Week 11

Technology Assessment and Forecasting: Framework for Understanding What is Coming Next

The week’s lesson kicked off again with a few videos, and one which particularly caught my attention was the video which basically summarised the past 10 lessons into slightly over 6 minutes.
Some future technologies it mentioned is saltwater energy. By directing radioactive waves at saltwater, the water will burn at high temperatures, producing lots of heat energy which can in turn be converted into other forms of energy. The speaker also mentioned how our fingers in the future, could be an electronic passport. I would definitely look forward to that happening, since the whole immigration process would drastically be shortened (amen!). Also, it’s easier to lose a passport than to lose your finger, right? So hopefully crimes related to identity theft and human trafficking would be reduced. But maybe that would take identity crime to a whole new level because instead of stealing your passport, people would knock you out (if you’re lucky) and chop off your finger. So there won’t just be organ trafficking, but finger trafficking. Oh my word.
Another possible future technology is interactive mind gear, which allows you to control the game with your mind. I can foresee gaming heading in that direction from Wii to Kinect, to just using your mind to control the game. It’s all in your head~ But if it’s really true that gaming promotes violence, and if you have to play these games with your mind, would that mean that we’ll have a lot more psychos in this world who cannot differentiate reality from the gaming universe?
Another forecast is that electric cars would progress to. hydrogen cars, and eventually to cars that run on just water, or salt water. That would allow us to use the water that covers 70% of earth.
It was mentioned in the video that a $1000 laptop will double it’s capacity every year, and that’s true because comparing the prices that I’ve paid over the years for my computers and laptops, the difference is simply….. I hope the next time I purchase my new macbook with the same capacity, I’ll only have to pay less than $1k, yay!

One thing about technology assessment and forecasting, is how do you differentiate between technology that will be only be around for a brief period of time, and ones that will stick around longer? See the potential and ability to change the world and truly change lifestyles and how it affects economic, social, environmental etc. How to decide when to, and whether to invest in the R&D for a particular innovation? Need to prioritize limited resources.

During his presentation, Wen Cong mentioned that the goal of forecasting is not to predict the future, but to tell you what you need to know to take meaningful action in the present. And that was an interesting and new perspective

Kevin’s presentation was also thought-inciting. When I graduate, would what I learn still be relevant? What jobs will exist 20 years from now? What is the future of work? Would we have to be super smart, and we now have no excuse for not knowing anything now, because you can Google, Yahoo or Bing it. Moreover, the world of business is becoming more competitive, you can’t just get ahead, you have to get further ahead. And I think that is why forecasting is so important, so that you can stay at the forefront in this highly competitive world. Given the current brand saturation, technology and forecasting will help keep your brand at the forefront. Currently, brands are going mobile and using apps to market themselves, and I enjoy all the ‘discounts’ that are offered on facebook and apps. And in terms of shopping, I am definitely looking forward to how new technology will influence and affect the already entertaining branding campaigns.

Week 10

This week’s topic is emerging technologies. I found this lesson really interesting and engaging, since a lot of things that we saw in class were really unexpected and innovative and I guess because of this, there was a lot more class participation, which was really refreshing.

One of the videos we watched in class was about flexible microchip plastics arising from nanotechnology. Basically, with this ‘flexible’ technology, we could have flexible ebook readers, and maybe even microchip contact lenses. One good way to use this technology to save the environment, would be to make newspapers out of this flexible plastic microchip. You can read newspapers like you usually would, but you wouldn’t have to buy the newspapers everyday because your existing papers’ content will change daily automatically! Save the trees! \:D/

Another video shown in class is Siemens’ vision of the future: smart buildings and smart cars with seamless integration, and also driverless cars (woohoo!!! I won’t need to get my license then). You can charge your car when it’s a home, so that you’ll never run out of ‘fuel’. Siemens’ vision, like Airbus’ vision for the aviation industry, greatly depends on innovations and radical changes to where we obtain our energy from for the vision to be realised.

I found that the quality of this lesson’s presentations really high, and the topics chosen were really intriguing. Charles presented on the product Microsoft Surface, which was first launched in 2007, and later updated in 2011. It’s something new to me because it is used in the USA mostly, in the food & beverage industry like bars and restaurants. I feel that this product has great potential, as it helps increase convenience, and would be best used for project meetings, school use, coffee table at home, family bonding time. But what really stops it from becoming the top IT product of 2011 is its affordability. When it was first launched, it went for $15,000. And while it has now been reduced to $7,600, it’s still not a sum many people are willing to pay for. Perhaps if it were more portable, will it be more pervasive? But if it were portable, then wouldn’t it be like another tablet, another iPad or Galaxy Tab? Some food for thought: is this an interim? Will we progress from touch surfaces to something even more interactive? I cannot perceive what will happen in the future, but I’m pretty satisfied with the current technology and my iphone.

