted, but it would be fixed soon with new materials or ways of charging such as the ones he wrote about.
As the article submitted by @stefaniatibiletti shows with Cardiogram, sometimes it is better to improve existing technologies rather than creating new ones. I think that new businesses should take advantage of current technologies if the latter were well developed. In this way the process is less time-consuming and the service itself (and not the device) could be improved more. At some point a new step in technology is required as you cannot improve more something dated and this is the moment when research is needed. In this meaning I support Formula 1 because of the innovation carried on with it (it is pretty the same discussion about whether it is worth or not funding fundamental research but with Formula 1 also non-scientists could have fun with it). I haven’t heard before of those gloves either, so thank you @stefaniatibiletti, but I could imagine them since also common cars are equipped with sensors to monitor attention. At CES 2017 they presented a headrest that detects brain activity, preventing drivers falling asleep. This is only one example of the huge amount of new ways to assist people while riding. Formula E is another car racing competition, based on electric engines, and it pushes innovation in this field similarly to Formula 1. If you’re interested in, on April 14th, there will be the first E-Prix in Rome.
Surely emerging technologies carry new problems, such as personal data collection and another one which I’d like to point out later. Data collection is unavoidable these days because companies need to satisfy consumers’ expectations while delivering a better product. I do agree about anonymous data collection (I use some open source software that ask you to let them get statistics in order to improve and I’m ok with that) but the problem concerns private data, for example health-related ones. It’s a big deal defining what privacy is now and remember that service providers often sell consumers’ preferences to marketing organisations, giving their product for free (which means no actual money is needed although there’s a price). In the end we have to trust them, it’s an all-or-nothing and now we can answer “yes” to following question: is data the new oil? .
I do think education is essential to be responsible while giving our data away using Internet. For this reason I would love to have my sensitive health data collected by wearables, stored and used to treat me in hospitals and similar situations but only if the whole system guarantees me they have taken all the measures to safely store my data. This means encryption (have you read Formula 1 gloves data are encrypted?) and a transparent law which explain how sensitive digital information must be processed. Sharing health data is an essential step to improve life and, after making them anonymous, they can be used to study diseases on a larger scale, with AI as well (and some companies do it, for example Orobix with pancreas cancers).
Thank you, @lucabaldessarini , for you post about the “personal black box database” that we can use to monetize with our data: it is a great depiction of how much important information we are giving away, often without thinking about the collectors of them, their policies and revenues.
In my opinion one problem with wearables is that they expose people to electromagnetic fields (EF) as never before. While the effects of high power EF are known (from interference of DNA synthesis to hormones cell response and cancer) we don’t know yet what low frequencies EF might cause because time is an essential fact to study this kind of health issues. Personally I don’t like the idea of long-distance wireless charging stations, preferring fast-charging cabled systems instead. On the other hand projects such as Pi Charging could help in giving current to implantable devices, becoming essential in those situations.
Thank you for the discussion, have a nice day!17 February 2018 at 16:41 #2292
Thanks @l-stevenazzi for such an engaging conversation.
I’d like to come back to the improving vs. inventing theme because I think it’s really worth discussing. In order to clearly consider the bigger picture, I think we have to look at two main things: the diffusion of innovation graph of new technologies and what is the current state of the art of the market. Concerning the diffusion of innovation graph, in the super early-stage phase, there are the small group of innovators (2.5%), geeks who love tech and have the inner power in their hands to choose for life or death of the idea. If successful through this stage, the product will go on to the early-adopters stage (13.5%), climbing the curve first heights, but then there’s the big gap of “the chasm”, which will determine whether or not your idea will reach the early majority (34%). If it makes it through this stage there are good chance to disrupt an entire market, increasingly gaining market shares. The same is for the graph of the current state of the art of a market, there is some certain level for some period and then, if a new idea/technology comes in and it’s disruptive, it will create a new wave, taking the whole market to the next upper level, creating this way a new standard for everyone. Here stands the point, all the new industries created by the new big tech jump, only improve a bit the new level in the long-term, those companies in facts, give strength to the new consolidated standard until another new disruption faces in, and so on, tech revolution after tech revolution. So, which is the most important? The big disruptive idea, such as blockchain, which creates and lots of new satellite industries and unlocks a completely new technology on a higher level than the previous one? Or the entire ecosystem generated from the disruption, which maintains the innovation momentum on the long period until the next big thing? What do you think?
