Monthly Archives: December 2023

Get these EdTech stocks to prepare for shifts in the education industry

Source: fizkes / Shutterstock.com

Education is a core pillar of a vibrant society, and the industry continues to evolve. Technology has made educational resources more accessible for many people. Its possible to access a library of online information, complete college degrees online and attend live classes.

Any industry with rising demand and a pathway for innovation can reward investors who get in early. Even some of the most established EdTech stocks offer many opportunities. Investors looking to profit from tech in education may want to load up on these three stocks.

Source: Postmodern Studio / Shutterstock.com

Coursera(NYSE:COUR) partners with colleges, universities and companies to offer educational resources. The company makes money through a monthly subscription. The company also receives a percentage of every tuition payment made through the platform.

Coursera has had a rocky start since its IPO and is down by almost 60% from its all-time high. However, a company that disappoints shortly after its IPO isnt necessarily a bad investment. Shares have catapulted 60% year-to-date resulting in a $3 billion market cap.

Coursera achieved21% year-over-year revenue growthand minimized its net losses in the third quarter. A notable trend investors should monitor is thedecline of college enrollmentswhich had been going on before the pandemic.

Its easy to see why enrollments are down. Students get straddled into high debt, and a degree doesnt offer the same guarantees as it did in the past. Coursera makes the path to a career more affordable.

The platform also features European universities which have lower tuition fees than their American counterparts. Some companies even accept certifications that demonstrate expertise in a certain subject. Coursera should benefit as more people turn away from universities.

Source: IgorGolovniov / Shutterstock.com

Even with innovation in the education industry, students and teachers often go back to popular resources. When most people have questions, they go to Google to find the answer. Google is one of the many companies under the Alphabet (NASDAQ:GOOG, NASDAQ:GOOGL) umbrella. The company also owns YouTube.

These two search engine juggernauts command plenty of attention. Google receives a mind-boggling89.3 billion visits per month, and that doesnt include YouTube. That type of reach allows Google to run ads and command high asking prices.

Alphabet isnt only making money with advertising. The company also uses Google Cloud to power many websites. Its suite of online products like Gmail and Google Docs are popular resources for students and teachers.

Alphabet has become a critical player in education technology. The company continues to innovate and generate healthy profit margins for investors. Shares have gained 58% year-to-date and are up by 173% over the past five years.

Source: dennizn / Shutterstock

Duolingo(NASDAQ:DUOL) is a mobile app and website that helps people learn new languages. Its the go-to app for the immersive experience it provides. Students are required to write and speak in the language they want to learn.

Duolingo has over83 million monthly active userswhich grew by 47% year-over-year. Daily active users jumped by 63% year-over-year to 24.2 million. The high user growth led to an impressive 43% year-over-year revenue growth rate.

Duolingo makes most of its revenue from subscriptions. The company also makes some money from advertising, English tests and a category labeled as Other. This all-encompassing component primarily consists of in-app sales of virtual goods. Total bookings were up by 49% year-over-year which implies a strong finish to the year.

Duolingo is poised to accelerate its revenue growth rates withthe recent addition of music and mathto its flagship app. Music and math expand Duolingos addressable market and can increase the apps average revenue per user.

On this date of publication, Marc Guberti held a long position in DUOL. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the writer, subject to theInvestorPlace.comPublishing Guidelines.

Visit link:

EdTech Evolution: 3 Stocks Educating the Next Generation - InvestorPlace

Alisa DiCaprio, Chief Economist at R3, explores how regulatory sandboxes and networks can drive the growth of institutional DeFi and tokenization

The primary missing piece in DeFi is what its sought to avoid: regulation. But over the past 12 months, the UK and EU have made several significant steps towards creating an innovative and enduring digital economy by building out the digital assets regulatory regime.

In March, the European Union launched its DLT pilot regime, and in June the UK passed the Financial Services and Markets Act (FSMA), creating a Financial Market Infrastructure (FMI) sandbox. More recently, in October, the Financial Conduct Authority in the UK introduced plans for a fund tokenization blueprint that was released later.

As we go into 2024, what other developments should we expect?

Despite a dip in fintech investment and uncertain macroeconomic conditions, the UK has continued to make strides in financial services innovation. The economy has maintained a competitive edge in the sector, showcasing its ongoing commitment to advancing financial technologies through several progressive initiatives.

In June, the Financial Services and Markets Act (FSMA) was passed into legislation, a significant milestone in accelerating financial markets innovation in the UK. Part of the Edinburgh reforms package, the act put distributed ledger technology (DLT) front and centre in its mission to enable enduring financial services innovation.

Provisions set forth by this reform, such as the creation of a Financial Market Infrastructure (FMI) digital securities sandbox, bring DLT into a secure, regulated environment. For entities in highly regulated markets, the FSMA FMI sandbox provision is key. The FMI sandbox will allow firms to experiment with DLT within a regulated framework by temporarily changing specific legislation.

The FMI sandbox will serve as a stepping stone to a more collaborative, open, and trusted digital economy. Because of this, it has frequently been compared to the European Unions DLT pilot regime. Though both have the ultimate goal of determining whether DLT-based market infrastructure will be successful permanently, there are a few key differences between them.

The EUs DLT pilot, which went live in March 2023, is similar to the UKs FMI sandbox in that it also offers firms a slight reprieve from legislation to explore the use of DLT and blockchain. However, there are several factors which differentiate the EUs pilot from the FMI sandbox.

To begin, the FSMA enables far broader participation in the FMI sandbox than the DLT pilot regime allows. While UK sandbox participants can include both FMI providers and participants as well as technology companies, the EUs pilot only allows multilateral trading facilities and securities settlement systems.

The use cases for each concept also differ significantly. The EU pilot offers an exemption to the MiFID II and CSDR regulations as it enables firms to test and experiment with DLT, but the FMI sandbox allows for the dis-application of a much wider range of legislation. The FMI sandbox not only exempts firms from current legislation, but it also goes one step further by allowing for the modification of legislation in certain scenarios. Because of this, the FMI sandbox may result in a more targeted regulatory framework for various use cases.

The technology itself differs as well. While much of the focus has been on the use of DLT, it is not the only developing technology that could be tested or adopted under the sandbox. Meanwhile, the EU pilot sets out frameworks specifically for DLT multilateral trading facilities and settlement systems.

The FSMA represents a significant shift in the UKs financial regulatory framework and a massive step forward for the transformative potential of DLT-based systems across all financial markets. The implementation of the FSMA proposal will require substantial collaboration across the public and private sectors, as regulators and governments work with technology providers to deliver.

Already at the forefront of innovation in the digital assets space, the UK is pushing ahead hard to not just evolve the technology for various use cases but to ensure the correct frameworks to support those who adopt are in place as well.

In October, the UKs Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) announced its plans for a fund tokenization blueprint, that was released in late 2023. The blueprint is an important step in setting out how fund managers can innovate with tokenization successfully and securely, as well as maintain a level of standardisation, and potential for collaboration, into the equation.

Over the next five years, DLT is predicted to help tokenize an estimated $5 trillion in assets. There are already several real-world examples of tokenizations ability to democratise financial market access, enhance collateral mobility, and streamline costs. For example, HSBC recently tokenized ownership of the physical gold in its London vault, and Euroclear settled its first digital bond using its new Digital Financial Market Infrastructure (D-FMI).

