was successfully added to your cart.
All Posts By


What influences people to say yes? (Video)


When you study the art of psychological advertising and persuasion, you’ll learn what influences people to say yes. Researchers have been testing on subjects for decades, for at least over 60 years, and we are certain there is indeed a science to persuasion. So how do people make accurate decisions in fast-paced environments? What are the universal anchors that guide human behaviour? The animated video below describes the six universal principles of persuasion that have been scientifically proven as reported by Dr. Cialdini.

Let us know what you think in our comments section below.

Source: Influence At Work

Infographic: how does facial recognition work and who’s watching you?

facial recog

In the not so distant future, connected users will have the ability to match and connect real-time photos and videos taken to personal identities.

Today, market researchers, businesses and governments are building photo databases and photo libraries of users with intentions of leveraging facial recognition algorithms for monetization and ‘security.’

Market Research firm, Research and Markets, projects the global facial recognition market to be worth $20-billion USD by 2025, trumpeted as the next ‘big thing.’

…Indeed the face has always been the crystal ball for human emotion…

But how does facial recognition work and who wants to watch us anyway?

Below the good folks at Who Is Hosting This share an interesting facial recognition infographic answering these questions and more.

Take a look and let us know what you think.

Source: Research and Markets

Infographic: how disruptive is 3D printing?

3d 2

How disruptive is 3D printing?

3D printing, also known as, additive manufacturing (AM) is a technological process developed in the 1980s that uses AM fabricating technology to synthesize materials into three-dimensional objects.

From toys to tools to homes to villages on the moon to even food and human tissue, the 3D printing industry today pilots many innovative business verticals and is expected to pull in $21-billion worldwide in revenues by 2020.

If you can design it and build it, you can 3D print it.

But just how disruptive will the 3D printing industry become?

Scroll down, check out the 3D infographic below and learn more.


Source: Visual Capitalist, Wohlers

What is the innovator’s dilemma?


“What is the innovator’s dilemma?”

Innovation has always served as both spear and shield in the shark-eat-shark world of business. And almost always at the tip of innovation, we find the sharpest of minds, the people who are constantly called upon for answers.

The term “innovator’s dilemma” was first coined by Harvard professor Clayton Christensen while writing his book entitled, “The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail.”

The book essentially talked about how successful companies failed to adopt to new technologies and business models, ignoring customers’ future undeclared demands.

Below, taken from an exclusive interview we uncover a Clayton Christensen transcript outlining his interesting take on disruptive innovation, personal case studies and his definition of the innovator’s dilemma.

Take a look below and let us know what you think.


The Idea: Clay welcome. 

Clay Christensen: Well thanks Des.

The Idea: What exactly is disruptive innovation? Explain it.

Clay Christensen: Disruptive innovation is not a breakthrough innovation that makes good products a lot better.

But, eh, it has a very specific definition and that is, it transforms a product that historically was so expensive and uh, complicated that only a few people with a lot of money and a lot of skill have access to it.

A disruptive innovation makes it so much more affordable and accessible that a much larger population have access to it.

The Idea: So give us an example of this. Most of us are familiar with the computer industry and how it has developed, perhaps you can use that as an example?

So give us an example of this. Most of us are familiar with the computer industry and how it has developed, perhaps you can use that as an example?

Clay Christensen: Ya so at the beginning. The first manifestation of digital technology was a mainframe computer, it cost several millions of dollars to buy. And it took years to be trained to operate these things.

Ya so at the beginning. The first manifestation of digital technology was a mainframe computer, it cost several millions of dollars to buy. And it took years to be trained to operate these things and so that meant that the largest corporations and the largest universities could have one. You know?

And so we had to take our problem to the center where the experts solved it for us.

But then there’s a sequence of innovations from the mainframe to a mini to a desktop to a laptop and now to a smart phone that has democratized technology to the point that everybody has access to it around the world.

And we’re much better off.

It was very hard though for the pioneers of the industry to catch these new waves, most of those were created and dominated by new companies.

The Idea: And that, and you touching on that gives rise to…This process gives rise to the innovator’s dilemma, which was the title of your 1997 book. And how, but how do people get around that? I mean that dilemma, can you explain that dilemma itself to us?

And that, and you touching on that gives rise to…This process gives rise to the innovators dilemma, which was the title of your 1997 book. And but. How, how do people get around that? I mean that dilemma, can you explain that dilemma itself to us?

Clay Christensen: Yes, so the dilemma is…in every company every day every year, people are going to senior management knocking on their door saying, “I got a new product for us.”

And some of those entail making better products that you can sell for higher prices to your best customers.

A disruptive innovation generally has to cause you to go after new markets. People who aren’ your customers.

And uh. And the product that you want to sell them is something that is just so much more affordable and simple that your…your current customers can’t buy it. You know?

And so the choice that you have to make is:

Should we make better products that we can sell for better profits to our best customers.

Or maybe we oughtta make worse products that none of our customers would buy that would ruin our margins. What should we do?

And that really is the dilemma.

It was the dilemma that General Motors and Ford faced when they tried to decide:

Should we go down and compete against Toyota, who came at the bottom.

Or should we make bigger SUVs for even bigger people?

And now Toyota has the same problem.

The Koreans in Hyundai and Kia have really won the low-end of the market from Toyota.

And it’s not because Toyota is asleep at the switch.

But why would they ever invest to defend the lowest profit part of their market which is the subcompacts when they have the prilivege of competing against Mercedes. You know?

And…And then Chery is coming from China, doing the same thing to the Koreans.

The Idea: So one of the things that I do like about your, your ideas that they do have had an impact out there. I mean some of this thinking has influenced a whole generation of managers including; people like Steve Jobs, you’re referenced in the biography that he, that he read the book and he was really influenced by the book and possibly Apple 1 and Apple 2 are you know him resolving innovators dilemma.

But also Andy Grove at Intel, you also had a contact with him

Clay Christensen: Ya (chuckle). Ya it’s uh. I’d never imagined that I could ever meet these people. You know. Let alone be judged to having helped them.

But I learned a lot from Andy Grove.

