ippisl

One feature that could help this: verifying that the account holder is the one using the computer, before showing results.

Without this, assuming this plugin is always-on on all the computers one uses, breaking user's privacy just becomes too easy.

And there's a lot of data one might want to leave private except porn(and usually don't post them in facebook): medical issues, sexual issues, marriage and some other relationship issues, drugs issues and probably others.

Shedskin might be one solution. From the shedskin forum[1]: " I've built and run shedskin apps for the iPhone - it works great actually.

It required commenting a few things out, and swapping in the boehm gc for iOS port.

Of course, no native ui widgets available - but I used phonegap to do the ui in html5 and it called shedskin c++ for all the actual app logic. Phonegap supports connecting html5 -> native c++ via a plugin architecture. Works wonderfully.

High powered, efficient apps on the iPhone via python is a bit of paradise compared to apples own obj-c, I must say. Huge potential for shedskin adoption there if someone packaged things up this way for the general public..."

[1] http://groups.google.com/group/shedskin-discuss/browse_threa...

From their homepage:

Access to Python libs

Mypy will support accessing Python modules from mypy programs, running in the stock CPython virtual machine for the best compatibility. You can also access your existing Python code.

This website is aimed at web startups. Their general way of operation is quite different from let's say medical device startups.

So people working in both types of firms are quite different. So my guess is this is just the wrong forum.

But i think medical device startups are doing fine[1].

[1]http://atpbio.wordpress.com/2012/07/27/positive-vc-investmen...

At the academic level , there seems to be a "space race". Maybe it could be improved by making the NIH invest in more radical high risk stuff.

But the commercialization process sure sucks. Testing and verifying a drug is expensive, long and complex. But there seem to be some work going to improve that:

1. The FDA is becoming a bit more friendly[1]. 2. There are some new innovations in how to run clinical trials. One example is [2].They claim they might bring drugs 1-3 years faster to market. 3. Organs on a chip are starting to become available and this might be more accurate than the mouse models used today.

Since some of the new innovations in clinical trials do use web/mobile technology, i wonder what role startups can take in this area.

[1]http://www.xconomy.com/national/2012/09/10/the-fda-turns-fri... [2]http://disruptiveinnovationsinclinicaltrials.blogspot.co.il/...

The OP has got something right and something wrong. Yes replacing all of healthcare with machines is not possible today. But we know that in order to capture the full benefits of a technology, usually a new business needs to be started, because old businesses are resistant to changes. That's true inside and outside of healthcare.

And about the role of doctors: Pilots do also have huge responsibility. Part of them being responsible is being able to defer themselves to checklists, to algorithms and to machines when needed, which is practically always in their profession.

Doctors resist that need. They resist checklists. They resist expert systems. They resist evidence based medicine(why else is evidence based medicine so slow ?).

How would healthcare looks if our the people who treated us stopped resisting to those factors?

Isn't this normal ? It was the same with the industrial revolution.Those new innovation enabled shitty factories on a mass scale.

One could even say it was the same in the beginning of the automotive revolution: In the 30's cars we're nice and all , but the new powerful motors and radios enabled nazism and tanks and blietzkrieg more than prosperity.

Maybe it's common : Some get fast insight on the use of new technologies and create huge inequality, but with time and struggle societies adapt and better use those technologies.

If we accept the point that were just in the middle of the transition , and look a little bit forward, we'll see:

1960 -> 2025

Air travel -> life quality telepresence and group meetings globally

Expensive education -> free, high quality education for all

Antibiotics are great(but easy) -> tons of very difficult medical innovations(transplants,printing organs,cancer treatments,diagnostics, AI in medicine ...)

Everything needs workers -> So much can be done automatically, at extremely cheaper cost and extremely rapid pace.

Dirty energy -> Clean energy at competitive price(at least available if not deployed)

Manual cars -> automated cars (?)

We love lucy -> Extreme variety of content

Monopoly -> addictive digital experiences

It's easy to see big changes when you look over 60 years.

