In my opinion Wearable health is highly neglected because older people are less tech savy than young people, so they use it less than younger people, but they would also benefit much more from the technology. If a 20 year old wears a smart watch that measures and records heart-rate it is almost only for fun, if a 60 year old does it, it could prevent and inform about important issues, but the 20 year old is much more likely to actually use it than the 60 year old.
I also asked ChatGPT, here are the six best ideas that it had (excluding electric bikes, as it was already my idea ;P) (cherry picked by me over 21):
Online education: Online education platforms like Coursera and Khan Academy were mature, widely available, intuitive, and cost no money for basic usage. They also had no regulatory barriers or moral issues and could be used by mutual agreement among one or a few people. Online education also saved a lot of time and played relatively well with the existing format of learning and education.
Digital wallets: Digital wallet technologies like Apple Pay and Google Pay were mature, widely available, intuitive, and cost no money for basic usage. They also had no regulatory barriers or moral issues and could be used by mutual agreement among one or a few people. Digital wallets also saved a lot of time and played relatively well with the existing format of financial transactions and management.
Wearable health monitoring devices: These devices, such as Fitbit and Apple Watch, are mature, widely available, intuitive, and cost no money for basic usage. They also have no regulatory barriers or moral issues and can be used by mutual agreement among one or a few people. They save time and money by allowing users to track their health metrics and stay motivated to maintain a healthy lifestyle.
Online language learning platforms: Platforms like Duolingo and Rosetta Stone are mature, widely available, intuitive, and cost no money for basic usage. They have no regulatory barriers or moral issues and can be used by mutual agreement among one or a few people. They save time and money by providing an accessible and effective way to learn a new language.
Home energy management systems: Devices like Nest Thermostat and Sense Home Energy Monitor are mature, widely available, intuitive, and cost no money for basic usage. They have no regulatory barriers or moral issues and can be used by mutual agreement among one or a few people. They save money and energy by providing users with insights into their home energy usage and allowing them to make informed decisions about energy conservation.
Collaborative writing and editing tools: Platforms like Google Docs and Microsoft Teams are mature, widely available, intuitive, and cost no money for basic usage. They have no regulatory barriers or moral issues and can be used by mutual agreement among one or a few people. They save time and make collaboration more efficient and effective, whether for school projects, business proposals, or creative writing.
Both of them are very reasonable, online education is accessible, almost free, and makes it possible to study even while holding a full time job, from a quick glance a great deal of your requirements are satisfied.
Digital wallets I am less sure about, I never used one, but they look really convenient and easy to use, but I would need more info on how secure they are before starting to use them.
Overall, I think all of these ideas kind of fit your point.
Electric bikes are vastly under-utilized even in European cities where they are safe and effective to use:
The only barriers are perceived risk (not clear if the risk of an accident is higher than the benefit from physical exercise in my opinion, it could well be net positive depending on where you live) and that you look "childish" and kind of weird if you bike to work.
Here is my playthrough with my though process:
:::spoiler
>!0) [2, 4, 6] is VALID
>!Now I think, let's check if the rule is *2
>!1) [31, 62, 93] is VALID
>!Let's check if the rule is always true with 3 random numbers.
>!2) [6534525, 142536, 456342532] is NOT VALID
>!I wanted to check multiply by 3, but I repeated multiply by 2
>!3) [5, 10, 15] is VALID
>!Checking multiply by 3
>!4) [7, 21, 63] is VALID
>!Checking multiply by 10
>!5) [50, 500, 5000] is VALID
>!Now I am thinking: maybe any multiplication is ok? I cannot try them all, let's try constant addition:
>!6) [34, 35, 36] is VALID
>!Let's try constant subtraction
>!7) [5, 4, 3] is NOT VALID
>!Let's try increasing
>!8) [5, 64, 234] is VALID
>!Let's try increasing with random numbers
>!9) [12345, 123456, 1234567] is VALID
>!Let's try increasing or constant.
>!10) [5, 5, 6] is NOT VALID
>!Now I have made up my mind!
>!After 10 tests, your guess was . . .
>!"The sequence is valid if it is strictly increasing."
:::
So what about an ensamble of the top 20 linear probes? Is it substantially better than using just the best one alone? I would expect so given that they are orthogonal, so they are using ~uncorrelated information.
The most important thing is approaching other points of view with an open mind, with epistemic humility , that is, knowing that something of what you think can be wrong, even if, from the inside, everything feels right.
On the object level:
We could not find a "speak in French" vector after about an hour of effort, but it's possible we missed something straightforward
Did you try 10 or 20 simple French phrases with a positive sign and their translations with a negative sign?
Also try 1000 english words and 1000 french translations in case scale is the problem.
Also try:
"The following text is in English: ' "
"The following text is in French: ' "
with the second phrase written itself in French.