So what had happened was that I was at HBS minding my own business. And Andy Grove called me just out of the blue. And said, “Look I’m a busy man. I don’t have the time to read drivel from academics. You know? But somebody told me that you had this theory and I wondered if you can come around and present what you are learning to me and my staff, uh, and then tell us what, uh, how it applies to Intel.”

And for me it was a chance of a life time. So I flew out there and uh…Turned out..Andy was he’s quite a gruff man and said, “You know stuff has happened to us. We only have ten minutes for you. So just what it means for Intel.”

And I said, “Andy I can’t… Because I have no opinion on Intel. But the theory has an opinion and so I have to describe the theory.”

So he sat back impatiently and ten minutes into it he shut me off and said, “Look I got your stupid theory. Tell us what it means for Intel.”

And he got what he got and he really did get it, you know?

And I said, ‘”Andy. I need five more minutes. Because I gotta describe how this process of disruption worked its way through a totally different industry. Just show you can visualize what can happen to Intel.”

So I described how the mini mills came into the steel market at rebar and then when up market.

When I was done with that. Grove said, “Oh I get it. So what you’re telling me what it means for Intel is…”

And he described how they had two companies coming at him from below and Intel needs to go down and not let him go up against us.

It was very successful.

The Idea:

And that was the Celeron?

Clay Christensen: Yes that’s right. And I thought about this. If I had been suckered into telling Andy Grove what he should do, I’d would’ve been killed. Because he knew so much more about my microprocessors than I would ever would know.

But rather than telling him what to think I taught him how to think and he could reach his own conclusions.

And that changed the way I teach, it changed the way I talk. And the insight is that…

You know for whatever reason the way they designed the world…Data is only available about the past.

And when we teach people that they should be data-driven and fact-based and analytical as they look into the future, in many ways we condemn them to take action when the game is over.

The only way we can look in the future, there’s no data, so you have to have a good theory.

And we don’t think about it. But everytime we ‘re taking an action, it’s predicated upon a theory.

And so by teaching managers to look through the lense of the theory into the future you can actually see the future very clearly.

And I think that’s what the theory of disruption has done.

The Idea: Clay Christensen, thank you very much for talking to us.

Clay Christensen: Well thanks for taking the time to ask such great questions.

VIDEO: What is the innovator’s dilemma?

<iframe width=”560″ height=”315″ src=”https://www.youtube.com/embed/qDrMAzCHFUU” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen></iframe>

Source: HBR, Clayton Christensen

Infographic: what is the Internet of Things?


Ask the right question…

What is the Internet of Things? Technologists today define the Internet of Things (IoT) as a network of smart systems consisting of the Internet’s three main actors: devices or ‘things’ (sensors); network connectivity (Internet service provider); people (users).

IoT evangelists and futurists on the innovation frontlines trumpet IoT today as the, ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution’ set to change the Internet as we know it.

“We are giving the world a digital nervous system.”

Everyday devices from home thermostats to ovens to traffic lights to cameras to energy flows and more, will track user data, all built with the function to ‘improve’ user standard of living.

By 2020 IoT-connected devices are expected to reach 34-billion and sources report over 6-trillion will be spent on IoT solutions in the next five years.

internet of things infographic

Source: Harbor Research

Infographic: how will Bitcoin disrupt the banking system?

bitcoin - green

Infographic: how will Bitcoin disrupt the banking system?

Peer-to-peer cryptocurrency Bitcoin has economists asking an interesting question: do we need banks anymore?

Bitcoin reportedly was invented in 2008 by Satoshi Nakamoto and released as an open-source software in 2009, hailed as the Napster of finance. Its users can independently mine its digital currency and exchange payments with each other inside the peer network without a middleman — like a bank.

But beyond Bitcoin’s disruptive reputation awaits a power greater than a digital currency, an existing network and chain forecasted to both disrupt the financial system and the entire Internet as we know it.

Scroll down for more.



Source: Visual Capitalist

Freise brothers create spine-chilling “Not A Dream” ad for Tesla Model S

This spine-chilling and voluntary indie production by twin brothers Adam and Nathan Freise for Tesla Motors is a testament to the power of branding and sustainable community building.

The 1984-esque ad features the words of Nikola Tesla — the inspiration behind the Tesla Motors name — and his legendary quote about the Wardenclyffe Tower, also known as Tesla Tower, a project in Shoreham, Long Island that was supposed to beam wireless electricity back in 1901-1902.

“Not A Dream” was narrated by Jonathan David Dixon, whose performance successfully struck an emotional chord with the sustainable energy and innovation community, including Tesla Motors CEO Elon Musk, who approved their ad in a tweet.

Watch the full video below and let us know what you think in our comments section.

Tesla “Not A Dream” Transcript:

“It is not a dream. It is a simple feat of scientific electrical engineering.

Electric power can drive the world’s machinery without the need of coal, oil, or gas.

Although perhaps humanity is not yet sufficiently advanced to be willingly led by the inventor’s keen searching sense.

Perhaps it is better in this present world of ours that a revolutionary idea be hampered in its adolescence.

All that was great in the past was ridiculed, condemned, combatted, suppressed, only to emerge all the more triumphantly from the struggle.

Our duty is to lay the foundation for those that are to come, and to point the way. Yes, humanity will advance with giant strides.

We are whirling through endless space at an inconceivable speed. All around everything is spinning; everything is moving;

Everywhere, there is energy!”

Source: Freise Brothers

Startup names: illustrating the top 77 best startup names and their rank

77 startup names

The process of finding the right name for your startup can be a painstaking exercise.

Many startups and entrepreneurs today will know firsthand how difficult it is to come up with something ‘perfect.’

And with over 100-million new businesses venturing out each year into the free market, it’s harder and harder to cater to best practice and come up with something that’s ‘two syllables or less’ and ‘clear and punchy’ and one that ‘reasonates with target demographics’ and ‘steers clear from legal issues’ while hurdling through ‘domain scarcity’ issues all at the same time.