However, whether these first few positive indications will continue and grow into real, large-scale change is heavily dependent on whether the right regulations and networks are in place to enable adoption. The EU Commission recently identified the sectors lack of interoperability as one of the most significant obstacles to enabling a thriving digital economy. As the technology evolves, custody and control frameworks are vital, as is prioritising interoperability across the different regions and players driving those evolutions.

An encouraging step in the right direction, the FCA recently announced a partnership with the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS), the Financial Services Agency of Japan (FSA), and the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA) on digital asset innovation.

Through continued dedication to smart frameworks and consistent collaboration, we can leverage tokenization to reach the ultimate end goal for the market participants controlling their assets securely, seamlessly, and in a streamlined way across different networks.

View original post here:

Looking ahead: What will the DeFi evolution look like in 2024? - Ledger Insights - Ledger Insights

In this penultimate instalment of the five-part, festive series of the pharmaphorum podcast, host Nicole Raleigh speaks with Bobby Savarese, senior principal and business development director at Unispace Life Sciences, exploring how laboratory space requirements have changed since the pandemic.

With Unispace Life Sciences latest research report, Forefront, having revealed, in a post-pandemic timeframe, six areas of focus for top global pharmaceutical firms - the key foci being sustainability, equipment recapitalisation, and digitalisation the conversation wanders around those trends and explores the primary goals of engineering teams.

Discussing, also, FutureLab and the reduction of space allocations, as well as the buzz around AI tech in the lab, the ultimate achievement aimed for is to accelerate the R&D project cycle - and quantum computing will be crucial for this end.

The evolution of the lab with smart design will increase efficiency, and social engagement, too, and will provide a collaborative collision course, if you will, for faster drug approval.

You can listen to episode 109a of thepharmaphorum podcastin the player below, download the episode to your computer, or find it and subscribe to the rest of the series iniTunes,Spotify,acast,Stitcher,andPodbean.

See the article here:

The smart-design evolution of the laboratory space - pharmaphorum

In this FandomWire Video Essay, we explore the WILD evolution of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (TMNT).

Check out the video below:

Subscribe & hit the Notification Bell so you never miss a video!

THESE are the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.

THESE are ALSO the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.

And so are these.

And these.

And believe it or not, even these. And thats just the tip of the iceberg for everyones favorite heroes in a half-shell. From humble beginnings in the pages of a black-and-white indie comic in 1984 to the faces of one of the biggest multimedia franchises on the planet today, spawning countless comics, TV shows, movies, video games, and more. All of these works bring something new to the table while still being built on the same core idea of four mutant turtles fighting crime with the ninja skills taught to them by their rat sensei father figure.

But how exactly did the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles get to where they are today? The original comics were largely built off of one central joke, so how did the franchise keep going even after the joke stopped working? Or perhaps more accurately, how and when did it become more than just one joke? To understand how the TMNT evolved over time, we need to break this down into the three distinct eras of the franchise: the 80s and 90s, the 2000s, and the 2010s to now. So grab a slice of pizza and head into the sewers as we explore the wild evolution of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.

When TMNT creators Kevin Eastman and Peter Laird wrote the original comics back in 1984, they were meant as a very straightforward and very adult parody series; lampooning major comic trends at the time like talking animals, mutants, and martial arts stories.

More specifically, Eastman and Laird took aim at Frank Millers then-recent run on Daredevil, with the Foot Clan being an obvious spoof on The Hand and the implication in the first issue that the same toxic ooze incident that mutated the Turtles also blinded Matt Murdock. Other riffs on Millers Daredevil in the book included the heavy use of narration, the over-the-top violence, and the gruff, angry, and interchangeable personalities of the Turtles themselves.

Despite independent comics being a relatively small market, especially at the time, the critical acclaim and strong sales of TMNT eventually caught the attention of Playmates Toys, who correctly predicted that, with the proper adjustments, the series could sell extremely well to kids.

The creation of the Playmates TMNT line brought with it the tie-in animated series in 1987, which proved so popular that it eventually outlasted the toys themselves. When you think of Ninja Turtles, this show is probably the first thing that comes to mind and for good reason. Firstly, the 1987 series introduced the now-iconic color schemes and personalities for the four turtles. Leonardo: the leader in blue, Donatello: the brains in purple, Raphael: the hothead in red, and Michaelangelo: the party dude in orange. The animated series would also establish many of the franchises most iconic villains, transforming Shredder from a one-off nuisance that dies in the first issue of the comic into the main ongoing antagonist. And turning the alien hive-mind species the Utrom into a single character: the now-iconic Kraang.

Thanks to its unique character designs and tongue-in-cheek sense of humor, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles would stay on the air producing new episodes for TEN YEARS, a then-unprecedented feat for childrens animation. And the consistent popularity of the series would lead to not only more toys and more comics, but also a slew of video games ranging from platformers to beat-em-ups to fighters, a.rather unfortunate live concert tour, and perhaps most prominently, a trilogy of live-action films.

The 1990 TMNT film took the individualized Turtles and playful humor from the cartoon and dropped them into the darker and more grounded world of the original comics; succinctly adapting the first few arcs into a single feature. Released during the peak of the shows run, this hybrid approach combined with the incredible puppetry used to bring the Turtles to life made TMNT a massive box office hit, grossing $202 million on a budget of only $13.5 million. While the two sequels didnt do nearly as well financially and all three films were slammed by critics, with The New York Times Janet Maslin claiming the first film was so poorly photographed that the red-masked turtle looks almost exactly like the orange-masked one, the first two films, in particular, remain fan-favorites and represent the franchises first step towards greater evolution after its initial run of mainstream success.

Once the original series finally ended its run in 1997, TMNT would take a hiatus for a few years before being rebooted in 2003 for the 4Kids Network. This new series, while keeping the Turtles personalities and some of the humor intact, aimed to bring the franchise closer to its comic book roots. A darker tone, higher-stakes action, and the return of many comic-specific elements such as the Utrom and the serious scientist version of Baxter Stockman; while simultaneously de-emphasizing elements created for the 1987 series such as Kraang, Bebop, and Rocksteady, and the toyetic vehicles.

While perhaps not quite as iconic as the original show, the serialized storytelling and generally more serious take on the material would make TMNT (2003) a huge hit with new and old fans alike, lasting seven seasons and spawning a new toy line and several video games. Granted, the last two seasons are generally disliked by fans, with many dismissing them as outright non-canon, but it did manage to go out on a high note with Turtles Forever, a made-for-TV movie that crossed over the 2003 turtles with their 1987 counterparts to commemorate the franchises twenty-fifth anniversary.

As for theatrical films, the TMNT only managed to get one of those during this era: a 2007 CGI film simply titled TMNT. For the record, thats not an acronym here. Its just called TMNT. Meant as a pseudo-sequel to the 90s trilogy, the film has become a cult classic amongst fans thanks to its unique visual style and excellent action scenes; but failed to make an impact at the box office and was once again panned by critics, with The AV Clubs Tasha Robinson describing the plot as a distracting clunker that feels like it was written one line at a time by a bunch of overexcited fan-board commentators playing a round-robin storytelling game.

