Privacy

With Facebook’s move to take over the internet and Google’s taking information from unsecure wi-fi networks, privacy has been in the news quite often lately. It seems that we are moving towards a world where privacy is greatly threatened (Yes, it’s a “Cracked” link).

That may be true that our current definition of privacy is coming to an end. I think it’s impossible for someone in my generation to go to a party and not have every single one of your friends know about it. The truth is that we are making choices that are leading us into a world that is more integrated, where information is readily available but where privacy is diminished. It seems as if we must make a choice between this greater access to data and the ability to keep our secrets.

However, it is our choice on where the boundaries are and we can control on how our data is going to get used.

I’m not taking a stance on what would be better here, but simply stating that we have a choice.

Bringing innovation to the masses

We’ve all seen the jokes on the internet about how much technology would cost you in the past. Obviously, the more powerful devices are getting cheaper as time goes by. A very powerful personal computer could still cost you around $5000, it would just be much faster than what that money could buy 10 years ago. However, with the advent of cheaper chips that are able to do a load of work, we are seeing that new devices themselves are getting cheaper.

 

This week, I came upon a January announcement of Kia’s Uvo system. This is based on Windows embedded technologies and will probably be very similar to Ford’s Sync system.

 

The Kia Optima will feature Uvo

Ford is thus coming to an end of its exclusivity deal with Microsoft. The automotive company now needs to add value to its product in order to keep its competitive edge. And this is what they are doing with the new MyFordTouch which will be, as far as I can tell, the most complete connectivity package ever found in a car. It will bridge everything, from your iPhone to your computer, enabling you to listen to music or having your passengers surf the web.

 

MyFordTouch will debut on the new Ford Focus

 

This brings me to my earlier point. Years before, this type of innovation would first be presented on cars that most people cannot afford. The early adopters would pay for the development costs of an unknown technology. Now, however, this is not new technology but a new application of things we are used too. We know it works, and while there is still a market risk, there are many more people able (and willing) to buy a Ford Focus than a 100K Audi A8.

 

There will still be new devices that will be insanely expensive at first. But we will see in the near future, smart developments of current tech that will be accessible to all.

The internet system (update)

I talked a little while ago about how internet access was important to anyone throughout Canada. Well Saturday, the Canadian government announced a $76.7 million in investment to bring broadband access to rural areas.

This is obviously positive but is not enough. The difference between Canada and most other developed countries is population density. Broadband networks are much more expensive to build here compared the gain a telecommunication company might get from it. What we would need is a true plan of development for our network infrastructures. We need it in order to stay competitive in this decade.

Creativity in a regulated environment

I work in the pharmaceutical industry and often times I hear about how we have a very rigid framework and how, at least on the production side, innovation is very limited. I’m guessing the same is true for the aerospace industry, the dairy industry or well, anything where the government has a say in what ends up in the consumer’s hands.

However, regulations are simply the limits of what you can do. Those guidelines are really the framework of any possible innovation. Indeed, in the quality department, we went from testing endotoxins in rabbits to finding a way to use horseshoe crab serum without even killing them. In the production department, our machines get insanely efficient while being safer than ever, both for the consumer and the operator.

Obviously, bad regulations might stifle innovation. A document saying that you must use a particular technique without giving an overarching rationale will have companies simply and stupidly applying the law. For example, the early interpretation of the 21 CFR Part 11 regulation, which aimed to put the basis of paperless systems within the pharmaceutical industry probably scared quite a few people out of using computers in their business with the FDA, at least for a while. However, when you know the reason, you will try to find better ways to achieve that goal. This is how we went from testing for contamination using century old Pasteur’s techniques to having the rapid microbiology machines.

Another thing that I feel a lot of people in the industry do not understand is that the FDA is on their side (interestingly enough, people outside the industry understand this and maybe take this fact to the other extreme). The first goal of any agency is to ensure the safety of the general public. The second goal of the agency is to insure the survival and the growth of the industry for which it was created. This means that, up to a point, agency will welcome any innovation that the companies make that result in both of their goals being met.