Gideon presented on the future of air travel (2050), based on a report by Airbus. The ideas presented are very, very cool. And definitely changed the way I look at air travel, and what I expect of the aviation industry in the future. But these ideas and innovations can only be made a reality only if there are drastic improvements in fuel efficiency. And as discussed previously, there are some up and coming new renewable energy sources, but we’re still too reliant on our fuel and coal for all the ideas discussed during the presentation to be fully realised by 2050. For Airbus’ ideas to be made a reality by 2050, it was mentioned that a better integration of airplane producers to their suppliers, and their suppliers’ supplier must be made, to reduce waste and cut down existing impacts on the environment. Moreover, there has be a convergence of technologies to create this possible new experience when flying. But really, we’re mostly limited by our impacts on the environment. And that is why the Concorde plane is not used for commercial travelling, because of the enormous amounts of noise pollution and the nitrogen oxides that it produces that degrades the environment. Till then, till we can overcome this hurdle of environmental pollution and finding a stable, affordable source of energy can we move forward.

The ideas put forward by Airbus are really innovative, but by then in 39 years in 2050, will we have teleportation that will make air travel unnecessary? Even if there were teleportation, I will not be the one of those who will be clamouring to try it out, because I’m afraid that I’ll be splinched, like what happened to Ron in Harry Potter. What happens if I teleport and then my eyes are left behind???? The horror!!!

 

Week 9

This week’s topic is Energy and World Change: Past, Present and Future.

What can we do without energy? Nothing. The USA’s interest in the politics in Middle East goes beyond the fear of terrorism, but also due to energy security. Securing enough energy for the present and future is paramount to safeguard and maintain maintain our current standard of living and ensuring that our country can progress. But we’ve become so dependent on oil and fossil fuels, and worrying about our ability to attain them that we’ve sorely neglected the renewable energy.

We don’t have to worry that somebody’s going to steal the sunlight or take away the wind from us. So why are we not tapping these two sources of energy? The energy from the Sun in a hour is said to be greater than the amount of energy consumed by the world in one year. Biomass produces 2 GWh/km2a, Wind 50 GWh/km2a and Photovoltaic being 170 GWh/km2a. Given these statistics, one would think that many governments in the world would be pumping money into solar energy research. But nope, nothing like that happening at all. Or not happening enough anyway.

I truly admire Europe’s goal to make 20% of the energy consumption come from renewable sources. Germany is especially outstanding, with 6.3% of electricity produced from renewable energy in 2000, to approximately 17% in 2010. Germany can definitely reach the EU’s goal, and even go beyond it to 30% by 2020. Another goal is to make biofuels replace 10% of current petroleum and fuel needs, with strict policies on biofuel. I feel that Singapore should follow the EU’s lead. Along the Autobahn in Germany is a wall of solar panels. Why can’t we have something similar along all the highways and expressways? It may even act as a sound-barrier for the unfortunately dwellers living by the CTE who have to tolerate the noise pollution from all the cars right outside their window.

After all that talk about solar energy, I did a quick Google search on how to set up your own solar energy system in Singapore and the results were inconclusive. Even if the government didn’t provide subsidies, I wish that they would at least point us in the right direction as to where we could get the solar panels from a trustworthy dealer, or put up some sort of clear guide as to how you can set up your own system.

In the midst of the Google searches, I came across this article here. Punggol was branded Singapore’ first eco-town, a test-bed for new green technology and Kenny shared in class some of the existing ones, such as how they’ve got a recycled water system in place to help save water. And while these things may not be possible for the older and existing HDB blocks (unless extensive upgrading works take place), it’s nice to know that the government is making some effort. Hopefully we’ll be seeing more of these solar panels not just in the other HDB blocks in Punggol, but also in the other parts of the country. And like what we discussed in class, for solar energy to really take off in Singapore, we need a nationwide roll-out scheme similar to that like the fibre broadband roll-out. I’m sure many Singaporeans would welcome that with open arms. Who wouldn’t want to enjoy their air-con without having to worry about the electricity bill?