The 2010s represented a major turning point for TMNT as a franchise. Namely, because the rights to it were sold in their entirety to Viacom, the parent company of Nickelodeon, in 2009. Nicks 2012 CGI Turtles show would be the companys first outing with the property; blending together elements from nearly every previous incarnation. The serialized storytelling and more serious tone were carried over from the comics and the 2003 series, the sleek and stylish action scenes were influenced by the 2007 film, and the leaner character designs and self-aware humor were reminiscent of the 1987 series. Kraang from the original series and the Utrom from 2003 were merged into The Kraang. Tokka and Rahzar from the second live-action film got entirely new origin stories and even got to coexist with the rebooted Bebop and Rocksteady; whom they were originally created to replace. And April ONeil, the Turtles one human friend who was always relegated to passive ally at best or damsel in distress at worst, became far more proactive; as well as being aged down from her mid-20s to 16 to be more in line with the Turtles as teenagers.

During 2012s five-season run, Paramount Pictures and Michael Bays Platinum Dunes produced two new live-action films, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles in 2014 and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows in 2016. Following in the footsteps of 2012s The Amazing Spider-Man, the 2014 film ties the Turtles previously accidental origin into both the backstory of Megan Foxs April ONeil as well as Shredders master plan to infect all of New York with mutagen. While Out of the Shadows aims to bring the series closer to the 1987 cartoon with the inclusion of Kraang, Bebop, and Rocksteady, and the Technodrome. Both films were negatively received by both critics and audiences due to rushed and sloppy plotting, as well as the overly busy and overly large designs of the Turtles themselves.

Design controversies would also define the first impressions of 2018s Rise of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, fairly or not. Premiering just one year after 2012 wrapped its final season, Rise of the TMNT aimed to shake the franchise up with new character designs, new character dynamics such as Raphael being team leader instead of Leonardo, and new characters in general; specifically a rogues gallery made up almost entirely of new villains, though the Foot Clan, Shredder, and the Kraang would all eventually make appearances.

Though initial fan backlash caused Nickelodeon to lose confidence in the show and it would ultimately be canceled after a truncated second season, Rise of the TMNT has garnered a massive fanbase in its own right thanks to its sense of humor, stylized action scenes, and the characterization of the Turtles themselves. Specifically how, unlike most previous versions, the TEENAGE Mutant Ninja Turtles actually act like teenagers. The inside jokes, the sibling rivalry, the more explicitly father-son relationship with Splinter, it all adds up to a much more authentic portrayal of the teenage experience.

The emphasis on the teenage angle also defines the latest movie adaptation of the Turtles, 2023s Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem, even going so far as to have actual teenagers voice the Turtles for the first time in the franchises history. Mutant Mayhem arguably represents the ultimate synthesis of everything TMNT has been up to this point.

Design elements from 1987, 2012, Rise, and even the Bay films can be seen in the Turtles themselves, and the central arc about their struggle to be accepted by others was previously explored in 2003, Out of the Shadows, and TMNT (2007). The films supporting cast is filled to the brim with vibrant and obscure mutant characters from throughout the franchises history and the sketchbook-esque art style harkens back directly to the original comics. All of these elements have quickly made Mutant Mayhem a favorite amongst fans, but its also the first theatrical TMNT film to win over mainstream critics, boasting a Certified Fresh 96% rating on Rotten Tomatoes with folks like Film Authoritys Eddie Harrison praising it as a kids/family film smarter than most films for adults.

The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles have certainly come a long way from their days as a relatively one-note Daredevil parody. The 1987 series gave them greater personality and a broader sense of humor, the 1990 film and the 2003 series blended the personalities of the Turtles with the comics grounded world and works like 2012, Rise, and Mutant Mayhem gave that serialized, action-driven storytelling a youthful and energetic facelift. However, no matter how different these incarnations may be, theyre all built on the same core ideas of found family narratives, stylish action, and self-aware humor to one degree or another. Every version of The Turtles is just as valid an interpretation as any other, with all of them even existing in the same canon multiverse as of Turtles Forever. By staying true to the roots of its source material while still adapting to modern audience expectations and remaining open to new ideas, TMNTs evolution over the years has been a largely successful one; even if its also been very, VERY, wild.

Now, we want to hear from you, Turtles fans. Whats your favorite version of the TMNT? Do you have a favorite Turtle? And what are your hopes for the franchises future? Let us know in the comments below and be sure to subscribe and hit that bell so you dont miss out on future videos like this one. Until next time, thanks for watching.

Follow us for more entertainment coverage onFacebook,Twitter,Instagram, and YouTube.

Thanks for your feedback!

Read more from the original source:

The WILD Evolution of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles TMNT (VIDEO) - FandomWire

About half a dozen readers sent me the article below, which appeared on Colin Wrights Substack site Realitys Last Stand. This piece, however, was written by Elizabeth Weiss, professor of anthropology at San Jose State University. Shes a brave woman, for after her own university banned her from accessing the ancient human remains she was studying, or publishing pictures of them, she sued the University. This was because the remains were presumably those of Native Americans, who saw them as sacred relics of their ancestors and demanded them back. (The lawsuit is, as far as I know, still pending.) Weiss is, like me, wary of allowing indigenous American peoples full possession of any remains dug up on their land, for we dont often know if the remains are really those of a tribes ancestors, and, also like me, she argues that scientists should be allowed to study them before and if they are returned to any tribe.

The post below is related to that view, but is mostly concerned with an issue weve seen in New Zealand: governments and scientists bowing to the religious and supernatural beliefs of indigenous peoples. In this case, museums are validating or being forced to mouth the religious beliefs of Native Americans, resulting in some crazy (and unpalatable) mixtures of science and faith.

Click to read (the American Museum of Supernatural History is a jab at the American Museum of Natural History, or AMNH, involved in many of these incidents).

Elizabeths thesis, also giving one of several examples in her piece:

In the past two decades, science institutions have faced challenges from another source: indigenous religions. Unlike Christian fundamentalist beliefs, these indigenous beliefs often receive enthusiastic support from academics, scholars, and mainstream media journalists. This support might stem from a desire to oppose Western civilization and align with the victims of modernity as part of an effort to decolonize museums. Alternatively, it may also be linked to a trend of virtue signaling, which has allowed the misconception that indigenous knowledge is science to take root in academic circles.

I recently reported on this trend inCity Journal, discussing New York Citys American Museum of Natural Historys Northwest Coast Hall. One exhibit features a display case with a warning label about the spiritually powerful objects contained in the case. This exhibit blurs the line between fact and fiction by presenting creation myths as history. It also asserts that artifacts are imbued with spirits that release mist visible only to elders, implying that the objects should be repatriated.

Weiss notes that other scholars didnt find anything objectionable to the deference given these artifact, apparently bowing to whats been called the authority of the sacred victim. Thats instantiated in this regulation:

Are museum staff actually buying into these beliefs, or are they appeasing their indigenous partners to continue curating and studying artifacts? The influence of repatriation ideology, movements, and laws, notably theNative American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, are increasingly depleting museums and universities of Native American human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony.

And here are a few more examples in which museums apparently give in to the claims of indigenous people, even though those claims dont involve human remains and are often imbued with religious beliefs.