And after living through years of watching friends and clients struggle through the startup naming process, stressing over unavailable domain names, experience has taught us how to cut through the clutter with these three main decision-making branches proven to simplify and accelerate the name generating process:

1. Go literal. Many small business owners and startups opt for efficiency and use the main keyword or keyphrase of their service or product as their business name like shoes.com, centralparksightseeing.com and discountcar.com.

2. Go unique. Google, Twitter and Uber all have unique names that evoke a unique brand identity and emotion. All are short and smooth, no longer than two syllables and sound like mysterious words or acronyms, yet, still sound good, look good and are memorable.

3. Go hybrid. A founder can merge both literal and unique naming options to churn out something that is both clear and emotionally engaging. Brands like Pinterest, Flickr and Giphy all sound clever and evoke mystery but also hints at the business service or product when you hear it or see it.

Now as a way to provide a contemporary naming benchmark for your next startup naming exercise, we highlight Venngage’s infographic, an illustration of their top 77 startup names list, ranking today’s cream of the crop from ‘perfect’ to ‘nah.’

Take a look and let us know what you think below in our comments section.

the anatomy of startupsSource: Venngage

What is the most expensive word on Google?

google - wrinkled

Google is shift-disturbing royalty. 97% of their revenue is attributed to advertising, selling ad space and keyphrases via Google AdWords. Consider that for every second that passes by there are over 40, 000 search queries, translating to 3.5-billion search queries a day. Today, Google is worth $527-billion and is hailed as the second most valuable company in the world next to Apple.

According to the good people at WebpageFX and SEMrush, the most expensive keyphrase to date is, “San Antonio car wreck attorney” valued at $670.44 per click, followed by “Accident attorney Riverside VA” at $626.90 per click and “Personal injury attorney Colorado” at $553.08 per click.

Below you’ll find the complete list: The top 100 most expensive words on Google today.

Source: WebpageFX

Adnarchist Newsflash: top stories you may have missed this week Jul 9


The killer robot used by Dallas police appears to be a first -Canadian Business

Facebook headquarters puts up massive Black Lives Matter sign following Dallas massacre -Infowars

The future of advertising is content ‘performance’ marketing -HuffPo

WikiLeaks tells OurMine hackers to impersonate high-profile victims and ‘reveal corrupt behaviour’ -IB Times

Freise brothers create spine-chilling “Not A Dream” ad for Tesla Model S -ADNARCHIST

Canadian startups help farmers dig deep into digital tech with drones, big data -IT Business

How Google is transforming NYC payphones into data goldmines -Village Voice

Tesla crash victim may have got distracted by his laptop -Times of India

Disrupting Internet access is a human rights violation, UN says – Think Progress

Facebook: Falcon Heights shooting video disappeared due to ‘technical glitch’ -VentureBeat

Toronto has a Wi-Fi problem -Torontoist

YouTube may launch an online TV service next year with ESPN, ABC, and CBS -The Verge

Why sports bras and bralettes are disrupting women’s underwear -Fast Company

The best Wi-Fi router (for most people) -The Wire Cutter

The UN says online freedom is a human right that ‘must be protected’ -The Independent

Skype’s bot invasion continues with group chats -PCWORLD

Warning: your wearable device can track your ATM PIN and give it away -TechTimes

15 hidden #Snapchat hacks & features you’ll wish you knew about sooner -HubSpot

Comcast’s Netflix deal could open a new front in Net Neutrality war -Wired

How real is the Artificial Intelligence startup wave? -Economic Times

What did the world’s first tv ad look like?


Timelines and history books have documented the world’s first tv ad, showing us a copy of what the first tv ad looked like. The official first paid television advertisement was broadcasted in the United States of America on July 1, 1941 in New York on WNBT, now WNBC.

The ad was a 10-second spot for Bulova watches and jewelry just before a Brooklyn Dodgers and Philadelphia Phillies game and features a shaky black-and-white screen, a Bulova dial hovering over a US map and a voice-over reciting tagline, “America runs on Bulova time.”

The ad reportedly cost Bulova between $4 to $9. Bulova also was the first US company to broadcast the first radio commercial in 1926, featuring the tagline, “At the tone, it’s eight o’clock, B‑U‑L‑O‑V‑A Watch Time.”

Source: YouTube

Adnarchist Newsflash: top stories you may have missed this week Jun 24


First YouTube ad for Olli, the world’s first self-driving ‘cognitive’ electric car -ADNARCHIST

Ad industry braces for uncertainty after Brexit -MarketWatch

Forecast: 33 percent of internet users will be ad blocking by next year -Marketingland

Despite 4 years trapped in embassy, Assange says WikiLeaks has “very big year” ahead -Salon

Snoopers charter will allow GCHQ to hack all phones and laptops in an overseas town -Infowars

How one matchmaker changed online dating for women everywhere -Broadly

How to make your Android look like a BlackBerry -Android Central

A free and open internet under assault in congress -EFF

Stocks rally on fading fears of disruptive ‘Brexit’ -Forbes

MTS shareholders “Overwhelmingly Approve” acquisition by Bell -iPhone in Canada

Brexit: Trade deals will force UK to follow EU data privacy laws anyway -Ars Technica

74% of Netflix subscribers would rather cancel their subscription than see ads -AllFlicks

How do we achieve an open, secure, trustworthy, and inclusive internet? -EFF

Mark Zuckerberg tapes up his webcam -The Verge

Aviva Ventures investing $180-million over five years in disruptive and high-potential digital startups -Canadian Underwriter

Where is Edward Snowden now? The NSA leaker still has a lot to say about the United States -Bustle

Mobile internet advertising to overtake desktop in 2017 -Zenith Opti Media

Apple won’t collect your data for its AI services unless you let it -Recode

Mark Zuckerberg’s 3 top pieces of business advice for entrepreneurs -Industry Leaders Magazine

Adnarchist Newsflash: top stories you may have missed this week June 4


When economic hit men, pr campaigns and bombs form superpowers -ADNARCHIST

2016 mobile adblocking report -PageFair

This woman’s $4.5 billion wealth just evaporated into nothing -Huffington Post

Second-in-command at Silk Road 2.0 sentenced to 8 years in prison -Ars Technica

How Mark Zuckerberg led Facebook’s war to crush Google Plus -VanityFair

Tesla Model 3’s design will be finished in six weeks, Elon Musk says -The Verge

Fusing cannabis with sugar, DeepCell startup shakes editable market, expects $10-mill round -ADNARCHIST