Overall, I feel that Singapore is really lacking in terms of renewable energy. The old excuse of solar panels being too excuse is quickly wearing thin, since much progress has been made in this area. We now have solar nanotechnology, where solar-absorbing nano-ink is set onto thin metal sheets, so these panels can be made for approximately a tenth of what current panels cost.

Singapore has to move from the 3Rs (Reuse, Reduce and Recycle), to incorporating a completely green lifestyle. And as usual, Singaporeans won’t do anything on their own. We need somebody to lay out and do everything for us, then will we make the change. So please Mr. Government, I don’t mind if my google search doesn’t load in 0.01 seconds, I’m happy with my existing internet speed. Please install solar panels for me instead, thanks.

Individual Topical Review Paper Draft 1

Digitalising music: Changing the way it’s distributed and the resulting implications: The way we listen to music, and the effects on the recorded-music industry

Executive Summary

The aim of this paper is to analyse how the introduction of digital recorded music has revolutionised the music industry.

The business dynamics in the music industry is rapidly evolving, with new developments in technology that change the very way we ‘consume’ our music. And this change has had a domino effect, culminating in piracy that has greatly changed the landscape of this industry.

This paper will look at music industry before digital recorded music became available, the market today and also future considerations. The effects, both positive and negative, caused by this change will be addressed, and what the future will hold for this dynamic industry will be discussed.

Background/Introduction

We now possess the ability to preview MP3s before purchasing, to buy music online, and to store hundreds and thousands of songs in a pocket-sized device.

This increase in accessibility has the industry at a tipping point, with attempts to stem the rampant piracy failing. The scales have now tipped in favour of the consumer. The progress of technology here has given consumers many varied ways to purchase music. Now, they are no longer held ransom by record labels, which once dictated how high the consumer must pay to get their music fix. And now the tables have turned, with consumers being able to purchase only the song that they wanted to, instead of having to paying for the whole album just to listen to that one song, and at a lower price than before. A CD album that once cost $19.90 can be now purchased for just $11.99 on iTunes, a leading digital music provider.

Historical Perspective

A long, long time ago, the music industry only consisted of live shows and publicity was through word-of-mouth. It was difficult to reach the masses, until technology came along and revolutionised the whole industry.

The gramophone was ground-breaking as it allowed listeners to enjoy music in the comfort of their own home. Radio soon came into the picture too. But now, record vinyl and jukeboxes that were once commonplace in the 1950s have become a novelty, having been made history by cassette tapes and Sony’s Walkman, which were later succeeded by CDs. Those too didn’t last long when digital music and Apple’s iPods came on the market.

Much progress has been made in the recorded-music industry, in terms of its form and the music quality. From only being able to listen to two songs on a single vinyl, we now have a library of hundreds of thousands of songs right at our fingertips. And just recently, we now have access to our whole music library, anytime, anywhere with music in the ‘clouds’.

But the key turning point that has shaped the industry into what it is today is the introduction of the compressed music file, MP3. This file format made it easy for users to store and share thousands of files on their computers. But the music industry did not know what it was in for with this innovation, especially when Napster hit the Internet. Founded in 1999, Napster was originally Peer-to-Peer file sharing Internet service that allowed music fans to trade MP3s for free. And while there were already existing ways to share music, Napster was most popular as it had a user-friendly interface, and easily connected different users and their MP3 resources together, creating a centralised library of sorts. Napster was eventually shutdown after successful legal action by various recording companies under the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) for copyright infringement. But the traditional business models previously adopted by recording companies could not continue further, as Napster had spawned many copycats, including Gnutella, LimeWire and Kazaa, all which operated on the same model using Peer-to-Peer file sharing. Despite attempts to shut down these sites, new ones always sprang up and workarounds were created. Consumers were no longer used to paying such high prices for their music, and the stranglehold that recording firms had on the music industry became a thing of the past.

Current Situation (Why has it become so?)

The change in the way music is distributed and shared has increased the accessibility and availability of music drastically. This change has allowed us to be able to listen to and have a better and broader appreciation of music from different eras. Previously, people could only share music by passing around a physical medium. But now, one can easily share or preview music with a click of a button. But a drawback is that this results in a lot of ‘rehashing’ and recycling, with musicians being inspired by music from the past.  Critics have bemoaned the lack of ‘fresh’ and new music.