TheWillamette Meteorite Agreement of 2000resulted in the American Museum of Natural History recognizing the spiritual relationship of the Grande Ronde Community to the Willamette Meteorite. This agreement allows the tribe to perform ceremonies in the museum, celebrating this spiritual connection. Additionally, it forbade the museum from removing any part of the meteorite for trade with other museums, apracticeonce common for diversifying collections for exhibition and research. These scientific exchanges benefited both museumgoers and researchers. However, indigenous religious beliefs have restricted these practices.Moreover, the publicity and support for this agreement has led other museums to adopt similar practices. For instance, theEvergreen Aviation and Space Museumin McMinnville, Oregon handed over their piece of the meteorite to the Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde.

Since when do meteorites belong in any sense to Native Americans? That would only be the case if it fell on their tribally owned land. But if they come into the possession of scientists, who might buy them or get them because they fall on public land, then those have a right to study them or trade them for other items. Remember, lands ancestrally inhabited by Native Americans dont oftenbelong to native Americans, so meterorites which fall on them belong to either the new owner, the finder, or, if on public land, to the Smithsonian.

Heres another example with a snarky (but accurate) remark by Elizabeth:

The negative influence of indigenous beliefs on science is also evident during tribal visits, such as when theTohono Oodham Nationvisited the American Museum of Natural History in 2021. During their visit, the tribe reviewed the items that were being curated, discussed the history of the collection, and ritually cleansed ceremonial pieces at the museum, which was closed to the public during the visit. Additionally, in November 2021, David Grignon, the tribal historic preservation officer from theMenominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin, ceremonially cleansed sacred items in the museums Division of Anthropology smudge room. For a scientific museum to have a smudge room is akin to a chemistry lab having an alchemy room. Museum spaces should be dedicated to scientific research, curation, and exhibitsnot to religious activities.

Except, that is, when the religious activities are performed by Native Americans. I doubt that Museums would be allowed to let a priest sprinkle holy water on old Catholic artifacts to sanctify them.

But the worst is the AMNHs procedures in dealing with Native American objects of power, which have to be treated specially because they supposedly possess supernatural powerspowers that dictate how researchers and scientists must deal with them. Get a load of this:

However, none of these examples are as shocking as the protocols established to curate so-called objects of power.These protocols were introduced at the 2021 annual joint conference of the American Institute for Conservation and the Society for Preservation of Natural History Collections. Developed in collaboration with Northwest Coast cultural advisors at the American Museum of Natural History,Amy Tjiong and colleaguesoutlined the necessary steps for curators and researchers when handling these objects of power, defined as objects used in association with traditional/spiritual healers practice, sacred ceremonies, or warfare. The new protocols include the need to greet the object and explain to it that permission has been granted from community representatives. The objects must also be clearly tagged, covered with muslin, and glass cabinets should be covered with brown paper to prevent disturbance and unintentional encounters. Lastly, bundles of Devils Club (Oplopanax horridus, a shrub used to contain power) should be hung in doorways and cabinets where these objects of power are stored.

That is palpably absurd. Museum staff are supposed to procure a special shrub to prevent objects from exerting their special power? But the rules continue:

To further promote the myths that surround these objects, museum staff decided to heed warnings by their indigenous partners. For instance, museum staff were told to Be wary of any object that incorporates human hair. This guidance influenced the handling of a Haida orca headdress: Community members instructed the museum not to put this headdress on view. Museum professionals were warned that handling can be dangerous. Consequently, this object is not currently on display.

Click on this poster heading to see the protocols developed in the 2021 online conference described above. It lays out how museum workers and scientists are supposed to deal with spiritually powerful objects:

From the poster above, presumably an object lesson in how to display powerful sacred objects.

And, from the poster, the rules that museum workers and scientists must obey vis--vis those objects, taken from the poster above (click to enlarge). Dont forget to greet the object and explain your permissions before you handle it! And check out the first point about pregnancy and menstruation:

This itself is an object of power, power exercised by indigenous people to control the behavior of museum workers. Note the ludicrous claims of this poster about the power of these objects. As Elizabeth notes:

Perhaps museum staffs know or suspect that if they dont play along, their indigenous partners will suddenly demand everything back. Regardless of the reason, it seems difficult to trust any science coming from people who take seriously the concept that whistles can be used to summon supernatural beings.

Perhaps most offensively, they caution, DO NOT APPROACH objects of power if you are feeling discomfort, i.e., if you are in a physically or emotionally vulnerable state (including menstruation and pregnancy). This clearly sexist warning abandons science and implies that women, particularly during menstruation and pregnancy, are emotionally unstable and weak. Allowing religious beliefs to be taken seriously in a place of science hinders scientific progress, enables discrimination, obstructs the teaching of science to those who partner with museums, and casts considerable doubt on the quality and objectivity of the research coming out of these institutions.

Thats all true, and here scientists and museum staff are being forced to obey supernatural beliefs of Native Americans,beliefs that are not only false, but also misogynistic and offensive. But this is what happens when science mixes with the supernatural; the former is diluted and the latter is given credenceand perhaps credibility.

Heres one more example and a photo:

Most absurdly, museum staff and indigenous partners debated over whether to display a whistle. According to Clyde Tallio from the Nuxalk Nation, Whistles are so powerful they have caused intercultural conflicts. Museum protocols explain that, Nuxalk elders say whistles would not normally be on display, but instead are traditionally stored in boxes. Because of this, Tallio advises that whistles should not be observed directly, but should instead be placed in closed boxes with an accompanying photo and text explaining its sacredness. However, museum staff decided to take extra precautions: one Nuxalk Kusiut whistle was removed from display entirely, as it is a summoning tool for supernatural beings.

From the poster; the removed whistle is the photo on top:

In my view, any object in a museum should not be displayed as if it had supernatural powers, though its okay to say that this is what the indigenous people believe. Nor should museum staff have to genuflect and respect the power of items that, after all, are just stuff used by Native Americans.

Read the original:

The supernatural invades American museums via indigenous artifacts - Why Evolution Is True

Baleen whales (mysticetes) include the largest animals on the Earth. How they achieved such gigantic sizes remains debated, with previous research focusing primarily on when they became large, rather than where. Now, paleontologists have described an edentulous baleen whale (chaeomysticete) fossil from South Australia. With an estimated body length of 9 m, it is the largest baleen whale from the Early Miocene. Analysing body size through time shows that ancient baleen whales from the southern hemisphere were larger than their northern counterparts.

Early Miocene mysticete gigantism. Image credit: Ruairidh Duncan

Until now, it was believed that the beginning of the Ice Age in the northern hemisphere about 3 million years ago kickstarted the evolution of truly gigantic baleen whales.

The new study, led by Dr. James Rule from Monash University and Natural History Museum, London, reveals that in fact this evolutionary leap in size happened as early as 20 million years ago and at the polar opposite, in the southern hemisphere.

The major discovery came from research into a 16 to 21-million-year-old fossil cared for in the Museums Victoria collection.

The specimen the front end of the lower jaw of a large edentulous baleen whale was recovered from a cliff face on the bank of the Murray River in South Australia in 1921 but was largely unrecognized in the collection.

In their study, Dr. Rule and colleagues show how whales evolved into gigantic sizes first in the southern hemisphere, not the northern, and have had larger body sizes in the south for their entire evolutionary history some 2030 million years.

The findings underscore the vital importance of the Australian and wider southern hemisphere fossil record for piecing together the global picture of whale evolution.