Does this speed still matters for people who aren't gamers ? Isn't the experience already "good enough" ?

I wonder if it's part of a strategy of creating a huge userbase and alot of content and data all of which will help you lead the field in the future(and be the most profitable). And nothing helps more to create this sorts of things than "free".

>> they kill all incentive to work hard and to innovate

At that time, the USSR was pretty advanced technologically. And it's citizens we're and still are pretty advanced academically.

One explanation why the soviet system failed was due to inefficiency in investing in oil production(which led to a mini soviet peak oil), because the wrong incentives at the institutional level.

But wrong incentives at the institutional levels are pretty common in capitalistic countries: the 2008 crisis is one example.

>> Why are we paying so much for tablets in the US?

Because of few factors:

1. It's relatively hard to find a Chinese tablet that can you be sure it has good quality. That's what branding is for, but chinese tablets don't have good branding.

2. Marketing does help to sell products. Promotion is needed.

I think that other vendors are using two chips by putting them inside one package. I don't think anybody else made the cpu and rf sections on the chip yet. also nice is that the rf is made using digital technology which benefits from moore's law.

It parses java source code.

http://code.google.com/p/j2objc/wiki/Motivation?tm=6

>>What are the obstacles to the transition? How can they be mitigated or avoided? What can we, as engineers and entrepreneurs, do to make it happen faster and smoother?

Few things i can think of are:

1.Focus on solving the problem of basic living as cheaply as possible, to enable moving to different system a political and practical reality and create some sort of stability for a world in transition.

One idea: focus on solving problem for the poor and the third world. They are a good market for cheap products.

2.If we learn from the history of the of the industrial revolution, achieving a good change will be very politically dependent. We cannot assume blind "technological optimism". So one way is to think how do we create a political change.

One idea: focus on technologies that automate lawyers out of a job. The lawyers will create political pressure.

3.I think that many engineers/entrepreneurs lack exposure to problems and knowledge needed to create the transition, so instead they're thinking on facebook apps.

Ideas:Build a database of real problems and projects for engineers/entrepreneurs to work on,find some way to break big problems into small one, and share knowledge or built communities for this.

4.One big obstacle to the transition is existing power structures. Hacking regulatory barriers that prevent disruptive innovation seems a solution here.

I'm not sure: "we want to make money when people use our devices, not when they buy our devices" is true.

Amazon does makes a decent margin above the marginal cost of the $299 kindle fire HD and on the kindle fire HD LTE: http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-blogs/other/4395833/BOM-b...

It's hard to tell if they profit even after including fixed costs, but they might.

But pricing it's low end model slightly above it's BOM is a signal to competitors: "we don't care to profit from sales, if you'll compete, you'll lose".

One path is people working , that need to learn something(say machine learning) for their jobs, and doing so online with the knowledge of their workplace.

If the result is good , it'll warm some workplaces to online courses.

Another path is using the fact that graduates of online courses can achieve a specific learning goal much cheaper and much shorter(in some jobs people don't need a full degree , only some courses). This opens a path for cheaper employees for companies and a solution for the talent crunch. Maybe some more venturesome companies will start using it. And the word will get out and it will become more common.

drone, does 30 workers needed for 30,000 units a month for this makes sense ? it seems pretty high for an automated process.

Are there technologies that give advantages to large groups of doctors over small clinics or make it preferable to doctors to create large groups ? Large groups have access to a large pool of customers so they can offer different business models.

Are there technologies that enable medical "self-service" or less dependance on doctors ?

I think medicare has started a "fee for package" program(instead of paying for services, you pay for a complete treatment around a single medical event - let's say knee surgery + including all services - for a single fee). Are there technologies that can help such implementations ?

Are there any technologies that can help places more receptive to medical change(like africa[1])? with time the experience gained there could be integrated in other places.

How can you make medical tourism a more popular choice or better choice? if it would be popular , more insurance companies would offer it and would pressure the medical establishment for improvement.