In addition, this increased accessibility has made the market much more competitive, making it cheaper for audiophiles to enjoy their music. In the United States, songs can be purchased affordably for just 99 cents on iTunes. Moreover, one has the option of buying a single song that you want, unlike previously where you had to purchase the entire album, even if you only wanted that one song. This essentially makes music ‘cheaper’.

However, this increased accessibility has affected traditional brick and mortar shops. People no longer or rarely purchase music in physical stores, preferring to take advantage of the convenience and additional service that online music stores offer, and this impact on conventional shops (e.g. HMV) can be seen; many shops are closing down. With the arrival of the MP3 and the subsequent ascent of digital music, the traditional brick-and-mortar record stores are finding it increasingly difficult to be able to compete with download services such as iTunes and Amazon.

Also, the increased accessibility has allowed musicians to bypass the traditional methods of distribution through record labels, and instead market their songs directly to listeners. Radiohead decided to side step the record label and sold their new album online instead, and allowed listeners to set their own price and pay only what they think is reasonable for the album.

Likewise, the Internet has also made it easier for budding musicians to get a following and to extend their reach. The most common platform would be YouTube, a video-sharing website which has contributed to the burgeoning number of amateur musicians and spawned its fair share of hits and misses. Some musicians’ careers were built through YouTube, and it is the number one platform for aspiring hopefuls to gain an audience. YouTube accessibility means anyone with an Internet connection can post a video that a worldwide audience could watch, and all for free.

Nonetheless, when online music sales should rise with increased accessibility, in light of piracy and the incarnations of Napster, global album sales have actually plummeted. This could wreak havoc on creativity as it could act as a disincentive to musicians. Prince has allegedly said to refuse to make a new album till piracy has been contained.

What the market has done, in response to this problem, is to innovate. They have started to offer music subscription services via mobile and the Internet to boost flagging sales resulting from piracy. But the question still remains as to whether there can be any money made online for the music industry.

Another emerging trend is the service of offering music on the cloud. This gives you the ability to access your music anywhere, from any device.

However, an obstacle preventing this innovation from taking off is that not all record labels are on board, as these services are not considered profitable, or profitable enough. Spotify, a popular cloud subscription service in Europe is not available in some countries due to this very reason.

Moreover, critics have argued that these services encourages piracy as it makes ownership of pirated tracks more attractive by providing access through the cloud, further hindering the success of cloud-based music services.

Future Considerations

In view of the rising piracy problem, the RIAA and record labels are lobbying for stricter copyright laws to be enforced to stop illegal music file sharing. But in order to do so would mean implications on consumers’ privacy, as their Internet activity would have to be monitored.

The role of the recording companies is now constantly evolving. Now that recording companies can no longer purely rely on album sales, they will have to change their tactics, moving from merely being wholesalers of music, to getting more involved in fan merchandise and planning elaborate live concerts to attract fans. They now have to analyse fan behaviour and capitalise on it and act quickly, just as the Korean music-recording firms have done so. It would be ideal for their western counterparts to learn from the tactics applied by these Korean companies that have had much success so far in this digital world.

Conclusions

Digital music has definitely changed the playing field in the industry, altering the relationships between record labels and consumers, labels and musicians, and musicians and consumers. Everything has become more ‘direct’, with musicians being able to connect directly to listeners, and listeners no longer needing a middleman to access music

However, the problem with the current music developments (music buffets, cheap subscriptions plans) may result in consumers becoming ‘spoilt’ with choices, and they may feel that they are entitled to free music. Contrasting the current situation with the past, where we treasured our CDs and made careful purchases, the difference is stark. Would the current music subscriptions services that are being offered fail to satisfy consumers in the future? The music industry landscape is rapidly evolving, and records labels can no longer depend on CD and MP3 sales. The future for them would be to constantly innovate and come up with new exciting ways to deliver music to satisfy consumers whilst improving their profits. Perhaps in the future, free music would be a legal option. And while that may be a long while before we do reach that situation, we can always look to ‘free-mium’ music services to satiate our never-ending wants.