The previous ruling hypothesis was based on fossils primarily found in the northern hemisphere, but the Murray River whale fossil disrupts that theory.

The southern hemisphere, and Australia in particular, have always been over-looked frontiers for fossil whale discovery, said Dr. Erich Fitzgerald, a paleontologist at the Museums Victoria Research Institute.

Fossil whale finds in the south, like the Murray River whale, are shaking up the evolution of whales into a more accurate, truly global picture of what was going on in the oceans long ago.

The researchers discovered that the tip of the baleen whale jaw is scalable with body size.

They estimated the length of this baleen whale to be around 9 m.

The largest whales alive today, such as the blue whale, reach the length of a basketball court, Dr. Rule said.

Around 19 million years ago the Murray River whale, at 9 m long, was already a third of this length. So, baleen whales were well on their way to evolving into ocean giants.

The results appear in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B.

_____

James P. Rule et al. 2023. Giant baleen whales emerged from a cold southern cradle. Proc. R. Soc. B 290 (2013): 20232177; doi: 10.1098/rspb.2023.2177

Visit link:

Baleen Whales First Evolved Large Body Size in Cold Southern Waters, New Fossil Shows - Sci.News

The Big Picture

The X-Men have been a staple of television for a very, very long time. Even before they helped kick-start the superhero movie boom, Marvel's mighty mutants appeared in various animated series, including Spider-Man and His Amazing Friends and X-Men: Pryde of The X-Men. Most fans will point to X-Men: The Animated Series as the pinnacle of these shows; after all, it managed to introduce the X-Men to a wider audience. With X-Men '97 slated to continue the series next year, that point of discussion is more than likely to make a return (as well as appreciation for its iconic theme song.) But there's another X-Men series that deserves just as much recognition, if not the title of "best X-Men series" ever. That series happens to be X-Men: Evolution.

This rendition of X-Men features Cyclops, Jean Grey, Rogue, Nightcrawler, Shadowcat and Spike as teenagers as they fight for a world that fears and hates them.

By now, everyone knows the X-Men's story: telepath Charles Xavier gathers a group of mutants and trains them to be heroes at a boarding school. The end goal is for the X-Men to prove that humanity and mutantkind can live in peace. With X-Men: Evolution, things are quite different. Although most of the X-Men live at Xavier's school, they attend high school in the fictional town of Bayville, California. Making the X-Men teenagers fully drove home the metaphor of mutant abilities kicking in at adolescence. Not only did the X-Men have to fight various threats, but they also had to get to school on time and deal with raging hormones. It made an already relatable group of characters even more relatable, especially when it came to their daily lives. One example is the Season 1 episode "Survival of the Fittest"; most of the X-Men are locked in a fierce rivalry with the Brotherhood of Mutants and despite Cyclops (Kirby Morrow) urging everyone to play by the rules, he loses his cool during a white water rafting race and uses his optic blasts to knock the Brotherhood's boat off course.

In fact, the show's best element may be its portrayal of Cyclops. In most X-Men media, including the comics, Scott Summers is often portrayed as a strict, humorless leader who often butts heads with the more popular Wolverine. But in Evolution, Scott actually gets to be a teen. He cracks jokes. He shows a variety of emotions. He even gets to be a badass; in the Season 3 episode "Blind Alley," Cyclops manages to survive being dropped in the desert by Mystique (Colleen Wheeler), who takes away the glasses he wears to control his optic blasts. While Cyclops was a major part of X-Men: The Animated Series, his storylines more often than not featured him getting into arguments with Wolverine (usually over Jean Grey) or being the X-Men's stoic leader. Letting Scott Summers be an actual teenager shakes up the dynamics of the X-Men to great effect.

Cyclops wasn't the only member of the X-Men who was characterized differently. Wolverine (Scott McNeil), who for once wasn't the center of the show, abandoned his usual loner persona to be a more hands-on teacher and protector. Jean (Venus Terzo) was more outgoing and flirty; in fact, it took until Season 3 for her and Cyclops to officially become a couple! But the character who changed the most is Magneto (Christopher Judge). Throughout X-Men history, the Master of Magnetism has been haunted by the memories of surviving the Holocaust, and is determined to rule the Earth so that mankind cannot visit any atrocities on mutants. X-Men: Evolution's take on Magneto is a bit more Machiavellian than his previous counterparts. He abandons his daughter Wanda (Kelly Sheridan), aka the Scarlet Witch, in a mental institution when her powers grow out of control and later forced the illusionist Mastermind to brainwash her into loving him. He revealed the existence of mutantkind to the world, forcing the X-Men into a corner. Even one of his Acolytes, Colossus (Michael Adamthwaite) is only working for him because Magneto threatens to kill his family. Making Magneto less of a well-intentioned extremist does lose some of the character's complexity, but makes him an effective villain.

While the roster of X-Men: The Animated Series was packed full of fan-favorite mutant heroes, it never really changed throughout the series. The X-Men would often run into characters who were also members of the team in the comics, but they never joined up (in fact, X-Men '97 marks the first time the active roster of X-Men will change.) X-Men: Evolution takes a different approach. Not only does its student body grow with each season, but various mutants get the chance to share the spotlight. The most prominent examples are Nightcrawler/Kurt Wagner (Brad Swaile), Kitty Pryde/Shadowcat (Maggie Blue O'Hara) and Rogue (Meghan Black). Nightcrawler is arguably the heart of the show his mile a minute mouth and his habit of comforting his friends in their toughest times endeared him to many fans. Kitty and Rogue also became fan favorites; Kitty more so for her upbeat nature and Rogue for her surly approach. One of Evolution's more iconic moments features the two, who couldn't be more different, dancing together (and it was just the first of many, many shoutouts to other teen-centric shows and films.)

Season 2 introduced a new class of mutants, and a new teacher: Hank McCoy, aka The Beast (Michael Kopsa). McCoy started off as a teacher at Bayville High, until an experiment unlocked his mutation and transformed him into a massive, blue-furred beast. It took Spyke (Neil Denis) and the other X-Men to snap McCoy out of his feral state, upon which he took up a teaching position at the Xavier Institute. McCoy's introduction was a key example of how the show took a different approach to adapting iconic storylines from the comics. In contrast to X-Men: The Animated Series, which would often adapt as many storylines as it could, Evolution took the long approach. One episode featured Jean's powers spiraling out of control, which was a nod to the infamous Dark Phoenix Saga, but skipped the pitfalls other adaptations took by not speedrunning through the events. Seasons 3 and 4 featured the X-Men coming into conflict with the ancient mutant Apocalypse, who transformed Magneto and Xavier into his Horsemen; needless to say, it was far better than the cinematic mess of X-Men: Apocalypse. By not racing to adapt the big stories, X-Men: Evolution was free to chart its own path.

If X-Men: Evolution has one major claim to fame, it was the series that introduced Laura Kinney aka X-23 to the world. Laura first appeared in the Season 3 episode "X-23," as she sought to kill Wolverine (aka the man she was cloned from) since she held him responsible for the misery inflicted upon her. Logan refused to fight her, and encouraged her to make a life for herself. Laura's appearance marked a key departure for Evolution; her childhood, briefly shown in flashbacks, was full of pain and horror, which resulted in one of the darkest origin stories ever put to Saturday morning animation. In contrast, X-Men: The Animated Series was hamstrung by bizarre censorship rules that didn't allow death to even be mentioned.

