UbiNET Platform from UbiNET Inc. with cryptocurrency and blockchain 2018 asset sale

The UbiNET Platform is built up from several propositions that each hold a key relationship ecosystem. UbiNET is designated a planet wide system as its architecture is designed for any planet and an in-transit mode for between planets.

thingcoin cryptocurrency coinUbiNET Platform – Blockchain data management of unique id in ThingCoin

UbiNET-c-Token – Corporation (Business) Cryptocurrency that issues ThingCoin’s

UbiNET-p-Token – Person (Individual) Cryptocurrency that issues ThingCoin’s

ThingCoin – Data description of micro-sensor embedded in everything

UbiNET – Planet data token

While the system has been defined using the constructs of blockchain and cryptocurrency they are just the enablers of a complex data system with millions of products and services from full lifecycle recycling to personal security and most importantly personal privacy.

UbiNET Open API Marketplace

UbiNET Inc. will be setting up some of the initial data products for participants but will also establish an open API marketplace for developers to access non personally identifiable data and personal open API for individuals to choose who can access their identification and their transaction details.

UbiNET Asset Sale

In 2018 we will be releasing 200 UbiNET-c-Token at a fixed asset price of $500,000 each given what the do in UbiNET this is a bargain. The money raised will be used to build the first fully functioning UbiNET this is costed as being $100,000,000. At this point the asset sale is set to be in Fiat (USD) to enable businesses to get the Token.

If you would like sign up for one of the 200 coins being offered in 2018 please use the form on UbiNET.

Tagged : / / / / / / / / / / / /

#Paradigm #Interactions #Venture #Capital Buyout Declined

The company that I am a CEO of in the United States of America, Paradigm Interactions Inc. has just issued the following press release;

To confirm Paradigm Interactions Inc. has been contacted by a New York City, Venture Capital company regarding investment, a defacto buyout.

At this time we have declined

Paradigm Interactions Inc. is involved the next generation post smart device internet as part of it’s project Charlemagne and based upon our Open Networking Ecosystem Protocol Patent until this project is completed in 2017 we are not considering any offers.

We said no, because it was a significantly under valued offer, given the IoT and Blockchain US Patents we are working on, still I was not aware we were even on anyones list yet. The yearly value of the market represented by our Open Networking Ecosystem Protocol (ONEP) patent in just the USA is estimated to be worth $100,000,000,000.

Tagged : / / / / / / / / /

#Strategic and #lean #thinking in private investment and asset portfolio participants part 2

There are several types of on boarding that relate to both business and investors structure and size, their specific purpose for investing and their local regulatory constraints.

The Main Participants

I will be focusing on four main participants in this post financial advisers (FA) and investors (I), either or both of these may be constituted by companies, funds or individuals and para planners (PP), local office administrators (external or internal) (AD), company back office administrators (AD). Other participants are traders, local regulation, international treaties, company regulation, regulatory reporting, trustees, product managers and the security services.

Financial Adviser

The role of the financial adviser is shaped by the organisation they work for both by its nature and its size. As a general rule, the smaller the firm, the more the adviser is likely to be involved in the process of client management. They will be managing their calendar, running segmentation reports, and getting to know the systems their firm uses. An adviser in a larger firm may spend more time on face-to-face client interaction and will delegate other tasks to administrators and Para-planners. They will be an avid consumer of research, but might have summaries prepared by para-planners. The adviser’s use of online tools and services will vary, but this is an attitudinal variable and is less correlated to the size of firm. They may view online tools as essential to helping perform well on behalf of their clients, in which case they will be a demanding and sometimes critical user. Alternatively they may be wary of disintermediation, seeing online servicing as a threat and something that could devalue the relationships they have carefully cultivated with their clients.

Financial Advisor High Level Processes by Karl Smith
Financial Advisor High Level Processes by Karl Smith


Para-planners are usually younger than advisers, and probably use online tools more frequently during the average working day. They will often carry out tasks for example, creating illustrations or portfolio models on the instructions of a financial adviser or as a way to show capability for the next step in their career. Although the Para-planner often carries out similar tasks to the administrator, their context of use differs. They may be an aspiring adviser herself, and their tasks are usually part of a larger, open-ended activity, such as research, where they help shape the approach. This means that although Para-planners often make use of process-heavy features, they are less process-driven than administrators. For Para-planners, attitudes to technology may be less behaviour-defining than for advisers: not at a sufficiently advanced career stage to make decisions on behalf of the firm, and will make use of the technologies available. Finally, they are likely to be heavily involved in the planning and aftermath of client review meetings, even if they do not attend them. They will play an essential role in meeting preparation and in executing any follow-up actions agreed with the client. In this sense they are a key resource for the adviser, and will therefore value any tools that help them work more rapidly and more effectively.

