Student

Through my journey as a MIS major, blockchain was always the buzzword. The article, CIOS, You’re Doing Blockchain Wrong, explains that IT leaders implement blockchain to their organization(s) but do not use it to its full advantage or purpose. A survey, published by Gartner, emphasizes that CIOs use blockchain for shared record keeping and asset racing. Blockchain is not solely used as a decentralized ledger, which was the original concept of blockchain. Avivah Litan, Gartner vice president, highlights, “That no one is using those innovative features calls into question why they’re using blockchain. Just go use a database. . . But, the reason they’re using blockchain is for the distributed ledger technology.” Litan also summarizes that because the technology does not meet the business expectations, dissatisfaction spreads to IT leaders. Also, there is a misalignment of real-world requirements to enterprise projects as a result. CIOS, You’re Doing Blockchain Wrong concludes through the mention that blockchain is still not yet mature enough to fulfill all enterprise use cases.

Amazon Go has been one of the most prominent examples of successful business applications of IoT technologies. Computer vision and machine learning are at the core of this technology.

Technologies have replaced human cashiers; shoppers are automatically billed via the credit card connected to their Amazon account, detected as they leave through the gates. Multiple people can shop on the same person’s account by scanning in the account holder’s phone again, and in-store cameras recognize that person as authorized.

A major goal is to reduce queuing times at cashiers by adding automation technology to in-person retail.

Items for sale consist mainly of grab-and-go lunch options such as yogurt, meat sandwiches, and salads. Weight sensors detect when items are taken or put back onto shelves. Products placed back on shelves are automatically deleted from the shopper’s virtual cart. Hundreds of cameras follow shoppers around the store, able to distinguish between different shoppers by body type, although the company insists there is no facial recognition used. During a test phase, children placing items on incorrect shelves proved an unanticipated challenge.

Reference

www.cbronline.com/news/amazon-go-internet-of-things-retail

This article discusses Disney’s additional investment into virtual reality (VR) entertainment after the release of their first VR short film “Cycles.” This investment shows Disney’s commitment to further exploring the technology and how it might change the way they provide entertainment. In an interview commenting on this article, Ben Fox Rubin summarizes the VR industry with the “chicken or the egg” analogy. I found this to be a very interesting and appropriate comparison. At this point, VR technology has been available for a few years, yet there has not been as much adoption as you might expect. A lot of people are waiting for worthwhile content to be available on VR before they buy headsets and the content creators are waiting for people to purchase VR gear before they invest in creating entertainment. This, I believe, is why there is not widespread consumer adoption of VR technology. More firms like Disney need to provide a collection of content significant enough to drive consumers to purchase the gear. I think if Disney makes this move, it could provide them a first-mover advantage. Especially if they pair it with the new streaming platform Disney+ they are working on.

Do you think VR is the next big thing in the entertainment industry? If so, why do you think it hasn’t seen widespread adoption? If not, why do you think it will fail?

– Drew Holt

Michael Sorokach

While we are currently in the “developmental” stage of self-driving cars, advances are constantly being made. One of the biggest concerns with the technology in its current state is how safe it is, with Tesla running into a few problems with its Autopilot feature being an example. However, one of the end goals of self-driving cars is to make roads safer, as a computer is able to react more quickly and accurately than a human. A computer is also much less likely to become distracted with text messages or drive intoxicated.

While this is beneficial for society as a whole, it poses a real challenge to the auto insurance industry. Over 90% of all vehicle accidents are caused by human error, so removing the human from the equation will have a massive effect on the insurance industry. The insurance industry will have to evolve to survive in a world where their current revenue model will not be feasible, barring massive downsizing by companies.

What are some ways that insurance companies can adapt? Can major players in the industry such as GEICO and Progressive still exist at their current size, or will they be forced to shrink? Will fewer providers be able to exist in the new market?

Sources:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-19/autonomous-vehicles-may-one-day-kill-car-insurance-as-we-know-it

https://www.wired.com/story/tesla-autopilot-safety-report-statistics/

Nik Fuchs

A recent article from Fortune Magazine highlighted a new, ground-breaking use for the Amazon Echo. The increasingly popular smart-home device now has a new purpose in the healthcare industry, specifically at Cedars-Sinai Hospital in Los Angeles. The hospital has launched a pilot program in which an Alexa-powered platform, called Aviva, can be used for a multitude of bedside assistance for patients, such as turning on the TV, calling for a nurse, or requesting specific medication – all completed with voice activation. Previously, nurses were needed for even menial tasks like turning on the TV, but with this new technology, nurses can focus their attention on more important tasks. 

So how does it work? According to the announcement from Cedars-Sinai, once a patient makes a request “[it] is routed to the mobile phone of the appropriate caregiver, whether a nurse, clinical partner, manager or administrator. A pain medicine request would be routed to a registered nurse, for example, while a bathroom request would be routed to a clinical partner. If the request is not answered in a timely manner, the Aiva platform sends it up the chain of command.“

As other hospitals begin to adopt smart devices into their services, what are some risks they might need to consider before launching Alexa enabled solutions? Is this a good investment for hospitals to make? What other smart home devices might hospitals want to consider as well?