X-23 would follow in the footsteps of Harley Quinn and made the jump from cartoons to comics in the NYX miniseries. Christopher Yost and Craig Kyle, the writers behind Laura's debut episode, would introduce her into the Marvel Comics canon with an X-23 miniseries. Finally, Dafne Keen portrayed Laura in Logan, and much like Evolution, she formed a strange yet heartfelt bond with Logan. Creating a fan favorite character, giving the spotlight to lesser known mutants, and using the comics as a guide rather than a strict set of rules helped make X-Men: Evolution the best animated incarnation of the X-Men to date.

X-Men: Evolution is available to stream on Disney+ in the U.S.

Watch on Disney+

View original post here:

'X-Men: Evolution' Is Better Than 'X-Men: The Animated Series' - Collider

A Peek Behind the Curtain

Lights, camera, action the three magic words that have drawn us into the captivating world of cinema. As we journey through the annals of film history, we find that the silver screen has not only been a canvas for storytelling but also a reflection of societal norms and cultural shifts. In this exploration, we delve into the intriguing evolution of celebrity nudity in cinema, tracing its path from whispers of scandal to the modern era where its both celebrated and critiqued. Join us on this enthralling ride through time, as we unmask the layers of cinematic nudity.

In the early days of cinema, the mere suggestion of nudity was enough to send shockwaves through conservative societies. The Hays Code, a set of industry guidelines established in the 1930s, tightly regulated on-screen content, relegating any form of nudity to the shadows. However, the forbidden allure of the human form persisted, with filmmakers employing creative techniques to hint at sensuality without breaching the code.

As societal attitudes began to shift in the post-World War II era, a subtle revolution took place on screen. European films, less bound by censorship, began pushing boundaries and exploring the human body in ways Hollywood could not. This era laid the groundwork for the gradual evolution of celebrity nudity in cinema, sowing the seeds for future on-screen liberation.

As we transition into the next phase of this journey, it becomes evident that the seeds planted in the Golden Age would blossom into a more liberated cinematic landscape.

The 1960s marked a cultural revolution, and cinema was not exempt from the winds of change. As societal norms relaxed, filmmakers began challenging the status quo, exploring themes of liberation and freedom. This period saw the emergence of films that embraced nudity as a symbol of artistic expression and a reflection of the changing times.

Notable actresses like Julie Christie and Jane Fonda became trailblazers, using their platform to redefine the boundaries of on-screen nudity. Films such as Blow-Up and Barbarella pushed the envelope, bringing nudity into mainstream consciousness. The cinematic landscape was evolving, and with it, the perception of nudity in film.

While the presence of nudity still raised eyebrows, a paradigm shift was underway. Nudity began to be viewed not just as a scandalous element but as a tool for storytelling and artistic expression. Filmmakers started incorporating nudity purposefully, challenging audiences to see it as more than just titillation.

The sexual revolution of the 1970s further dismantled barriers surrounding on-screen nudity. With films like Last Tango in Paris and Deep Throat, the boundaries of explicit content were pushed to new limits. The depiction of nudity became intertwined with the exploration of human sexuality, challenging traditional notions and paving the way for a more open cinematic landscape.

However, as the 1970s progressed, a fine line emerged between the liberation of on-screen nudity and its potential exploitation. The challenge now lay in balancing artistic intent with the risk of objectification.

As cinema entered the 1980s and 1990s, the conversation around on-screen nudity became more nuanced. Filmmakers grappled with the challenge of maintaining artistic integrity while avoiding the pitfalls of exploitation. Actresses such as Sharon Stone in Basic Instinct and Halle Berry in Monsters Ball embraced nudity for the sake of character development and narrative, leading to critical acclaim.

This era witnessed a tug-of-war between the desire for artistic freedom and the responsibility to portray nudity with sensitivity. As the industry sought this delicate balance, a new era dawned where on-screen nudity could be both empowering and thought-provoking.

See more of this transformative period, where the discussion shifted from the explicit to the artistic, challenging filmmakers to wield nudity as a powerful storytelling tool.

With the advent of the digital age in the 21st century, the dynamics of on-screen nudity underwent a significant shift. Social media platforms and streaming services provided new avenues for celebrities to control their narratives, challenging traditional power structures within the industry.

Celebrities began using nudity as a form of self-expression, sharing intimate moments on their own terms. This shift blurred the lines between private and public, prompting discussions about empowerment and ownership of ones image in the age of instant connectivity.

As we navigate through the 21st century, it becomes evident that the evolution of celebrity nudity in cinema has transcended the confines of the silver screen. It has become a reflection of societal changes, empowerment, and the ongoing conversation surrounding consent and agency.

In recent years, there has been a remarkable shift in the narratives surrounding on-screen nudity. Celebrities have embraced body positivity and inclusivity, challenging the traditional standards of beauty. Actresses like Lizzo and Jameela Jamil have used their platforms to advocate for acceptance and celebration of diverse bodies, reshaping the conversation around nudity in the media.

While the 21st century has brought newfound empowerment, it has also exposed celebrities to the dark side of the digital age. Instances of private images and videos being leaked without consent have raised questions about privacy, consent, and the boundaries of the public and private spheres.

As society grapples with these ethical dilemmas, the conversation around celebrity nudity extends beyond the screen, highlighting the importance of respecting personal boundaries in the age of information accessibility.

In the next section, we explore the critical importance of consent in the evolving landscape of celebrity nudity.

In an era where information flows freely, the conversation around celebrity nudity must be rooted in the principles of consent. Celebrities, activists, and the industry at large are engaging in a consent revolution, advocating for the importance of respecting boundaries and ensuring that nudity is a consensual and empowering choice.

This shift marks a pivotal moment in the evolution of on-screen nudity, emphasizing the need for a culture of consent that extends beyond the silver screen and into our daily lives.

As we stand on the cusp of a new decade, the future of celebrity nudity in cinema holds the promise of continued evolution. Emerging trends suggest a more inclusive and diverse representation of bodies on screen, with an emphasis on authenticity and storytelling that transcends physical appearance.

In closing, the evolution of celebrity nudity in cinema is a multifaceted journey that mirrors the shifting sands of societal norms and cultural attitudes. From the forbidden allure of the Golden Age to the empowerment movements of the 21st century, each era has contributed to a rich tapestry of on-screen expression.

As we reflect on this journey, its clear that the conversation surrounding celebrity nudity is far from static. Its a dynamic dialogue that will continue to shape and be shaped by the evolving landscape of cinema and society.

Tags: Celebrity Nudity, cinema

Dr. Jerry Doby Editor-in-Chief of The Hype Magazine, Media and SEO Consultant, Journalist, Ph.D. and retired combat vet. 2023 recipient of The President's Lifetime Achievement Award. Partner at THM Media Group. Member of the U.S. Department of Arts and Culture, the United States Press Agency and ForbesBLK.

Read the original:

Unveiling the Silver Screen: The Evolution of Celebrity Nudity in Cinema - The Hype Magazine

It is often assumed that modern humans are no longer evolving. But there is now considerable agreement among scientists that evolution is still affecting our speciesand this process is taking place "more rapidly" than ever before, one expert told Newsweek.

While cultural and technological innovations now appear to be the main drivers of adaptation for modern humans, this has not replaced biological adaptation, according to scientists.