Coming to the data collection theme, I completely agree with @l-stevenazzi about the unavoidability of the process in order to allow products more an more customized, lately more than ever, but I personally think that nowadays we’re gone too much further from any reasonable level. Thank you so much again @l-stevenazzi, for mentioning the idea of a privacy education for people, I think this is such an important and fundamental theme unknown to the most that need to be discussed in schools. Furthermore, I do believe that the biggest problem about this new “data rush” is exactly the inner essence of it, it touches really deeply some of the people’s most private data, and it makes big profits out of it.
For the record, I don’t have some sort of conspiracy disorder about private data, but I do think we have a serious problem here. I personally use non-tracking browsers and search engines and moreover, regarding our project, TakePlace, me and my colleague are firmly convinced about the respect of people data and we’re working since the beginning in order to do that. So, we’re developing all the back-end, as well as the software architecture with this strong inner value.
In the end, wearables. Yes, I also think that in the long term, with more significant and prolongated analysis we’ll find out that the EF constant exposure that we’re facing won’t be as good for our body, all the problems with DNA interference, as @l-stevenazzi wrote, may will come up, and that’s obviously another big problem. Maybe, as I said before, systems like Pi charging, but for longer distances, with further developments could reduce our direct exposure from such radiations, improving at the same time, our freedom from charging cables.
Have a nice weekend!
Luca Baldessarini20 February 2018 at 9:33 #2299
Good morning everyone!
I’m really happy with the topics you are proposing, sorry for my absence but I’m particular involved with work, thesis and other 2 personal projects.
@lucabaldessarini thanks for showing us Pi-charging. It is very interesting technology, especially when it will be applicable to transports. As mention @l-stevenzazzi, I’m worried about the electromagnetic waves as well. I hope that the damage to humans can be restricted, obviously every new invention must have the priority of not damaging the human body.
@l-stevenazzi I heard about the invention of headrest because a friend of mine who attended the platinum path in iBicocca created a similar device and he was hired by Abarth to implement it.
As far as data analysis are concerned, people tend to give their personal datas too easily, for this reason it is important to teach them what kind of datas they should or shouldn’t communicate to do not have privacy problems.
I would like that datas will be analyzed in the medical field, to try to save lives. Thanks to data collected by IBM and the Watson computer, a lady at the end of her life with a rare type of leukemia, receive the therapy cure by this computer and she has recovered. This way of using data is very important because it could save lives.
Regarding the topic improving vs. inventing, I found so interesting the @lucabaldessarini ’s video I think improving is so important to reach the mass market but disruptive innovation, as you said, creates some more other innovation, because it destroys the balance created and open new business opportunities. I think the current two most important innovation are Artificial Intelligence, Blockchain.
What do you think? What are the most new technologies that could change our future lives?
Have a nice day!21 February 2018 at 21:23 #2300
Thank you for your interesting discussion, and thank you for mentioning the ‘disruptive innovation’.
I really like this topic, for this reason I have some questions for you, first of all, can you try to explain it using your own words? And give us at least one example of disruptive innovation. But, be careful, I don’t want the classical and most obvious one! Surprise us 😉 If you aren’t able to find a peculiar one, tell us what in your opinion could be a disruptive innovation and tell us why!
Moreover, I found this interesting article:
And so, I would like you to go in depth about the three reasons reported by Forbes:
Show me that you are able to have such interesting discussions, also with topic that are not related to technical stuffs, numbers and statistics !
Have a nice week,
- This reply was modified 1 year, 8 months ago by Stefania Tibiletti.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.