Jump The Curve Archives: 08/2007

Rapid Prototype Manufacturing: The Shape of Things to Come

The latest issue of Business 2.0 is dedicating to finding the next great disruptive companies. The lead article profiles 10 start-ups that the editor’s claims might challenge General Electric, AT&T, Microsoft and even Google. It’s an interesting article and I would encourage readers to pick up a copy.

As interesting as that article was, I was more intrigued by a separate article in the issue, one which highlighted the rapid rise of rapid prototype technology. If you are not familiar with the technology it is more commonly referred to as 3-D printing and it works by taking computer-aided-design (CAD) data and using that information to build physical objects layer-by-layer. In most cases layers of liquids or powdered plastics are deposited from a printer and then sintered together into a computer-generated shape using ultraviolet light or a laser beam.

Today, the leading companies in the field are 3D Systems and Stratasys, as well as two private companies—Z Corporation and Desktop Factory.

Interestingly, the latter is soon expected to begin producing a 3-D printer for $5,000 and the others have indicated that the price might drop to below $2,000 within the next few years.

To understand the significance of this development is important to know that just a decade ago such machines cost over $100,000 and were the purview of large companies like BMW and Boeing (NYSE: BA). Today, the cost has dropped to anywhere between $10,000 and $50,000 and the number of companies capable of purchasing these machines has increased correspondingly.

If the price continues to plummet, the number of companies using these machines—which can be used to manufacture everything from automobile and airplanes spare parts to custom-made plastics toys and personalized figurines of SecondLife avatars—could explode. This will be especially true as a new generation of designers comes to understand that they can easily create complex shapes and parts in order to produce new products that were previously too expensive, if not impossible, to previously manufacture.

To this end, Wohler Associates, a consulting specializing in tracking developing in the emerging field of rapid prototype manufacturing, has estimated that the market for rapid prototype machines will grow 360% to 15,000 units by 2012.

All in all those are numbers that bear watching, and if you’re involved in the manufacturing sector or if you’re a designer, this is a technology that will impact your business over the coming years.

Jack Uldrich is a writer, public speaker and host of jumpthecurve.net. He is the author of seven books, including Jump the Curve and The Next Big Thing is Really Small: How Nanotechnology Will Change the Future of Your Business. He is also a frequenter speaker on future trends, innovation, change management and executive leadership.

Enjoy this post? Bookmark at the following sites.

                           

Email This Article To A Friend   View/Add Comments

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, Robots and Your Future

I’d like to bring to your attention an excellent article from yesterday’s USA Today announcing that the U.S. Air Force will begin deploying a new generation of pilotless airplanes over Afghanistan this fall.

According to the article, General Atomics, the manufacturer of the unmanned aerial vehicle known as the Predator—which, you may recall, played a vital role in hunting down a key al-Qaeda leader in the summer of 2006—will replace it with a newer version, dubbed the Reaper.

What is so significant about the Reaper is that it can reportedly fly three times as fast as the Predator, carry eight times more weaponry and stay aloft eight times as long as a manned F-16. That is an extraordinary amount of progress, and it is why one official quoted in the article said, “This is the future.”

Now, this analogy isn’t perfect, but as I mentioned in this article I wrote for the Motley Fool recently entitled, Planes, Trains, Automobiles ... and Robots; technological progress will not merely be limited to unmanned aerial vehicles, it’ll likely carry over to the field of robotics as well. The U.S. Defense Department has already publicly stated that it expects fully one-third of the fighting force in 2015—in just 8 years—to consist of robots! That is a sea change of historic proportions.

My broader point is that both robots and UAV’s are experiencing near exponential growth, and as they continue to improve these technologies will revolutionize warfare, law enforcement, and border security.

Moreover, when these advances are combined with the improved capabilities of Google Earth and Google Maps (for instance by using UAVs and robots to take and download pictures), it could also transform industries as varied as the real estate market and commercial delivery. (For example, if a UAV can fly eight hours and drop a bomb right on a terrorist’s head, why couldn’t FedEx start using UAV’s to deliver non-essential cargo?) These are the types of opportunities the Exponential Executive needs to begin thinking about today!