"I don't think [the question of whether humans are still evolving] is fully appreciated by the general public," Michael Granatosky, an evolutionary biomechanist at the New York Institute of Technology, told Newsweek. "Perceptions of evolution tout the phrase 'survival of the fittest', which automatically recalls epic battles between fighting individuals vying for a mate, or a ragtag bunch of animals surviving a cataclysmic event beyond all odds."

"With these images, it is tempting to assume modern populations are no longer under selective pressures. However, evolution simply means a change in a population's gene pool over successive generations. With this broader definition, I do not believe there is considerable debate among evolutionary biologists that humans are still evolving," he said.

From a genetic perspective, evolution is defined as a change in the frequency of certain genes through time, Jason Hodgson, an anthropologist and evolutionary geneticist at Anglia Ruskin University in the United Kingdom, told Newsweek.

Populations evolve in two primary ways: genetic drift and natural selection. Genetic drift refers to random fluctuations in the frequencies of certain genes between generations in populations.

"Some generations a genetic variant will increase in frequency, some generations it will decrease in frequency. However, it is always occurring," Hodgson said. "The strength of genetic drift depends on the size of the population, with small populations experiencing more drift and large populations experiencing less. The ultimate fate of any genetic variant evolving through genetic drift is either to go extinct, or to completely replace all other variants in the population and become fixed."

Natural selection, on the other hand, which people are more familiar with, occurs when a genetic variant provides a reproductive advantage to individuals that carry it. Changes in gene frequency due to natural selection are not random. The favored variant increases in frequency while all other variants decrease.

"The ultimate fate of a variant evolving through natural selection is to replace all other variants in the population," Hodgson said. "Perhaps counterintuitively, natural selection is a stronger force in larger populations. This is because in large populations selection is not countered by genetic drift."

Both natural selection and genetic drift continue to affect our species, thus, humans are "undoubtedly" still evolving, Hodgson said. Genetic drift continues to change the frequency of allelesdifferent versions, or variants, of a given geneas it does in all biological populations.

"The census size of humans has now surpassed 8 billion people. In a population this size, genetic drift should be almost negligible. However, in reality humans are subdivided into much smaller groups, within which people are more likely to choose their mates," Hodgson said. "This means that in practice evolution occurs in much smaller groups, and genetic drift does still operate."

Similarly, natural selection is also still operating, although the drivers are now different compared to when humans were primarily living as hunter-gatherers thousands of years ago.

"In terms of pressures, several things are happening. For one thing, the pressures that used to drive our evolution in hunter-gatherer societiesresistance to disease and parasites, strength to defend yourself from lions or else kill someone from a rival tribe, or kill someone over a woman (traditionally, one of the leading causes of murder in hunter-gatherer societies)have largely been removed. Basically, the things that used to cull us from the population largely aren't operating," Nick Longrich, a paleontologist and evolutionary biologist at the University of Bath in the United Kingdom, told Newsweek.

"You might think this would end natural selection, but instead it does two things. One is that it alters the direction of selection: if selection isn't operating on these things, it increasingly operates on other things, or might select against features that were once useful adaptations," he said.

For example, access to things like healthcare and birth control is highly variable within and among human groups. This means that the rates of people surviving to a given age and reproductive success are also variable.

"Not all evolutionary change is to do with things like death from disease, or risks faced from a harsh environment," Hodgson said. "Anything that creates variation in birth rates among groups, so long as there are differences in allele frequencies among those groups, will create evolutionary change. Because allele frequencies vary among human groups, any difference in reproductive rate among those groups will cause evolution if we are considering the human species as a whole."

"It is my belief that cultural variation with respect to things like preference for large families or small families will drive much of the evolution of humans in the near future. Lots of the evolution we see on a species-wide scale will be driven by demographic differences among populations that happen to correlate with differences in gene frequencies among those populations. Genes that are common in populations that are expanding will increase in frequency, and genes that are common in populations that are contracting will decrease in frequency," he said.

There are several notable examples of evolution among modern humans in our relatively recent history. In fact, Longrich said: "Humans are evolving rapidlymaybe more rapidly than we've ever been evolving before."

For example, "our brain size is evolving[they] have actually become smaller over the past 10,000 years since we started living in civilization," he said. "Brains seem to be smaller now than even in Greek or Roman times."

We have also adapted to newly available food sources, for examplesome populations, particularly those of European descent, have developed the ability to tolerate milk into adulthood.

Skin color has changed as human populations moved into new climates. And resistance to various diseases has emerged as a result of plagues like the Black Death and smallpox.

"The most recent example of clear natural selection in humans is perhaps selection for resistance to vivax malaria in Madagascar," Hodgson said.

Over the past 2,000 years there has been strong selection for resistance to the diseasewhich is a form of malaria caused by the Plasmodium vivax parasitein Madagascar.

"We can estimate that having resistance to vivax malaria results in about 7 percent greater reproductive success," Hodgson said. "[The selection] is very likely to be ongoing since medical care is highly limited in much of Madagascar."

The recent COVID pandemic may also have resulted in evolutionary pressures on our species, according to the scientists.

"During the pandemic, we learned that there is natural variation as to how individuals responded to infection," Granatosky said. "Such variation serves as the basis for evolution to act. Perhaps the most interesting thing about the COVID-19 pandemic was its global nature. Rarely do such events affect an entire species so dramatically."

To have an effect, the virus does not need to kill people, it just needs to affect their long-term reproductive output, according to Longrich.

"We've definitely evolved in 2020-2023," he said. "There are a lot of negative consequences associated with non-lethal infectionsfatigue, depression, brain fog, etcetera, and currently it seems like the virus is just going to keep circulating indefinitely, which increases the odds that sooner or later people get an adverse reaction."

"We probably won't know the effects for another 50 years, but people with an innate resistance to the virus are at a distinct advantage relative to everyone else, and people whose genes make them vulnerable are at a disadvantage, and it's hit pretty much every person on the planet. I don't think it will radically reshape us as a species, but I'd be surprised if it doesn't leave a lasting imprint on our genetic diversity that will be detectable for generations," he said.

Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.

Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.

Go here to see the original:

Are Humans Still Evolving? 'Maybe More Rapidly Than Ever,' Says Scientist - Newsweek

CXOToday has engaged in an exclusive interview with Chirag Mehta, Founder, Arbour Investments

Q How do you envision real estate fintech evolving in the next 5-10 years, and what key technological advancements do you anticipate will drive this evolution?

In the next 5-10 years, real estate fintech is expected to undergo significant evolution, driven by technological advancements that will improve efficiency, streamline processes, and enhance user experiences. Some key technological advancements and trends that will shape the real estate fintech landscape include:

Automation:AI will play a crucial role in automating processes such as property search, asset evaluation, risk analysis, and general management tasks, leading to better offers, faster deals, and safer investments.

Blockchain:Blockchain technology will continue to gain traction in real estate fintech, providing a secure and transparent platform for recording and managing property transactions.

Data Analysis:Advanced data analysis tools will help real estate professionals better understand market trends, property valuations, and investment opportunities.

Digital Payment Systems:The adoption of digital payment systems will become more widespread, enabling faster and more secure transactions in real estate.

Tech-Enabled Underwriting and Servicing:Fintech solutions will leverage technology to improve the underwriting and servicing processes, making it easier for businesses to access financing and manage their properties.