Yahoo publishes national security letters after FBI drops gag orders -WIRED

TextNow CEO explains how its cost-saving tech is disrupting North America’s phone plan industry -BetaKit

Why is there suddenly such a huge push for ‘Mark of the Beast’ technology? -Infowars

This invisible tech company will have most interesting tech IPO of the year -Quartz

Instagram’s new algorithmic timeline goes live -MobileSyrup

As Canadians continue cutting cable cords, Netflix is the new black -Techvibes

Airbnb rivals run tough ad accusing it of racism -Fast Company

Instagram’s ad business is looking more and more like Facebook’s ad business -Recode

NSA spying scares people away from reading about terrorism -The Next Web

Slaying Goliath: how social will defeat search for ad dollars -AdWeek

The ad-pocalypse is coming: Samsung wants to put ads on your TV menus -TechRadar

Report: Ad blocking users more than double in a year to almost 420 million globally -Marketing Land

Racist ad row: Chinese company blames foreign media -Destiny Connect

Fans in Brazil stage Twitter campaign to bring Windows 10 Mobile phones to country -Windows Central

When being a ‘B Corp’ is better than just a company -Forbes

Net neutrality is complicated: Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales -Economic Times

Google’s new messaging app ‘Allo’ dangerous: expert cautions users of security breach -iTech Post

US government oversight on cross-device targeting will curb ad blocking -The Drum

Adnarchist Newsflash: top stories you may have missed this week May 21


Google AdWords purple ad label officially for map ads -Search Engine Roundtable

Instagram’s Vimeo ad, their new logo and the creative class alternatives -ADNARCHIST

Uber to start testing self-driving cars in Pittsburgh -CNBC

Google brings shopping ads to image searches to fend off Amazon -Recode

British artists made more money on vinyl than on YouTube last year -CNET

TransPod one step closer to making Hyperloop dream a reality with Mersen partnership -BetaKit

The cyberattack that changed the world -Daily Dot

The trouble with the TPP: Cost to the Canadian economy garnering increasing attention -Geist

Google’s new Chatbot won’t shut up — and that’s a good thing -Wired

Rogers releases third transparency report, touts importance of landmark ‘Tower Dump’ case -Mobile Syrup

3Dvarius a 3D printed violin based on an original Stradivarius available from €6,299 (video) -Geeky Gadgets

GM invades Google’s territory with autonomous car testing in San Francisco -Jalopnik

Apple pulls iOS 9.3.2 update for 9.7-Inch iPad Pro after bricking complaints -Mac Rumors

Cybersecurity investment to reach $400 million due to IoT threats -Readwrite

The Internet of Things a hacker’s dream -UBC

CRTC to explore Net neutrality in hearing on Internet, wireless data pricing -BNN

Facebook’s plan to train a new generation of cybersecurity pros -Yahoo!

Edward Snowden says this one thing would save more lives than any NSA surveillance program -Tech Insider

How ad blockers benefit both consumers and advertisers -Entrepreneur

3 campaigns that demonstrate the future of marketing according to Google Canada’s agency lead -IT Business

Internet proves Billy Corgan right following ‘InfoWars’ free speech interview -The Inquisitr

Why this artist is taking her pro-pussy campaign to TCAF -Torontoist

Fueling Canada’s startups: announcing the winner of the GE Fridge Contest -Techvibes

Millions of LinkedIn passwords being sold by hacker – but the data is from 2012 -BNN

Adnarchist Newsflash: top stories you may have missed this week May 14


10 trophy hacks worth knowing, investigating and sharing -ADNARCHIST

This isn’t a Google Streetview car, it’s a government spy truck -Motherboard

Designers react to the new Instagram logo -Creative Bloq

Blockchain’s split personality: Digital disruption or digital distraction? -Computer World

This photo from Calvin Klein’s new NSFW ad campaign is stirring up controversy -Esquire

What Apple Pay means for mobile payments in Canada -MobileSyrup

Forget a Netflix tax: How the digital CanCon review can shake up the status quo -Geist

More than one in five people in the UK will use ad blockers this year -eMarketer

Apple’s $1 billion investment in Didi Chuxing aligned with electric vehicle plans -MacRumors

The man once thought to be Satoshi Nakamoto is raising money for a bitcoin startup -Quartz

Five tech companies making waves at Techfest this month -Techvibes

Digital skills crisis in Irish schools prompts call for reform -Silicon Republic

That excellent Simpsons quote search engine now makes gifs as well -i09

E-book sales in the UK decline for the first time -Engadget

WhatsApp Web now lets you share documents -Android Central

The head of Google’s enterprise apps business is jumping over to run its virtual reality business -Recode

Solar Impulse has made it to Tulsa -Gizmodo

Trump says Amazon’s Bezos has yuuuge antitrust problem -CNET

How a plastic surgeon became a Snapchat sensation -BuzzFeed

Match.com ad suggesting freckles are ‘imperfections’ receives criticism -WPXI

It’s official: Japan now has more electric car charging spots than gas stations -Transport Evolved

Google’s ban on payday loans estimated to cost millions in lost ad revenue -Search Engine Land

Political ad spending way up from 2012 -NPR

If you’re outraged by the Calvin Klein ads, read this -Refinery29

How to create quality Facebook canvas ads -Social Media Examiner

Anti-virus pioneer John Mcafee: Your phone may be snooping on you -Infowars

10 trophy hacks worth knowing, investigating and sharing


Live to explore the limits of possibility…

Hackers live pushing the virtual limits and envelopes in the name of both justice and crime; coming in many forms and hacker values.

From 2009’s Climategate hack leaking evidence reportedly suggesting a global warming hidden agenda to the North Korea hack on Sony’s corporate network before 2014 movie, The Interview, the hacking infographic below provides a timeline of notorious examples.

And despite the publisher’s Gary McKinnon snub, the following 10 trophy pop hacks still are held in high regard by the people of the Internet and the media.