Para Planner High Level Processes by Karl Smith
Para Planner High Level Processes by Karl Smith


Of all the participants the investor is most subject to variation. The main reason for this is that, while other participants are shaped to a certain extent by their job roles and the responsibilities, constraints and priorities these involve, investors are strongly defined by attitudinal factors which vary from individual to individual. One key factor that defines how an investor interacts with the product company is their degree of financial mediation, with discretionary investors on one end of the spectrum and self-directed investors on the other. The differences between these extremes are so significant that, these will need to be defined as distinct participants later. Other factors that will strongly shape investor behaviour include risk tolerance, investment horizon, degree of financial engagement & sophistication, the amount of time devoted to financial matters, and the way online information is located and used (this last factor is important even if an investor is entirely discretionary). It is also important to remember that the investor participants as well as the product company’s business goals relating to them are heavily affected by the stage of their relationship with the product company and with their adviser.

Investor High Level Processes by Karl Smith
Investor High Level Processes by Karl Smith


The roles carried out by administrators can vary significantly based on size of firm and the age or career ambitions of the administrator. Some administrators see the job as a transitional stage before attending university and receiving a financial qualification others might be called “career administrators” and might have been working in this role for many years. Some administrators especially career administrators may have become experts in the systems they use on a daily basis. In smaller and mid-sized firms, these administrators will probably be the company’s leading expert on these systems, and there are real-life examples of administrators who have created manuals for asset management systems which are used to train new staff. These experts can sometimes be most resistant to changes, even when the changes represent a tangible improvement, as they have invested so much time becoming familiar with the old system. Resistance to change is less pronounced among administrators who are younger, less experienced, or who do not intend to stay in the role in the longer term. Administrators are not key decision-makers in an organisation, but they are key users, if a system frustrates them and reduces their efficiency, their firm will suffer.


Related Posts

Author Links

Tagged : / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /

Less #UX wireframe #fluff and more #Proof of the #pudding

Less UX fluff and more Proof of the pudding!

In recent years the flaws in user experience design (UX) based in wireframe exercises have become more evident to professional IT people as the business has become flooded with unqualified people.

User experience is the interior designer of the computing world

I recently heard from a Bank that they wanted people with less fluffy thinking, there is a certain perception that user experience design is the interior designer of the computing world. Designers don’t need analytics (engineering principals), computer languages (material science), usability testing experience (ergonomics), user research experience (anthropometrics, human behavioural science), business management, project management all they need is colour theory and basic graphics.

Clients should expect measurable proof (KPI’s) before development

Because user experience appears to afford a rapid project method, the point is being missed on many expensive projects “diagrams are not proof of delivery”, solid KPI’s showing the process to form them, what they deliver, how and when they can be measured and what the success criteria is should be required for investment. Businesses rightly need to show that they are not wasting money to shareholders and the public (in the case of publicly owned or supported) but for the most part UX is not based on research but uses design patterns. The problem with design patterns is that there are huge risks associated with using them without doing any primary research. Such research would also provide UX KPI’s for businesses.

Who is qualified in UX?

This is a difficult question to answer as no professional body currently represents user experience at a professional level (including the UXPA), so in effect anyone can call themselves a user experience designer, architect or consultant.

I know a lot of employment agencies get burned by people who can’t do the job and digital agencies go through a string of low paid, no experience people. In one case I reviewed an in house UX person’s work after the digital agency called me in to smooth out a relationship with a major brand client who said they “would not pay for this crap”. The UX person’s work was rubbish, wireframe notation non-existent and no functional specification how they expected to pass it to a developer I have no idea.

Verbal communication is a key aspect of the job and this person was very shy. From my side I have an MSc in Computer Science and a BA in Design, plus professional qualifications.

Characteristics of UX people

When I interview UX people I look for great communicators who can not only talk about the subject but also about themselves with confidence, who have a wide experience in usability, research and computing (I always use control questions as well, where I know the best practice answer).

  1. I look for opinionated people who can back up their views, passionate people (but not falling into the advocacy fight user vs. business) who are balanced and know what to fight for at the right point in a project.
  2. I look for logical thinkers and while this might sound easy it’s one of the hardest skills to find.
  3. I will usually ask the person to describe an interactive system they have designed as it shows the logic model used and dependencies they have recognised.
  4. I also look for professional people, UX people are not rock stars they are service providers.
  5. I expect them to be respectful of people and their time, attend planned / booked meetings and advise or change meetings if they are running late.
  6. I also expect them to have professional indemnity insurance, why would they not, if they are professionals?

Formal scientific methods, rather than the pseudo science used in marketing

Beyond the above UX people need formal scientific methods, rather than the pseudo science used in marketing that is leaking into UX at the moment.

Business people need proof they can show the board of directors sometime just to release the funding more often to show them they are competent.

I was heartened recently when a VP from a major consultancy mentioned the use of Ethnographics, I think he was shocked to find out I created the method in 2002 for usability studies as a digital enactment method based upon ethnography. Someone has always created methods (I have created six and defined four key concepts in research) so be careful when you talk about them as you may be talking to their creators.

The proof of the pudding or just a guess and can the business afford the risk?

Scientific methods create repeatable (rigorous; extremely thorough, exhaustive and accurate) results that can be used as the bases of complex interactive systems design without these types of methods is just a guess.

In previous years it has been the domain of Managing Directors and Heads of Department to go with their gut feeling about how their customers and clients want to interact with them, now it’s UX people.

Can businesses really afford to risk so much on the guess of a UX person or would they rather mitigate the risk with some research and KPI’s first?

Tagged : / / / / / / / / / / /