Platforms Leveraging FinTech:As the real estate ecosystem evolves, platforms that combine fintech and real estate will expand their offerings through acquisitions, product development, or partnerships, owning more of the real estate transaction cycle.

Faster Payment Cycles:Fintech solutions will accelerate payment periods, making it easier for businesses to manage cash flow and invest in property improvements.

These technological advancements will not only streamline processes but also create new opportunities for innovation and growth in the real estate fintech sector. As a result, we can expect to see a more efficient, user-friendly, and transparent real estate market in the coming years.

Q How have recent government policies and incentives affected the real estate landscape?

Recent government policies and incentives in India have significantly affected the real estate landscape. Some of the key effects include:

Implementation of RERA (Real Estate Regulatory Authority):In 2016, the Indian government implemented RERA to increase transparency and confidence in the real estate sector, which in turn increased demand for property and pushed up prices.

Taxation policies:Changes to taxation policies, such as stamp duty, registration fees, and capital gains taxes, have increased the cost of buying and selling property, directly impacting real estate prices.

Investment incentives:Government initiatives like the Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) and the Affordable Housing Scheme have encouraged foreign investment in the real estate sector, increasing investment and pushing up prices in certain areas.

Environmental sustainability:The Indian governments incentives, such as tax breaks, low-interest loans, and subsidies for energy-efficient materials, have promoted green and sustainable development in the real estate sector.

Affordable housing:The government has launched initiatives like Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana Gramin, which aims to build 10.2 million dwellings for the rural poor by 2019, and Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana Urban, which aims to create 12 million new houses for the urban poor by 2022. These initiatives have boosted the affordable housing segment, attracting more investors and buyers.

Ease of doing business:The government has been working on simplifying processes and reducing costs for real estate developers, such as easing compliance and relaxing norms for foreign investment.

Infrastructure push:The government is expected to announce incentives that will boost the growth of the sector, such as reducing transaction costs and expanding the SWAMIH Fund, which ensures the completion of projects and boosts homebuyer confidence.

These policies and incentives have shaped the real estate landscape in India, driving growth, investment, and innovation in the sector.

Q In the context of real estate transactions, how can real estate solutions contribute to improving efficiency, transparency, and accessibility for both buyers and sellers? Are there specific challenges in the real estate industry that fintech is particularly well-suited to address?

Real estate solutions can contribute to improving efficiency, transparency, and accessibility for both buyers and sellers. Fintech, a combination of financial technology, has been particularly well-suited to address specific challenges in the real estate industry, such as:

Lack of transparency:Fintech solutions can provide a transparent platform for recording and managing property transactions, ensuring that all parties involved have access to accurate and up-to-date information.

Poor data management:Fintech can improve data management by streamlining processes and reducing errors, making it easier for all stakeholders to access and understand the information they need.

Slow decision-making:Fintech solutions can expedite operations by automating processes such as property search, asset evaluation, risk analysis, and general management tasks, leading to faster and more informed decisions.

Inefficient transactions:Fintech can help accelerate payment periods, making it easier for businesses to access financing and manage their properties.

Limited accessibility:Fintech has democratized real estate investment, allowing people of all income levels to participate in the market through platforms like crowdfunding.

Cybersecurity threats:Fintech solutions can help protect against potential data breaches and ensure that payment or other aspects of the deal process are as secure as possible.

Loss of face-to-face encounters:Fintech can help maintain relationships and trust in the real estate industry despite the increasing reliance on digital solutions.

By leveraging fintech solutions, the real estate industry can overcome these challenges and continue to evolve, offering better experiences for buyers, sellers, and other stakeholders.

Q With the increasing use of blockchain technology, how do you see it impacting the real estate fintech landscape, particularly in terms of security, trust, and streamlining processes like property transactions and title management?

Blockchain technology is poised to have a transformative impact on the real estate fintech landscape, particularly in terms of security, trust, and streamlining processes like property transactions and title management. Some of the key impacts and benefits of blockchain in real estate include:

Increased Transparency and Trust:Blockchain technology creates more transparency, minimizes fraud, and reduces the need for intermediaries, thereby instilling confidence in buyers, sellers, and investors.

Streamlined Processes:Blockchain enables the use of smart contracts and tokenization to streamline real estate processes, making them more efficient and accurate.

Reduced Costs and Increased Accessibility:By eliminating intermediaries, blockchain technology reduces costs, making real estate investing more cost-effective and inclusive, and lowering the barrier to entry for investors.

Facilitating International Investments and Fractional Ownership:Blockchain can facilitate international real estate investments and codify the practice of fractional ownership, opening up new opportunities for investors.

Challenges and Considerations:While blockchain offers significant benefits, challenges such as the complexity of integration with existing real estate systems and the need for widespread adoption across the industry should be considered.

Blockchain technology is set to revolutionize the real estate fintech landscape by enhancing security, trust, and efficiency, and by making property transactions and title management more accessible and cost-effective for all stakeholders.

Q As the world becomes more interconnected, cross-border real estate transactions are becoming more common. How can real estate institute facilitate and streamline international real estate investments, and what challenges need to be addressed in this globalized context?

Real estate institutes can play a pivotal role in facilitating and streamlining international real estate investments through various means. These institutes can provide education and training on global real estate markets, including the associated risks and returns, macroeconomic and geopolitical considerations, and the identification of opportunities.

They can also offer insights into international real estate development, global real estate investment trusts (REITs), global mortgage products, and mortgage-backed securities (MBS), as well as the international taxation of real estate. By equipping real estate professionals and investors with this knowledge, institutes can help them make informed decisions when engaging in cross-border transactions.

Furthermore, real estate institutes can provide access to global networks of real estate professionals, investors, and developers. These networks can offer valuable connections and partnerships, which are essential for navigating the complexities of international real estate investments. Additionally, these institutes can offer resources and tools for due diligence, market analysis, and risk management, which are crucial for assessing and mitigating the unique risks associated with international real estate transactions.

Despite the potential benefits, there are several challenges that need to be addressed in the context of globalized real estate transactions. One significant challenge is the differences in legal and regulatory frameworks across countries. Navigating these variations requires a deep understanding of local laws and regulations, which can be facilitated through the resources and networks provided by real estate institutes. Currency exchange rates, language barriers, and cultural differences also present challenges in international real estate transactions. Real estate institutes can help address these challenges by providing access to language and culture-specific resources, as well as by offering guidance on navigating currency exchange and international business practices.

Moreover, varying levels of transparency and data availability in different countries can pose challenges for international real estate investments. Fintech solutions, such as blockchain technology, can help address this issue by providing a transparent platform for recording and managing property transactions. Blockchain technology can also facilitate international real estate investments and codify the practice of fractional ownership, opening up new opportunities for investors.

In conclusion, real estate institutes are instrumental in facilitating and streamlining international real estate investments by providing education, resources, and access to global networks. Fintech solutions particularly block chain technology, can help address challenges related to transparency, trust, and efficiency in cross-border real estate transactions. By leveraging the expertise of real estate institutes and the innovative capabilities of fintech, investors and professionals can navigate the complexities of international real estate transactions more effectively.

See original here:

The Intersection of Real Estate and Fintech: Evolution, Impact of Policies, and Global Dynamics - CXOToday.com