Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

arcosapphire t1_j9n20gw wrote

Why do you think that a product that is useful, but only for a small fraction of the population, would make "infinite" money? Smartphones are already tremendously more widespread, and are hardly an "infinite" source of wealth.


DanielPhermous t1_j9n39h5 wrote

> Why do you think that a product that is useful, but only for a small fraction of the population, would make "infinite" money?

The device can reportedly detect diabetes before it actually hits you, which would be invaluable for any pregnant women. Constant monitoring may also have other benefits in regards to informing exercise regimes, or providing some insight into other, more minor issues. Something along the lines of how constant blood oxygen monitoring can let you know if you're getting a serious respiratory ailment.


arcosapphire t1_j9n4eas wrote

Okay, so let's say they become as popular as smart phones, which are used by the majority of the planet. That's still not some game-breaking figure, as we know by the existence of smart phones which have not upended the world economy.


DanielPhermous t1_j9n56j9 wrote

You're reading way too much into some obvious hyperbole. Obviously it can't earn infinite money. We don't have infinite money. Clearly, Herewego just meant that they will make a shit-ton.

That is also hyperbole, by the way. A ton of excrement weighs no more than ton of anything else, including money.

However, yes, I can see the watch becoming more popular than smartphone long term. Machine learning is exceptionally good at finding patterns in noise and it is likely that the Apple Watch, using all of its sensors present and future, will be able to intuit medical conditions that we cannot.

At that point, why the fuck would you not buy one? They can already literally save your life. Add another five or ten things it could save your life from, plus early warnings on lesser problems like diabetes, and it's a no-brainer.


KhonMan t1_j9ncf37 wrote

I think the potential is more there to make smartwatches a real thing. It's a decent sized market now but still maybe only like 5% the size of the smartphone market.


swaskowi t1_j9p3mff wrote

The economics of medicine are deeply weird though, like I can imagine the Qaly's gained by such monitoring being worth subsidizing in some fashion, but in no other industry does an advance in the underlying tech contribute to acute suffering because, when Ferrari releases a new faster car, no one thinks they have to have it, but as soon as a regime that improves life outcomes exists people that can't afford the initial asking price become furious they can't afford it, contra Ferrari's. Despite the fact that they're no worse off than before the magic tech existed.


kaynpayn t1_j9nn8da wrote

According to google, around 10% of the world population is affected by diabetes. Far more are in a state of undiagnosed prediabetes that can be managed and prevented better if warned earlier, such a product would be very desirable. But at the very least, 10% of the world's population is a good number of people to branch out an investment.

Also, diabetes is one of those diseases that people manage, not cure. It won't stop existing or will end anytime soon, actually it's even expected to increase over the years. You'll always have clients for such a product and they tend to increase, hence the "infinite wealth" (which is an obvious exaggeration and meant as a hugely profitable), especially if you own a patent and are the only one selling it.


tiktaktok_65 t1_j9oaz8l wrote

you paywall these kind of services behind a subscription + service. but yeah it's probably not infinite money, but it can maybe eat into current glucose screening services rendered, i have no idea how much that market is in annual revenues.


Funicularly t1_j9qfqgg wrote

A small fraction? About 800 million people have diabetes, and many that don’t will in the future.


arcosapphire t1_j9qhovm wrote

And yet,

> There are over 5.22 billion smartphone users in the world, representing 66% of the global population.

My point remains that if making smartphones didn't break the economy, making an even less applicable device won't either.

I'm not saying it's a bad idea, I just don't think it's free money.


verynifty t1_j9oenyf wrote

Smartphones aren’t subsidized by insurance. A wearable that promotes health and could be proactive for certain afflictions would be huge.