References

1. Alexander, P. J. (2002). Peer-to-Peer File Sharing: The Case of the Music Recording Industry. Review of Industrial Organisation, 20, 151-161
2. Talab, R.S. (2002). Napster, Distributed Peer Sharing, and it’s Chronology: “You Say You Want a Revolution?” TechTrends, 46(3), 3-6
3. Youngs, I. (2009, October 9), Pirate Party hopes for free future. BBC News. Retrieved from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/8314620.stm
4. (2011, June 9), Digitally remastered. The Economist. Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/node/18805473
5. Brooker, C. (2011, June 6), If the internet gave free back rubs, people would complain when it stopped because its thumbs were sore, The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jun/06/spotify-problem-getting-people-to-pay

Week 7

For this week’s lesson we continued with the topic of Biobusiness, but looked at the Agribiology, Environmental Life Sciences and Industrial Biotechnology side instead.

At the start of the lesson, we watched a video that reminded me of Happy Tree Friends due to the graphic nature of the video. I thought that the video was a funny but rather graphic way of presenting the way we treat our world, hacking off trees and cute animals’ heads with little care. Slightly exaggerated, but still true. It served as a reminder that we have to change the way we live right this very moment, before our world dies by our hands. Thus, I feel that for this lesson, we looked at what this side of Biobusiness has to offer to help create a sustainable lifestyle. Here in Singapore, I realised that our version and vision of sustainable living is not sustainable in the long run, since we’re merely aiming to use our resources like petrol efficiently. However, these resources will eventually run out, and where will that leave us?

In 2008, we passed an important milestone: From having more than half of the global population living in rural areas, to more than half of the global population living in urban areas. What does this mean to us? It means less resources will be available/rate of resources being used is increase, since urban consumption is way higher than rural consumption.

In the 1950s, too many people were living in rural areas, resulting in less land available for agriculture. Arable land had been shrinking rapidly, and prime agricultural land was being converted into residential areas, since people like to stay near the delta/ocean. This has forced farmers to farm in marginal areas, which should be making it difficult to get good yields. But yet, global food output has been increasing over the years, and this can be attributed to technology. The success of this green revolution that is responsible for the increase in food yield, that has largely kept the food shortage problem from becoming a full blown crisis, is not just the technology itself but also the courage and willingness of the government and people to adopt the technology. I feel that back then, if we had allowed our doubt and fear of the mystery of this emerging technology to cloud our judgement and decide to reject it, then there would be no way that today, most of us can go to sleep with our bellies full.

The most well-known product of this technology would be genetically modified food. We all know that gm food has allowed food production to increase, as a result of the creation of pesticide-resistant crops. But this technology has also created genetically modified feed for animals which can have added protein and nutrients, thus less land/feed is needed for the animals, so that means more land available to grow more food for us! Also, there are no-till crops, which help reduce greenhouse emission since there is no need to till the land. And possibly in the future, there’ll be ‘flood-resistant’, hardier crops. It’ll be good for developing countries that experience monsoon season/typhoons and flooding which often destroy their crops, resulting in starvation and increased food prices.

But with the pervasiveness of GM food, is there anyway we can escape it if we choose to? During Michelle’s presentation, she raised this issue, pointing out that even if some livestock are not injected with hormones, their feed may be genetically modified. So, is it even possible to go completely GM free?

Something to ponder is what if in the future us humans unknowingly develop the ability to break down the poisons and insecticides that can be found GM food. B.t. corn is toxic to pests as these pests are able to break down the poison present in the corn. If humans were to somehow develop a similar ability, and if all our food sources are genetically modified, then….we’re dead meat?

 

Week 6

This week’s lesson was on the biobusiness revolution, covering healthcare and biomedical sciences. What exactly is biobusiness? From what I garnered it’s commercial activities based on the understanding of life sciences and its processes. We covered the global distribution of biobusiness and diseases in class, and I learnt that USA’s healthcare spending, as of 2001, is half that of the world’s – 1588.2 out of 2933.8 billion. Of course, USA’s population isn’t even close to half of the world’s. In fact, South Asia only spent 33.5 billion (1/47 times of USA’s). The disparity never fails to amaze me. And yet, most of the money spent here is spent on the last year of a person’s life.
And even more bemusing is the fact 49.9 million people, or 16.3% of the population is uninsured, meaning they can be denied any healthcare services, till absolutely necessary.

Something else that we discussed is how pharmaceutical products are extremely expensive despite their production cost being relatively low. That is because having applied for a patent, manufacturers are only given 20 years to capitalise on their innovation before it’s made ‘public’ and free for all. And considering that the drug discovery and drug development (clinical trials etc) takes many years before it is finally considered safe to be put on the market, is it wrong for these drug companies to want to maximise and obtain as much profit as possible from their research?