Scroll down for further investigation.


Source: Redscan

Adnarchist Newsflash: top stories you may have missed this week May 7

adnarchist - yellow

Bitcoin’s self-proclaimed founder backtracks -Canadian Business

Researchers develop skin-touch gesture user-interface for wearables -MobileSyrup

Apple is letting you create shareable Mother’s Day videos for Facebook -The Next Web

Highlights from tonight’s YouTube brandcast event: What’s next for Google Preferred -YouTube

What in the world is a raunchy #showhole? Amazon Fire TV says… -ADNARCHIST

The trouble with the TPP: My appearance before the international trade committee -Michael Geist

Adblock Plus will help users pay publishers and keep a cut for itself -Ars Technica

SingTel ad replaces driver’s eyes with VR goggles in spectacular demo -Mashable

NSA and CIA double their warrantless searches on Americans in two years -The Intercept

Canadians expect seamless multi-channel provider experience -Techvibes

IBM Canada ends distribution partnership with Tech Data Canada -Computer Dealer News

Shopify releases q1 2016 results, announces 95 percent increase in revenue yoy -BetaKit

Startup Scaleup: accelerating IoT innovation -Digital Catapult

Condé Nast is betting on virtual reality too -Digiday

The world’s largest startup contest – #500 startups tech leaders -3D Printing Industry

We got eight Indian startup CEOs to tell us their one killer interview question for new hires -Quartz

Meet the CEO of the $1.1 billion startup reforming education in the arab world -Forbes

The Jay Z-funded ‘Uber for private jets’ startup is shutting down -BI

Why MakerBot — and the 3D printing revolution — failed to deliver -The Awl

NASA launches searchable database of public domain patents -Engadget

Amazon poaches AI guru from Xerox PARC to work on Alexa virtual assistant -TechCrunch

Infosys CEO Vishal Sikka says artificial intelligence-enabled automation is today’s biggest disruptor -Economic Times

You don’t see this often: Simultaneous FBI, DHS and DOD cyber espionage alerts -Infowars

Adnarchist Newsflash: top stories you may have missed last week Apr 23

adnarchist - yellow

What was the real motivation behind the war on drugs? -ADNARCHIST

Caught on camera! Tesla Model S autopilot saves driver from crash -ADNARCHIST

Apple releases new Earth Day video featuring Liam and Siri -Mobile Syrup

Social ad spending rises by 86% -Betanews

Native ad click-throughs jump as Google AMP, Facebook Instant Articles expand: report -Luxury Daily

French electronic music legend creates a new track with…Edward Snowden? -A Journal of Musical Things

The average web page is now larger than Doom -PC World

VanHackathon connects Canadian companies to a world of talent -BetaKit

Your phone number is all a hacker needs to snoop -Discovery News

Google adds podcasts to Google Play Music -The Verge

Did you think the battle over net neutrality was over? Think again -Motherboard

The next generation of GMO food is here, and it’s technically not a GMO -BI

AI + humans = kick-ass cybersecurity -PC World

What happens after self-driving cars come to Canada? -Mobile Syrup

The best places to work in Canada -TECHVIBES

Noam Chomsky defends WikiLeaks and declassifying information -Alternet

Here’s one corner of the digital ad world that Google and Facebook don’t dominate -Recode

Microsoft reports $21.7B in revenue for 2016 Q3; Bing search ad earnings up 18% -Marketing Land

Apple touts eco-friendly data centers in new Earth Day ad -Apple Insider

Schools are helping police spy on kids’ social media activity -Infowars

What was the real motivation behind the war on drugs?

war on drugs

What was the real motivation behind the war on drugs?

In a 22-year-old interview released by Dan Baum for Harper’s Magazine’s 2016 April cover, he reveals shocking testimony from former President Richard Nixon aide, John Ehrlichman, who admits that then-President Richard Nixon invented and used the war on drugs as a political tool to disrupt hippie and black communities.

“You want to know what this was really all about? The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”

Dan Baum unearthed the Ehrlichman quote from an old writing book he used to document research for his 1996 book, “Smoke and Mirrors.”

He tracked the former domestic-policy adviser to an engineering firm in Atlanta working on minority recruitment 22 years ago.

Baum commented on Ehrlichman’s confession stating, “I think Ehrlichman was waiting for someone to come and ask him. I think he felt bad about it. I think he had a lot to feel bad about, same with Egil Krogh, who was another Watergate guy.”

In Baum’s admission, he provides insight on the political play, stating in his April article, “Nixon’s invention of the war on drugs as a political tool was cynical, but every president since — Democrat and Republican alike — has found it equally useful for one reason or another.”

According to Baum and his report, for us to win the war on drugs we must, “Legalize it all.”

Disruptive lightning in a bottle indeed…

Let us know what you think in our comments section below.


Adnarchist Newsflash: top stories you may have missed last week Apr 16

adnarchist - yellow - at

Did Zapata Racing just make the first ad for the world’s first hoverboard? -ADNARCHIST

House passes bill to sabotage net neutrality -EFF

Justin Trudeau’s quantum leap -Macleans

At the Tribeca Film Festival, virtual reality gives storytellers a new, immersive medium -Ars Technica

Apple says it has the ‘most effective security organization in the world’ -Recode

Live video viewing up 86% over last year in MLB’s At Bat app, thanks to addition of multitasking -Tech Crunch

Apple says FBI has failed to prove necessity in New York iPhone unlock case -Apple Insider

Tesla Model X windshield may cause drivers to experience double vision -Jalopnik

Postmedia, AgilityForex agree to revenue-sharing marketing collaboration -TechVibes

These 5 facts explain the scary new era of ‘Forced Transparency’ -TIME

Secure cars, but not phones? Government doublespeak on cybersecurity -The Intercept

Connected health is a growing Canadian trend, but privacy officials aren’t so sure -Mobile Syrup

Medium is now blocked in China -Tech In Asia

Edward Snowden has too much free time, starts making music -Engadget

Alphabet is plotting a digital city full of Google cars, high-speed Internet and maybe more! -Recode

Shoe company New Balance says US gov’t basically offered it a bribe to support TPP -Techdirt

