Eric Schmidt on Innovation: Patents, Self-Driving Cars and Education

Last night I attended the AllThingsD interview with Eric Schmidt. Yesterday’s post focused on smartphones, this post will go through the second half of his discussion.

Patents
While Schmidt wasn’t willing to discuss specific patent fights, he did emphasize one point: The patent fights harm little companies the most since they don’t have the resources to fight patent claims. Small companies have created the most jobs and innovation and so patent disputes can cause great harm by harming them.

This seems true, though patent trolls probably only sue companies that have enough money to be able to pay them. Though perhaps large competitors could sue small companies out of existence, but I don’t know if that is too common. No matter what,he current patent system is pretty ridiculous.

Google and Self-Driving Cars
Swisher felt bothered that Google was involved in everything instead of just focusing on organizing information and called Google a Borg. She also said Google Glass is ugly and wasn’t so in to self-driving cars. Schmidt replied that they want to be in the center of the information revolution. But he said they should be celebrating innovation instead of dissing it.
He said that people shouldn’t really be driving cars and that self-driving cars will save many lives. Car companies will be able to implement components of Google’s technology in a few years, but their will still be a driver behind the wheel and a big red button to turn off automated driving. Also, Google Glass will provide new opportunities and experiences for people.

Clearly Google no longer just focuses on making information accessible  but now does all things software. I don’t see any reason to be bothered by that, as they seem to be doing a good job and provide basically everything or free.
Schmidt seemed to imply that humans will need to be monitoring the driving. People have a hard-enough time staying focused on the road now when they are driving, so I doubt they will be able to when the computer is doing it. Though maybe the computer will be able to pause the YouTube video when there’s an issue that require’s human attention.

Innovation & Education
Schmidt said there’s low morale in the US, which is a demographic problem, a global problem, and an automation problem. He seemed to be saying there was low unemployment because software and globalization are taking over jobs, but he felt that more innovation was the solution. He said the platforms created by Google and their competitors can create many job opportunities in the US.
The solution is also to improve education to help innovation. Currently, the gap between the elite and everyone else has widened, but it needs to be closed. Mossberg asked if he things online MOOCs like Udacity are the future even for the elite. Schmidt replied that these new initiatives are just version 1 and that they glimmer with possibility, i.e. yes. He said there has been very little innovation and real competition in education but these new online offering are changing that.

If technology is part of the problem of low-employment, perhaps increased innovation will just make things worse? However, improving technology has not caused long-term unemployment, since it has always created new markets for people to spend their money on. So the online platforms may provide many more new jobs. This type of work is not for everyone though, and better education won’t necessarily help. However, I don’t think there’s an immediate risk of widespread unemployment.
I think Schmidt hit the nail on the head about the potential of online education. Who more than the head of Google recognizes the power of software to revolutionize industries? He stressed often how competition drives innovation and lowers prices. This is something the government-backed system of education sorely lacks, but there is now potential for change.

The overall theme that emerged from this discussion was the power of innovation. By allowing competition that isn’t restricted by unfair patents or over-reaching unions, great things can be developed that will benefit everyone.

Brain, Patents and Trading

extremetech.com/extreme/136446-darpa-combines-human-brains-and-120-megapixel-cameras-for-the-ultimate-military-threat-detection-system
Humans are still better than computers at interpreting images, but they’re too slow. So it makes for the Army’s threat-detection system to to use a computer to filter the images to only show the human possible threats.One would think the job would then be for the human to press a button when a threat is detected. However, that’s too slow for the computers, so instead they just use an EEG to read the human’s brain and sense when a threat is detected. So the human is like an advanced motion detector for the machine.

blog.stackoverflow.com/2012/09/askpatents-com-a-stack-exchange-to-prevent-bad-patents/
The Patent office came to StackExchange to ask for help in detecting prior art so patents can be invalidated. If this catches on, it can help reduce some of the rampant patent lawsuit that have been going on. Maybe one day they’ll consider crowd-sourcing the actual granting of patents.

blogmaverick.com/2012/09/21/what-business-is-wall-street-in-3/
Another attack on high-frequency trading, pointing out that they’re just ‘hacking’ the system without providing any benefit to society.

 

Software beats humans at teaching

How does blending learning compare to the traditional model? A new study finds that they can teach the same amount in less time:

In experiments at six public universities, students assigned randomly to statistics courses that relied heavily on “machine-guided learning” software — with reduced face time with instructors — did just as well, in less time, as their counterparts in traditional, instructor-centric versions of the courses…
“Our results indicate that hybrid-format students took about one-quarter less time to achieve essentially the same learning outcomes as traditional-format students,”

As elearning becomes more popular, I think it will continue to demonstrate its effectiveness, which will create a cyclic effect and cause further adoption. Its biggest challenges will be taking on the current monopolies in education, but I think in the long-term it will succeed.

Link: Report: Robots stack up to human professors in teaching Intro Stats | Inside Higher Ed.

Algorithms Writing Articles

An old post mentioned how algorithms are being used to help with diagnoses, but they’re also being used to write articles. Wired just published an article about Narrative Science, a company that creates programs which can generate articles. They mainly publish articles on finance and sports, since those are well-structured topics and very repetitive. You don’t normally have too many things happening in a baseball game or stock chart, so I could see why a computer could write such articles. They also have begun generating articles with other data:

Once Narrative Science had mastered the art of telling sports and finance stories, the company realized that it could produce much more than journalism. Indeed, anyone who needed to translate and explain large sets of data could benefit from its services. Requests poured in from people who were buried in spreadsheets and charts. It turned out that those people would pay to convert all that confusing information into a couple of readable paragraphs that hit the key points.

This is obviously quite impressive, though I wonder if all that information is necessarily better in paragraph form. Why can’t some of the data just be turned into some nice charts that people can view? Articles can sometimes “textualize” the content and make it take longer for the reader/viewer to get the necessary information. They can turn tables into paragraphs, but will they be able to soon write more general articles?

wired.com/gadgetlab/can-an-algorithm-write-a-better-news-story-than-a-human-reporter

Computers Begin Taking Over

Soon computers will be diagnosing patients’ problems and answering their legal questions…

Watson, the “Jeopardy!”-playing computer system, is getting a job… WellPoint said it plans to use Watson’s data-crunching to help suggest treatment options and diagnoses to doctors. It is part of a far broader push in the health industry to incorporate computerized guidance into care, as doctors and hospitals adopt electronic medical records and other digital tools that can record, track and check their work.

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903532804576564600781798420.html