I wished that our discussion on the pharmaceutical industry had been more in-depth. For instance, I would like to have heard my fellow peers’ opinion on ethics and this particular industry. After all, this is one of the biggest and most successful businesses and could be used as an extremely potent force for good in the community, but yet it’s potential is not being maximised due to the ‘business’ side – profit maximisation. I believe this industry can definitely serve society more than it had before and has, but yet to what extent are these drug companies obligated to ‘serve’ society at the expense of profits? Of course, I wished that these firms should only be able to make no more than 25% profit from their research such that the drugs are affordable and all is well in the world but of course, that is not how the world works. Greed once again thwarts utopia. I used to read this blog about a young boy’s battle with Neuroblastoma, written by his father. Young Ezra was pulled off a Nifurtimox cancer drug trial by a hospital in Virginia before he was given a chance to take the drug, as his success rate was deemed to be too low since he was “deteriorating too fast”. Luckily, he was eventually able to take the drug through another means, but this example reminded me of complexity of this issue.

And I wonder, just how much are we willing to pay to live longer? I’m still young and if nothing goes wrong, I’ll still have a good 50 years ahead of me so it’s hard to answer that question. But I’m sure my answer would change when I’m 70. And the most thought provoking discussion today was on immortality. Personally I would not take the test to see how long I’ll live, because if I do know exactly how many years I have left to live, I’ll be fretting too much to be able to enjoy the time fully. And after all, isn’t life suppose to be about the surprises?

Week 5

This week’s lesson kicked off with this video about Project Natal.

I never knew that we had technology this advanced, and I’ll be honest, it’s quite creepy. Milo’s expressions are so real and lifelike, and the interactions between him and Claire were so seamless. How can it be possible that we already have such advanced technology that can do what was displayed in the video??? For a moment while watching that video, I forgot that behind Milo isn’t real. I kind of thought of him as a human trapped in a screen, instead of a super-smart program. He’s like a chatbot, but with a face. And he holds a better conversation than they do, har har.

And since the video is at least 2 years old, how far has this technology progressed? I wonder if in the future, you could create avatars of yourself so that people who are apart and in different countries could interact together just as Milo and Claire did, except Milo is a real human person in avatar form instead. The benefits of that would be endless, families could interact beyond just talking to each other through the webcam or phone. Of course, if that were to happen, I think some regulations should be in place too, that is the technology shouldn’t go in the direction of chat rooms or second life, where strangers can interact with each other. Such amazing technology should not be exploited by perverts.

We also discussed Cloud Computing in class. In my opinion, it’s not as widely as adopted as it should be (considering the many benefits) because it’s still some new and because it’s ‘up in the clouds’, many businesses are worried about security. I just got a dropbox account (late to the party) because I needed it for school, and I’m worried about my privacy. Also, everything is pretty fuzzy and for normal consumers like me, as all the technical terms can be pretty daunting.

After having looked at Reading 3, I feel that ICT can only work to reduce in countries or regions that can afford the required equipment. For the case of healthcare, in many countries like Somalia, they can only afford the very basic medical equipment. Perhaps in bigger cities ICT would be more successful in aiding to achieve the millenium development goals, but in the poorest regions where the most help is needed, ICT would take a backseat, since the very basic needs have to be met first. Also, ICTs’ success largely depends on government partnership and involvement and it’s noted that many developing countries have a rather unstable political government. Not that I want to be a Debbie Downer or anything, but without a strong government, making ICTs work for the poor will be an (almost) impossible dream.

Individual Topical Review Paper Outline

Specific Innovation of Interest:

Digitalising music: Changing the way it’s distributed and the resulting implications

Rationale of selecting this innovation:

Business dynamics in the music industry is rapidly evolving, with new developments in technology that change the very way we ‘consume’ our music. We now possess the ability to preview MP3s before purchasing, to buy music online, and to store hundreds and thousands of songs in a pocket-sized device. This increase in accessibility has the industry at a tipping point, with attempts to stem piracy failing.

Proposed Approach to Development of Paper:

1. Executive Summary

2. Background/Introduction

3. Historical Perspective
Brief overview

• Live Music > Records > Tape Cassettes > CDs > MP3s > Cloud Music
• Jukeboxes > Radios > Youtube

4. Current Situation

• A change in music distribution
• Availability and accessibility of music has increased drastically, and this has allowed us to be able to listen to and have a better and broader appreciation of music from different eras. Previously, people could only share music by passing around a physical medium. But now, one can easily share or preview music with a click of a button
• This results in a lot of ‘rehashing’ and recycling, with musicians being inspired by music from the past.  Critics have bemoaned the lack of ‘fresh’ and new music.
• ‘Indie’ music becoming mainstream, ironically.