Jack Uldrich is a writer, public speaker and host of jumpthecurve.net. He is the author of seven books, including Jump the Curve and The Next Big Thing is Really Small: How Nanotechnology Will Change the Future of Your Business. He is also a frequenter speaker on future trends, innovation, change management and executive leadership.

Enjoy this post? Bookmark at the following sites.

                           

Email This Article To A Friend   View/Add Comments

The Exponential Educator

Few people would disagree that the state of education in America is in poor condition. Unfortunately, all too often the debate for fixing the problem centers on stale old nostrums, including paying teachers more money and making class sizes smaller. Rarely, do people discuss how emerging technologies have the potential to enrich the educational experience for students and teachers alike.

Three articles from today’s news help paint a different and exciting picture of the future state of education. The first was reported in Physorg. Com and it discusses how scientists are using virtual reality goggles to study out-of-body experiences. Now, out-of-body experiences aren’t something I would yet recommend teaching young students about, but what the study does indicate is that virtual reality technology might soon be used to help “train people to do delicate ‘teleoperating’ tasks, such as performing surgeries remotely.”

My point is that if this technology can be used to help doctors learn how to perform surgery remote, there are surely other educational applications it can also be used for, such as studying human anatomy in a biology class.

The second article was an editorial by Michael Granof in the New York Times addressing the insanity of how the market for college textbook market currently exploits students. In short, Granof proposes rather than having students shell out between $100-$150 for a textbook; schools and universities instead license the intellectual content of the material. He makes a compelling case and it is an excellent example of jumping the curve.

The final item comes compliments of CNET. It is a piece entitled, “Is the digital pen mightier,” and it discusses how digital pens are getting exponential better. The technology might not yet be ready for mainstream use but, mark my word, the time is coming and the “Exponential Educator” needs to begin thinking today about how these exciting new technologies and ideas can be used tomorrow to enhance the educational experience.

Jack Uldrich is a writer, public speaker and host of jumpthecurve.net. He is the author of seven books, including Jump the Curve and The Next Big Thing is Really Small: How Nanotechnology Will Change the Future of Your Business. He is also a frequenter speaker on future trends, innovation, change management and executive leadership.

Enjoy this post? Bookmark at the following sites.

                           

Email This Article To A Friend   View/Add Comments

Google is Out of this World

In the marketplace section of today’s Wall Street Journal there is a fascinating article about the feasible of a space elevator. That’s right an elevator that would usher people and supplies 62,000 miles into geosynchronous orbit.  The article ends with a quote from a NASA official saying that the concept of a space elevator is really getting kids excited about space and, by extension, the physical sciences.

Well, just today, Google (Nasdaq: GOOG) announced another application that holds great potential in getting kids excited about space. Dubbed “Sky in Google Earth,” the application allows users to explore the universe from the comfort of their chair. According to Google officials, “it’s like having a giant, virtual telescope at your command—your own personal planetarium.”

Now, at first glance, putting a personal planetarium into people’s homes might not seem like the ideal vehicle for generate advertising revenue, but I think this is a shortsighted view. It is well-known that schools all across the country are facing budget crunches. Under such tough financial straits, what is one of the first extracurricular activities to get whacked? Often it is things like the annual visit to the local planetarium.

To the extent that Sky Google allows teachers to continue to educate children in their classroom, I believe the company’s technology will continue to grow as a legitimate and welcomed addition to most classrooms. This strategy of introducing products into the classroom in order to better familiarize future consumer with their technology is one that Microsoft , Intel, and IBM, among others, have successfully employed in the past.

In Google’s case, though, as more teachers use the tool, the company is essentially getting an army of teachers to educate the next generation of its users to Google’s many other applications—applications, I might add, that do generate revenue.

I don’t mean to imply that Google has manufactured this application for entirely philanthropic purposes. I am sure that Sky Google can be used to pitch the legions of space enthusiasts who will undoubtedly spend a good deal of time on the site ogling the Crab Nebula and other assorted extraterrestrial wonders; but given its overriding educational value I think Google is probably comfortable bidding its time until it figures out how use the tool to drive future revenues out of this world. I also think it is a good example of exponential thinking.