CRTC created 3 forum posts to hear Canadian’s response to telecommunications -Reddit

The vigilante who hacked Hacking Team explains how he did it -Motherboard

Adnarchist Newsflash: top stories you may have missed last week Apr 9

adnarchist - yellow - at

Infographic: how Bitcoin will disrupt the financial system -ADNARCHIST

Huge data leak reveals the hidden wealth of the rich and famous -Engadget

Facebook just launched a feature that will revolutionize the way millions of people experience the social network -BI

New bill would require companies to decrypt data on demand -The Verge

Disruptive innovation in healthcare: what to expect in 2016 -Samsung

Advertising through awareness: for city startups, social marketing is the new cause -Economic Times

NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden speaks to Vancouver crowd via videolink -CKNW

A startup insider photographed 100 people to change the way we think about Silicon Valley -QZ

It’s absurd we need ‘Broadband Facts’ to tell us how much the Internet costs -Motherboard

Overstock.com CEO Patrick M. Byrne on blockchain and the duture of online retail -Equities

Canadian spy agency regularly using new “disruption” powers -WSWS

7 cybersecurity tips for lawyers -Above The Law

Your letters for Monday, April 4: Sparks Street, sharing data -Ottawa Citizen

How Amazon will kill your local grocer -Bloomberg

Your next MacBook may have a touchscreen keyboard -TNW

The CIA wants beauty products to collect your DNA fuuuuuuuuck -Gizmodo

US government still pursuing court order to unlock iPhone in New York case -Ars Technica

Quebec net neutrality advocates decry planned block of online gambling sites -Casino

Fingerprints to be tested as currency -Infowars

Are wearables failing? An early 2016 recap


Most people think wearables will be a big deal, but they’re not yet, and there’s the sneaky suspicion that we don’t quite understand their best use cases or ideal UX. Here’s a roundup of some doom and gloom surrounding wearables in early 2016.

Prepare yourself for lots of pictures of hairy wrists…

The Apple Watch just ain’t very useful (and ain’t selling)

Celebrities don’t wear them any more. High profile reviews have highlighted how frustrating they are to use. Same goes for all smartwatches, reliant as they are on pairing with a smartphone, they haven’t carved out a niche yet. When will a truly watch-first app come along?

IDC estimates 4.1m Apple Watches were sold in Q4 of 2015, only a 5% increase on Q3 (uplift from Q3 to gift-buying Q4 is usually much higher for tech hardware).

Essentially, many analysts reckon sales in 2015 can be explained by Apple fans and the power of the brand.

Read more

When seven tobacco CEOs said, “nicotine is not addictive” under oath on CSPAN

addictive - pink

Friendly reminder: listen and watch for the song and dance of persuasion and manipulation as it will lead you down the roads of power, fame and conspiracy. If you fall on deaf ears, we’ll take you to a time when seven tobacco CEOs of the seven biggest tobacco companies in North America sung and danced under oath testifying, “I believe nicotine is not addictive” during a congressional meeting on C-SPAN.

The seven tobacco CEOs in the C-SPAN video are: Mr. Campbell President of Philip Morris U.S.A.; Mr. J. Johnston Chairman and CEO of RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company; Mr. Taddeo President of U.S. Tobacco, Mr. Tisch Chairman and CEO of Lorillard Tobacco Company; Mr. Horrigan Chairman and CEO of Liggett Group, Mr. Sandefur Chairman and CEO of Brown and Williamson Tobacco Company; Mr. D Jonston President and CEO of American Tobacco Company.

Today tobacco causes 6-million deaths each year and is projected to cause 8-million deaths by 2030.

Source: C-SPAN

Adnarchist Newsflash: Top cyberlaw stories of the week March 13

adnarchist - yellow - at

Bill C-51 should be repealed, not amended -Rabble

#Ironic: When #TheTriggering free speech hashtag got too popular, Twitter CENSORED it -The Rebel Media

The long road ahead: Obama’s cybersecurity action is a step toward change -TechCrunch

AdBlock, Riots, Weiwei and Amnesty team up against cyber censorship -The News Tribe

CCLA & CJFE mounting charter challenge against Bill-C51 -CCLA

Snowden says FBI doesn’t really need Apple to unlock iPhone -MarketWatch

Silicon Valley firm’s stumble signals chill in cybersecurity market -Yahoo

The Internet of Things: the cyber vulnerability landscape emerges -Nat Law Review

One year after Snowden warning, how Canada has changed -The Tyee

Presidential Candidates get graded on their cybersecurity stances -Dark Reading

Top Cyber News: security spending soars, Obama snubs Apple, hack-a-human -Forbes

New privacy rules expected for Internet providers -Canadian Business

White House’s claims that the TPP would curb Internet censorship are fantasy -EFF

Imagineers: cybersecurity expert Jaya Baloo on hackers, AI and creating better humans -The Next Web

Still not done yet: Michael Geist unearths the trouble with the TPP Pt. 3 -Open Media

NSA Is mysteriously absent from FBI-Apple fight -The Intercept

Terra Privacy, LLC offers a user-friendly solution to stop Internet hackers in their tracks -Digital Journal

The people must win the digital revolution -Rabble

UK spy agency admits it is LOSING cyber-security battle – despite government spending almost £1bn -Mirror CO UK

Why the NSA doesn’t support the FBI in the San Bernardino iPhone case -BGR

The cyber world: predicting the unpredictable -IT Proportal

LA Chefs movie review – Cowspiracy: truth or propaganda?


EXAMINER — BY Stephen Swick

Cowspiracy, like the movie 2016 Obama’s America on the far right (or Michael Moore films on the left), uses “facts” and talking heads to further the filmmakers’ particular agenda. The film largely repeats all of the arguments made by Richard Oppenlander DDS in his book Comfortably Unaware. The film tones down that book’s rhetoric not, like the book, citing more controversial organizations (e.g. PETA and PCRM) as references. Instead under the guise of concern for the environment, Cowspiracy’s instead ultimately reveals its real absolutist agenda by concluding that a vegan diet is the only solution to climate change, and no one can eat meat and call him or herself an environmentalist.