• For musicians, it is much easier to get a following (Youtube) and to extend their reach. This has led to the rise in the number of musicians and Youtube covers.
• Global album sales have plummeted, wreak havoc on creativity as it could act as a disincentive to musicians. Prince has allegedly said to refuse to make a new album till piracy has been contained.

• Offering music subscription services via mobile etc to boost flagging sales resulting from piracy
• Impact on tradition brick and mortar shops (e.g. HMV ); many shops are closing down.

5. Future Considerations

• More music-related games that allows us to tap our own personal music library
• Stricter copyright laws may be enforced to stop illegal music file sharing, but what are its implications on privacy?
• Music subscriptions services will fail and the music industry landscape will change. Records labels can no longer depend on CD/MP3 sales, and instead innovate and come up with a new exciting way to deliver music to improve its profits . Hopefully there’ll be free music, or almost-free music.

6. Conclusions

• Digital music has changed the relationships between record labels and consumers, labels and musicians, and musicians and consumers. Everything has become more ‘direct’, with musicians being able to connect directly to listeners, and listeners no longer needing a middle man to access music
• With the current music developments (music buffets, cheap subscriptions plans), resulting in us feeling that we are entitled to free music. Will we become spoiled? Contrasting it with the past, where we treasured our CDs, and made careful purchases.

7. References

Week 4

This week’s lesson was about Technology and World Change, and a question posed by Prof to us was what could happen that would make us go back to the ‘dark ages’? Straight away I thought of a scenario like the movie 28 Days Later or I am Legend, where a highly contagious disease spreads and society breaks down, bringing us back to the ‘dark ages’. When all hell breaks lose, when people believe that they no longer can trust in the authorities to keep them safe, when people can only think to fend for themselves, that’s when we go back to the dark ages. I hope this day will never happen. Every time I watch a movie like that, I do wonder if there ever is a possibility of a similar scenario happening in real life. Luckily so far, the current viruses do not turn us into savage monsters that eat other humans. Phew.

And regarding Charles Darwin’s quote shown in class, it is said that we should always be flexible and responsive to world change. But that’s easier said that done, because when we’ve gotten comfortable with the status quo, nobody would be willing to venture out of our comfort zone.

Deco’s presentation on how social media has changed the world took me a trip down memory lane. It’s amazing how much we’ve progressed so far. We’ve gone from communicating via snail mail and the telephone, to Twitter and Facebook and whatnot. I remember chatting on the phone with my friends all day after school, compared to now where SMS-es, Whatsapp and Facebook chats are my primary means of contacting them.

And now that many of my friends are scattered all over the world in different universities, Facebook and Skype is how I keep in touch with them and know what’s happening in their lives. If such technology did not exist, I think I would be spending a lot of money snail mailing all of them. But I have to admit that I do miss the thrill of receiving a letter. The only mail I get is the occasional bill or Pizza Hut and KFC coupons. And that is the one thing I do miss about the ‘old’ times, but I am glad that we have this ‘new’ technology that allows me to keep in touch with friends and family overseas, and I’m sure my friends who are separated from their families are too.

Technology has not only changed the communications landscape, but also that of information distribution. Obama’s political success (or potential downfall with the rise of the Tea Parties)  can be attributed to technology. Technology played a huge part during his election campaign, with his use of Youtube and various web tools to connect with young voters.

Technology has very much revolutionised the way we live and I cannot wait to see how it’ll affect the future. I do however, can foresee myself getting les sleep, considering the amount of time I already spend on the internet.

The second half of class was on drivers on world change, and one of the presentations was on how energy has driven, and will continue to drive world change so far.

This question was posed to us: Can alternative energy completely replace fossil fuels? I feel that at this moment in time, no. We’re too reliant on the traditional sources of energy and being human, too lazy to switch till we’re practically held at knifepoint, when all the fish have died in the sea and sunlight can no longer shine through the pollution clouds and the entire world threatens to collapse around us, then will we change. Perhaps I’m a little pessimistic, but it’s simply human nature that we won’t change until we really have to. Currently, we’re trying to make an effort to change, and that change is if it doesn’t alter our current lifestyle too greatly. Renewable energy may have the potential to power the entire world, but it is not cost efficient compared to Fossil Fuel. Using the concept of Energy Returned On Energy/Cost Invested ratio (EROEI), Fossil Fuel’s ratio is 100:1 compared to renewable energy which is significantly lower. That is why some many of us aren’t switching because it’s more expensive, and we don’t want to give up our current lifestyle.