Jack Uldrich is a writer, public speaker and host of jumpthecurve.net. He is the author of seven books, including Jump the Curve and The Next Big Thing is Really Small: How Nanotechnology Will Change the Future of Your Business. He is also a frequenter speaker on future trends, innovation, change management and executive leadership.

Enjoy this post? Bookmark at the following sites.

                           

Email This Article To A Friend   View/Add Comments

A Debate about the Future

Is this the direction we’re headed?

This past Sunday I watched the Democratic presidential candidate debate held at my alma mater, Drake University. I did the same thing earlier in the month when the Republican candidates spoke at the university. Instead of finding inspiration, I came away from both debates with the sense that something important was missing from each. Specifically, no candidate approaches today’s important issues of health care, education, the environment and war from the perspective that the near-term future of all of these issues will almost certainly will be different-and perhaps radically so-because of the accelerating pace of technological change.

Let me provide just a few recent examples. Last week, the Pentagon reported that it had begun arming robots with guns for the first time ever. The following day it announced that it intended to triple the number of robots in battlefield situations by 2010. And by 2015-a date that would place it near the end of the next president’s second term-the Defense Department has publicly stated that it expects one-third of the U.S. fight force to consist of robots.

If this holds true, it will be a shift of historic proportions and it would be helpful to have the current crop of future would-be commanders-in-chief explain their thinking on the morality of machines making life-and-death decisions and, more broadly, whether they think the wide-scale use of robots will lead to more or less wars like the one we are now engaged in Iraq.

Earlier this week another scientific advance with profound public policy implications was announced when a handful of publications touted the remarkable amount of progress scientists are making in creating artificial life forms. According to the reports, most experts agreed that it is reasonable to expect a breakthrough in this field in the next three to 10 years and one scientist was even quoted as saying “We’re talking about a technology that could change our world in pretty fundamental ways.”

To my way of thinking, anything that can change our world in “pretty fundamental ways” is appropriate fodder for a presidential debate. These synthetic life forms are purported to be capable of wonderful things like fighting disease and efficiently creating new forms of clean, sustainable energy. They might also, however, be used for more nefarious purposes. At a minimum, it would be helpful to hear how those now wishing to lead this country think about this issue and whether they want to boldly lead us into this brave new world or, alternatively, prevent scientists from even attempting to explore synthetic biology’s potential.

Lastly, hardly a day seems to go by without some new advance being touted in the field of computers, Internet technology, voice recognition software, and the development of new immersive virtual reality and social networking technologies. It is not much of a stretch to think that these advances will deeply alter the educational environment of the future. Yet instead of hearing a word about how any of these new technologies might impact education, all too often we are offered only stale platitudes about an issue all the candidates claim is at or near the top of their agenda.

Not all of the blame for failing to address the future can be laid at the feet of the candidates. Few in the media attempt to pose thoughtful questions along these lines and most citizens are more naturally concerned with more immediate issues that confront them on a daily basis. Alas, these are merely excuses. One true test of leadership is a person’s ability to think about the future and, when appropriate, begin preparing others for a new future. A debate offers the perfect forum to achieve both goals.

Isaac Asimov once wrote, “It is change, continuing change, inevitable change, that is the dominant factor in society today. No sensible decision can be made any longer without taking into account not only the world as it is, but the world as it will be. This, in turn, means that our statesmen, our businessmen, our everyman must take on a science fictional way of thinking.”

Well, yesterday’s science fiction-the stuff of robotic warriors, artificial life forms and virtual reality-is quickly becoming today’s science fact. Future debates have the potential to both enlighten and educate, but in order to achieve this goal the candidates, the media, and the public need to first adopt a more “science fictional way of thinking.”

Jack Uldrich is a Drake graduate. He is the author of numerous books and his forthcoming book, Jump the Curve: 50 Strategies for Dealing with Emerging Technologies, is due out in 2008. He formerly worked in Governor Jesse Ventura’s cabinet as the director of the office of strategic and long-range planning.

Enjoy this post? Bookmark at the following sites.

                           

Email This Article To A Friend   View/Add Comments