But we do know that good IT implementation do help:

"There is significant evidence that CDSS can positively impact healthcare providers' performance with drug ordering and preventive care reminder systems as most clear examples." (from a literature review)[1]

[1]http://jamia.bmj.com/content/18/3/327.short

>> people are generally more comfortable and willing to submit personal information to a fellow human who they know and trust

There was some research(can't find it now) , that show that filling an automated form is a good way to make patient elicit personal embarrassing info that they wouldn't offer via chat.

>> difference between a little old lady with a problem, and a little old lady who's just lonely

First that's a nurse can easily do. And maybe, hopefully we'll find ways to solve the loneliness issue.

hurrah for insulinoma diagnosis:)

I think that even rare disease diagnosis can be done better by algorithms by using Isabel healthcare's diagnostic system[1] or Watson(in the future).

The place where a human will contribute the most is the interpersonal stuff:motivating people, digging data from people(although computers compete there[2]) and administering placebo.

And of course doing the physical stuff.

But that seems very different from the job of a doctor and closer to the job of a nurse.

[1]http://www.isabelhealthcare.com/home/default [2]There was some research that showed that people give more personal information to a computed form than via face to face chat with a doc.

Kaiser is a rare gem in the u.s. healthcare system, and the reason is that they are integrated system: they integrate insurance with treatment.

Since Kaiser if payed a fixed sum and not a fee for service it has motivation to reduce costs, hence the expert system.

Patients at Kaiser also stay for the long haul(who wants to switch doctors?), so it makes sense for Kaiser to invest in prevention, and they do.

Finally, Kaiser is an NGO, which i'm sure helps to keep they're priorities straight.

Maybe Kaiser is a good target for startups ?

According to [1] we spend only 16% on drugs and devices. Maybe they didn't include meds you get at a hospital but still it seem that medical services take a big share of the cost.

Also, assuming technology can give better treatments , it can lower the drugs needed and their costs.

[1]http://www.examiner.com/article/health-care-reform-historica...

While it's a big technical achievement, in a world when companies are talking about 4G LTE bill of materials of $50 [1] for a picostation(roughly 20mhz) and vodaphone setting targets for $100(my guess for a full device) , where does this fit in ?

[1]http://www.rethink-wireless.com/2010/09/07/picochip-femtocel...

Assuming the internet can't give a better customer support in the long term(at least from the knowledge side) is a wrong assumption.

Somebody can surely design an high quality expert system for consumer electronics , that asks you some questions and helps you choose good products.

Uber is a small company. Google is big enough to pay politicians. I don't think political opposition will be a big problem.

One factor that increases housing prices is that people are competing on houses near good schools, because of the importance of education.

But education might become less dependent on geography(by using remote ed tech) or in some scenarios(better AI) much less important, which will indirectly reduce housing costs.

Another option is a growing availability of remote jobs and better remote social lives( remote telepresence and video conferencing, access to great and varied food through sous-vide, generally better digital experiences) might also decrease the demand for city life.

First, This is not a criticism of google.

Google , which is relatively generous, gave 2.1% of it's profits in 2010 to charities, which is $180 million.

So i wouldn't say google or larry page "devote" their life to doing good.

And i wouldn't say that there's a trend of ex entrepreneurs trying to help others. maybe donating here and there.

First, at the start of the industrial revolution, people who had to leave their home in the country and come to the city to look for work, had to work very long hours for subsistence pay.

This has only changed with the rise of the labor movement, and a general shift in democratic societies towards a welfare state.

So for a huge positive technological revolution, societal change is needed.

In fact, i think that today we have the right technologies to solve many of the world's problems, just the wrong politics and societal order(globally). Just look at education,healthcare,global hunger, the subprime crisis. The biggest barriers there are political, legal and societal.

And yes, "Humans are a bottomless pit of wants". But that didn't helped the loyal employee - the horse. After the industrial revolution they were left unemployed and sadly went to the glue factory.