And we’ll all only make that great leap when we can see the world truly changing. Everyday we read in the papers about the ice caps melting and global temperatures rising, but till we can truly feel the effects, we’ll continue with the way we are now, and perhaps lament once in a while that the world governments aren’t doing their jobs to help.

Lastly, we were asked if change management is change leadership, and I feel that leaders are visionaries, whereas I feel that managers are the people who work in the background, making sure that everything runs smoothly. In a way, the leader is a figurehead, inspiring and motivating (sort of like the president har har) whereas the manager is the hardworking one who has to run around making sure that everything is as it should be (the prime minister). And yes, while the line between the two roles may be blurring, as said in one of the readings, I feel that there is still a need for these two separate roles. But with the rise o the knowledge worker, the ‘manager’ is now expected to be the leader. And yes, the manager now is to possess leadership qualities, but ultimately I feel that the burden of combining the role of manager and leader into one is too great and almost impossible for anyone to carry, hence requiring the two separate roles. Just as in the tech world where there is the visionary who takes the company towards a particular goal, there are the people behind him who help make that happen.

Week 3

I hate to admit, but I really dreaded Monday’s lesson because I had to do my first ever presentation in SMU, and I was really nervous about it but I’m so glad that it’s over. And I realized that what prof said is true, that you’ll start to give higher marks only when you realise how much effort has been put in.

I presented on biofuels (palm oil), it’s implications on the environment and how it contributes to sustainable development. The discussion in class following that really brought new insights.

While I’ve heard of sugarcane as being used for biofuels, I never realised bamboo could be used the same way too. However, I wondered how this would affect Pandas in China, since Pandas only eat bamboo. I thought that by clearing forests to make way for bamboo biofuel plantations, the Panda’s living environment would be affected. I researched a bit more about that, following Monday’s lesson and came across articles about using Panda poop as biofuel. Bacteria in panda poop is said to be able to efficiently break down tough cell walls in plants and turn them into sugars, which can then be fermented into fuels. The enzymes in the bacteria help speed up chemical reactions, thus eliminating the need for high heat and pressure, and harsh acids to produce biofuels. These bacteria would also be a more energy-efficient way to turn materials such as corn and wood chips into fuel. I feel that China could take advantage of this fact, and decrease it’s dependence on coal for energy, and switch to biofuels instead, with this potential new energy source in their hands. This would also be an incentive for China to put even more effort to protecting their Panda population.

And while Corn ethanol is easier and cheaper to make but there is a conflict of interests as corn is often used as food for humans and livestock, hence the issue of food versus fuel. Moreover, the efficiency of corn as biofuels is extremely low. The only reasons why corn is being used in USA is due to the strong farmers union and their political influence, and also the fact that ethanol has brought stability and new sources of income to many. Would that mean that we have to choose between economic growth and protecting the environment?

Honestly, I think we would all chose economic growth over sustainable development. Few people do have the means to live environmentally friendly while maintaining their current standard of living. The little things that we do, making a conscious effort to recycle or switch off the lights when we leave the room, is it enough? In fact, do all of us even make an effort to do this? In my home, my family practises the aforementioned , but we simply just cannot give up our air-con in this insane humidity and heat. While we would like to install solar panels on our rooftops, they are currently beyond our means as it’s too expensive. What role then should the government play here? In fact, why is the Singapore government not trying to take advantage of the plentiful sunlight that we get???

Moving on to the second part of the lesson where we discussed technology and innovation, and personally feel that innovation be technology driven. I feel that if it’s driven by the market instead, innovation would be limited because we would set ‘boundaries’ on our imagination.

Of course, there are concerns that drive innovation, apart from the usual cost/benefit, such as safety, navigation and transportation. Many would wish for teleportation to exist so that we need not have to be stuck on a plane for hours just to see our loved ones and family. But honestly, I don’t think I’ll take to Teleportation that quickly. I’ve been scarred when one of the characters in Harry Potter tried to perform the magical version of teleportation (apparition) and got splinched (a part of his body got left in behind in the process). I definitely would not want to hop into a machine and come out on the other side missing a limb.