Thus Cowspiracy’s real agenda is to promote abolitionist veganism. Oppenlander is a abolitionist vegan. This strand of veganism is pretty much fundamentalist veganism meaning it allows for no alternatives or compromises. The real goal of Abolitionist vegans is to get rid of all livestock. They oppose any form of livestock management. To achieve this goal, such advocates pretty much use any means necessary to reach their goal including gross oversimplification of complex issues, finding “scape cows,”cherry picking the worse statistics, spinning those statistics, and in some cases downright lying to further their cause. Heck, if they just were vegan for moral reasons, fine. But absolutism is counterproductive, and doesn’t lead to real meaningful debate or solutions. Absolutism stifles dialogue.

Utilizing this any means necessary approach, the film’s vegan talking heads even go so far as to ironically borrow conventional feedlot cattle industry talking points almost verbatim to argue against any alternatives including smaller pasture based 100% grass fed cattle ranches. Thus the film argues that there is no such thing as sustainable livestock by quoting abolitionist vegan activist and NYC urbanite Demosthenes Maratos (aka @nycVeganPunk) while simultaneously glibly dismissing Allan Savory. Thus there is no mention of methods Savory champions including carbon sequestration, methane oxidation regenerative agriculture and holistic management. (Methods that all help against climate change that use cattle in an environmentally beneficial way).

The conventional feedlot finished cattle industry use the talking points, that vegans like Maratos and Oppenlander borrowed, to undermine the efforts of small ranches since small ranchers critique their industrial systems (especially input intensive environmentally unsound ones) and take market share. Small 100% grass fed ranchers do this by providing consumers with a more ethical and environmentally friendly alternative that’s better for the consumer’s health and cattle’s welfare.

So no, contrary to the communications director, NYC vegan punk’s, bold-faced lie, pastured grass finished cattle are NOT worse for the environment because they live longer than conventionally feedlot finished cattle. Cattle managed properly may be used to help combat climate change especially by being an integral part of a system that sequesters carbon and methane into healthier soils- see Cows Save the Planet by Judith D. Schwartz and Defending Beef by Nicolette Hahn Niman as well as recent peer reviewed research done by the University of Georgia and at Texas A&M.

In an almost comical moment during the film, after visiting a small pastured ranch (Markegard Family Grass Fed) where the duped and lied to rancher plays the foil, the narrator Kip Andersen extrapolates a number for necessary acres for pastured cattle based upon this one ranch without understanding the rancher’s operating methods or having the slightest understanding of how stocking rates are determined…let alone how different grazing methods, locations and slew of other variables impact those stocking rates. In Kip’s over eagerness to further shoot down grass fed and finished cattle as an alternative to grain finshed cattle, Kip fails to realize or mention that over 3/4 of cattle in the US are already on grass, and majority of the world’s cattle are also already on grass. According to cattle inventories, from the University of Missouri for 2014 only 22 mill of the approx 88 mil of cattle in the US are in feedlots (13 mill beef cattle) or CAFO’s (9 mill dairy cows).

In reality Kip, like city dweller NYC vegan punk Maratos, is clueless. Kip’s contrived land requirement number is meaningless as well as grossly inaccurate. (This math comes from Oppenlander’s book noted above, pages 123 and 124, where Oppenlander makes the absurd assertion that there are a billion “cows” in CAFO’s and feedlots). One would have to assume that neither has ever been to a cow-calf operation where 66 mill head of US inventory including bulls, cows, calves and replacement heifers are on GRASS. Though it’s no surprise that Kip is so utterly clueless because his “statistics advisor” for this film as listed in the closing credits is the dentist Oppenlander, who like most of the other abolitionist vegan talking heads in this film is anything but an expert on sustainability, ranching, the environment or pretty much any other issue raised in this film. .

As a side bar, Doniga Markegard noted, “We were lied to by the directors from the start. Our words twisted to make us sound ignorant to things such as the carbon cycle.”

So the film, in order to make it’s initial argument, that there is a conspiracy to deny livestock’s impact upon global warming (before furthering its absolute one), Cowspiracy refers to the 2006 FAO Long Shadow Report. Though the film fails to refer to the more recent 2013 revisions to that report from the FAO that lower the prior report’s livestock emission numbers from 18% down to 14.5%. The revised report also states that agricultural emissions can be cut an additional 30% with better “intensified” management practices. The film doesn’t delve into how the original 2006 number was generated so doesn’t acknowledge any of the politics or math behind this and the later revised numbers. The movie doesn’t also recognize that the intent of the authors of the 2006 FAO report was to provide an argument for “intensification” i.e. more factory farms, and not less meat consumption. This article, “A load of hot air?” printed in The Guardian back in 2008, points out some of the questionable methodologies the FAO used to derive their statistics plus points out the irony of abolitionist vegans appropriating the original 2006 eighteen percent number as this community’s mantra when the article notes the following:

“…These campaigners and websites all derive their 18% figure from a single source: a report published in November 2006 by the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), called Livestock’s Long Shadow. The IRONY is that the agenda promoted in this report is diametrically opposed to that of most greens and vegans. Its authors’ mission is not to phase out or reduce meat-eating; indeed, they anticipate that world meat consumption will have doubled from 229m tonnes in 2001 to 465m tonnes by 2050. Nor do they want to see an end to factory farming. Instead, they say that “intensification and perhaps industrialization of farming is the inevitable long-term outcome”, which can “only be achieved at the cost of pushing numerous small- and middle-scale producers out of business”…”

The movie then goes on to reference numbers from the late vegan activist Robert Goodland’s 2009 World Watch non-peer-reviewed report that have been completely rejected by the greater scientific community (including the UN long shadow authors). The way Goodland generated his numbers was dubious at best. As pointed out in the peer-reviewed report “Livestock and greenhouse gas emissions: The importance of getting the numbers right”, Goodland takes only half of the equation of cycles without factoring in the other half of cycles that mitigate emissions. Plus Goodland spun scenarios that maximized his emission numbers. Here’s another excellent critique of the World Watch report that points out this reports many flaws: Climate chicanery. Like Goodland’s non-peer reviewed report, Cowspiracy provides a lot of graphics with numerical statistics but doesn’t really explain how any of these numbers were calculated. As in political pseudo documentaries like “2016: Obama’s America”, figures lie, and liars (especially a certain dentist) figure or, at least, spin data and “facts” to reinforce their biases. The modus operandi? Repeat the spin often enough so, even if it is a lie, it becomes the truth.