References

http://fortune.com/2019/02/26/cedars-sinai-hospital-is-using-amazon-alexa-in-patients-hospital-rooms/

https://www.cedars-sinai.org/newsroom/cedars-sinai-taps-alexa-for-smart-hospital-room-pilot/

 Balancing our privacy against the benefits of data monitoring and tracking is a question that has become increasingly important in today’s IT environment. With the growing use and creation of “smart” technology, be it a smart phone, a smart house, or smart clothing, IT companies are inserting themselves more and more into our personal lives. This is not to say that this is a bad thing, in many cases it is not. Having apps that can track our heart rate, or insulin levels, etc. can have significantly positive, if not life-saving, influences on our day-to-day lives. However, in all of these instances where technology is becoming a part of our lives, it is being welcomed. An issue arises when companies use their technology to discreetly gather information about us that we otherwise would not have known they can access. A very recent example of this is a secret microphone that was found on Google’s Nest product. For those who are not familiar, the Nest is a smart home thermostat capable of learning your preferences and being controlled remotely online through an application. There is no reason for a microphone to be a part of this product, at least not one that doesn’t provides the user with some increased capability. This opens many questions as to why the microphone was there, why Google did not disclose that the microphone was a part of the product, and what information could Google – and did Google – gather from having this microphone in the homes of millions.

It is my opinion that in the end, this smart technology is better for the progress of society than the bad that comes with it. However, as a society we have to cautious about the access we give companies to our lives and to not set any unfortunate precedents legally under the belief that we “have nothing to hide”. Overall, we should welcome smart technology as a medium through which to simplify our complex lives, but be very careful about when the trade-off between simplicity and privacy becomes too much. Additionally, because of how much companies have to gain by obtaining unfettered access into our lives, we should meet all of these requests for access with skepticism and thorough review. This would be to avoid situations similar to the microphone in the Nest, as well as any other future intrusions into our lives. 

http://fortune.com/2019/02/21/privacy-group-to-ftc-divest-google-of-nest-over-hidden-mic/

1) Do you watch more than ten hours of streaming media on the go a week?

Streaming media is the biggest reason to switch to one of the foldable phones thanks to the increased screen size. If you’re a commuter or you watch a lot of movies, these are designed to make you salivate. The average screentime is ten hours for Netflix per week or five hours if you subscribe to Amazon or Hulu [CNBC/GBH Insights]. As 5G rolls out expect huge pushes from all side to watch more video and stream more content than ever before.

2) Are you ok with being a guinea pig?

Foldable phones have a lot of unknowns; performance, screen durability, battery life and other issues. While the promise is good (multiple batteries, fast charging, we all know there are realities with these issues). If you are ok being the early testers for this category, head to the next question. If you don’t, think carefully about how these issues could impact your life.

3) Does spending $2000 on a phone seem cheap to you?

The other reason is, of course, that you have too much money and need a place to spend it. Go forth and support the economy.

In reality, most consumers will simply want to try it out or want a bigger phone. The issue for foldable phones is whether they are as easy to use at tablets or will concessions needs to be made. There are already rumblings of creases being visible which will spoil any content shown on it. Are phones destined to be foldable? Not at all. Dual-screen phones have not seen the traction many thought they would and with all the ‘screens are bad’ rhetoric bouncing around the various echo chambers, a push for these to become mainstream will take time and a lot of ad-dollars. Most people will likely plump for a bigger single-screen phone like the iPhone XS Max thanks to the current price-point and lack of killer use case for foldable ones.

Source:https://www.forbes.com/sites/paularmstrongtech/2019/02/25/how-to-decide-if-you-need-a-foldable-phone-that-costs-2000/#bfaa2e0774b4

The New York Times article “Don’t Fight the Robots. Tax Them.” discusses the current and future states of automation. Automation is a hot topic, because it’s increasingly common and increasingly threatening jobs. The benefits of automation supposedly come in the form of increased productivity, but that isn’t always the case. Despite rapidly increasing automation, productivity growth is slow, both in the US and around the world in other developed countries. The reason for the divide falls on the tax code; even if robotics and automation offer no productivity or quality advantage, they can still be a good investment for the company, because of tax subsidies to support automation. These tax subsidies have two main forms in the US: for one, 1/3rd of all tax dollars collected by the federal government are payroll taxes on employers, which can be reduced by firing employees and replacing them with automation for which the company doesn’t need to pay taxes. The second way automation is subsidized is by tax laws allowing investments in robotics to be depreciated faster than wages. These tax laws need to be changed to encourage companies to automate when it provides business value, and not just to save on taxes. 

So far, South Korea is the only country to impose any sort of tax on robotics, in the form of reducing tax deductions from investments in automation. The EU and US have rejected similar laws. Changing these tax laws would be hugely beneficial to the American people, because on top of the 33% of taxes that come from payroll taxes on employers, 50% of the federal government’s tax revenue comes from income tax. That means that as more of the labor market is replaced by automation, government tax revenue will fall, while the demand for government services will increase with unemployment and underemployment. Until tax laws are changed, American workers will continue to lose jobs to robots, and the federal government will have less and less money to support its citizens.