There is obviously no reference to the Union of Concerned Scientists 2011 report that states: “Climate-friendly beef production practices reduce methane and nitrous oxide emissions while increasing carbon sequestration.” There also isn’t any reference to more recent conflicting EPA’s numbers that put all agricultural emissions at 10% well below the energy and transportation sectors of 32% and 28% respectively. The EPA’s numbers for the US are similar to those numbers for greenhouse gases noted in the 2014 UN Climate Change committee’s report where the entire agricultural sector in the US (farming and livestock) accounts for slightly over 8% of the total and, doing the math, enteric methane from cattle is only 2.17% of the total amount of greenhouse gases emitted.

Thus like “2016: Obama’s America”, this film isn’t about balance. It’s a propaganda piece. So aside from a few brief editted clips from a duped Michael Pollan, all the so-called “experts” quoted at length are really just die hard abolitionist vegan activists like Richard Oppenlander DDS, David Simon, Will Tuttle, Demosthenes Maratos, and the “Mad Cowboy” Howard Lyman. There aren’t any other voices. No one from the Savory Institute, Carbon Nation or the Grass Fed Exchange. It’s like having Dick Cheney, Sean Hannity, John McCain, and Mitt Romney discuss Obama’s foreign policy on Fox News (or an equally slanted panel in the opposite direction on MSNBC). There’s absolutely no effort at balance. Everything presented is done so to present and support a single biased point of view.

The film repeatedly returns to the dentist Oppenlander, the film’s “statistic advisor” who is someone (in his abolitionist vegan lectures on youtube) who also mocks local food systems and the word sustainable while advocating for highly processed vegan protein energy bars. Like noted above, the film is largely based on Oppenlander book Comfortably Unaware. In his book and in this pseudo doc, the dentist basically blames all the world’s problems on “cows.” Oppenlander’s disdain for hamburgers seems to emanate from not being able to sell enough of his Ope’s B-12 fortified fake meat vegan patties (so yes Oppenlander has a vested interested in highly processed vegan food production, something not mentioned in the pseudo doc). The dentist Oppenlander even goes so far in the film to blame all the dead zones in waterways on cattle farming without the slightest critique or mention of large agricultural use of synthetic fertilizers or monocultures. The Mad Cowboy, Lyman suggests we can use all the feed crops grown instead for humans also without the slightest critique of the impact of NPK fertilizers, and monocrops on soil and waterway health. There’s zero discussion of how price supports, tax credits and crop insurance impact the type of crops farmers grow and thus why so much ends up as animal feed, in processed foods (high fructose corn syrup, soy lecithin, etc) or as ethanol. Furthermore during the film’s discussion of rain forest conversion there’s zero discussion on what role land speculation, government corruption, and sugarcane production also plays in deforestation. Nor do the filmmaker’s note Greenpeace’s role in reducing year to year deforestation rates in the Amazon eighty percent (since 2004) via their 2006 soy and 2009 meat moratoriums.

Deforestation involves a lot of issues including land speculation, mining, timber, farming, ethanol production, etc. In general there is so little larger context of any issue that at times this film, with its gross over simplifications of complex problems, feels more like a cartoon or mockumentary than a documentary.

At the end of the film, the movie suggests that veganic agriculture can replace all animal inputs without exploring the methane and carbon dioxide emission ramifications of composting at a large scale, the adverse carbon impacts of tillage, the reality of seasons, the vast amount of lands/grass lands not suitable for crops, and the dearth of minerals from just composting green matter. Though there is zero discussion of soil, soil building or soil health in this film therefore any balanced conversation on the advantages and importance of integrated and regenerative no-till organic farming shouldn’t have been expected.

Then again, this is a fairly simple-minded film so if anything was actually critically discussed in depth the agenda wouldn’t be as clear or convincing to devout vegangelicals, who are this film’s most boisterous advocates and who probably have spent very little to no time on ranches or farms. Again like “2016: Obama’s America”, Cowspiracy is about spreading propaganda to further an agenda and not an in depth or real discussion on what needs to be done or can be done to reduce global emissions. Plus by being so uncompromising with its absolute position on any animal husbandry or meat consumption, the film fractures communities of people who should be united against factory farms, CAFO’s and feedlots, by turning them into antagonists. But then again with many of the speeches I’ve listened to by abolitionist vegans, I cynically believe that division is some of these abolitionists’ hidden intent, that is to divide people who should be allies against factory farming (including industrial agriculture) and all the horrific aspects that this form of farming entails especially in regards to environmental degradation.

If the movie was genuinely concerned about the environment, the pseudo doc’s directors would have provided a more balanced view including more data from other sources, talked to actual experts (not just vegan advocates) on the topics raised, and not dismissed solutions that included alternative ways of raising and managing livestock. Again, though not as blatant as a PETA production, this film is first and foremost interested in promoting vegan-ism not environmentalism.

Source: Examiner

An uncensored message from the Adnarchist

question everything

Question everything. Question this source. Question this title, this motive and our editors, our advertisers, our writers, the medium and this bloody message, the freaking art work and the design, the code, the CMS, the colour scheme every fucking thing. Every definition, every error, every sentence fragment and run-on sentence, every euphemism, every testimonial, every glittering generality, every transfer, every bandwagon, every name call, every card stack, every appeal to fear and prejudice, every big lie, every beautiful fucking person, every cherry pick, every euphoria, every exaggeration, every love bomb, every red herring, every repetition, every scapegoat and every straw man. Question your identity, your family, your friends, your teachers, your confidants, your idols, your environments, your governments, your gods, your everything. Every form of communication has a meaning and every meaning has a purpose that summons anyone to react to its call, wanting you to obey. Question everything and search for answers and then let freedom ring.