#Active Protection System Market

[amrutmnm]

The Active Protection System Market is projected to grow from USD 3.9 billion in 2022 to USD 5.2 billion by 2027, at a CAGR of 5.5% from 2022 to 2027.

Active protection systems are widely used in the military, mostly to provide safety to armored fighting vehicles from enemy fire. They can be installed on tracked or wheeled armored fighting or logistics vehicles, combat helicopters, naval warfare ships, and other systems. Modular optoelectronic sensor systems, target acquisition systems, digital radar processors for target detection, and thermal imaging devices provide optimized field surveillance and combat by day/night or under poor visibility. Several countries are focusing on increasing their armored vehicle fleets owing to the rise in cross-border conflicts, which has directly led to the growth of the Active Protection System Industry.

The US Army and Israeli defense forces, among other armed forces, have carried out practical analyses of numerous active protection systems developed by Raytheon (US), Artis LLC (US), Israel Military Industries (Israel), and Rafael Advanced Defense Systems (Israel) to equip and install active protection systems on their armored vehicles.

For instance, in January 2022, the Hungarian government awarded a contract to Rheinmetall AG of Germany to install StrikeShield hard-kill active protection systems on 209 new Lynx infantry fighting vehicles. In January 2022, the US Army awarded a contract to the team of Unified Business Technologies (UBT) and Rheinmetall Protection Systems to test the StrikeShield active protection system at Redstone Test Center in Huntsville, Alabama. Various players such as Rheinmetall AG (Germany), Saab AB (Sweden), Raytheon Company (US), Airbus (Netherlands), and ASELSAN AS (Turkey) among others, are prominent players operating in the active protection system market.

[aerospace-and-defence]

The Active Protection System Market is projected to grow from USD 3.9 billion in 2022 to USD 5.2 billion by 2027, at a CAGR of 5.5% from 2022 to 2027.

Active protection systems are widely used in the military, mostly to provide safety to armored fighting vehicles from enemy fire. They can be installed on tracked or wheeled armored fighting or logistics vehicles, combat helicopters, naval warfare ships, and other systems. Modular optoelectronic sensor systems, target acquisition systems, digital radar processors for target detection, and thermal imaging devices provide optimized field surveillance and combat by day/night or under poor visibility. Several countries are focusing on increasing their armored vehicle fleets owing to the rise in cross-border conflicts, which has directly led to the growth of the Active Protection System Industry.

[globalaviationanddefense]

[bitnest]

In the current rapidly evolving digital currency market, decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms are redefining the shape of financial services with their unique advantages. Bit Loop, as a leading decentralized lending platform, not only provides a safe and transparent lending environment, but also opens up new passive income channels for users through its innovative sharing reward system.

Personal links and permanent ties: Create a stable revenue stream One of the core parts of Bit Loop is its recommendation system, which allows any user to generate a unique sharing link when they join the platform. This link is not only a “key” for users to join the Bit Loop, but also a tool for them to establish an offline network. It is worth noting that offline partners who join through this link are permanently tied to the recommender, ensuring that the sharer can continue to receive rewards from the offline partner’s activities.

Unalterable referral relationships: Ensure fairness and transparency A significant advantage of blockchain technology is the immutability of its data. In Bit Loop, this means that once a referral link and live partnership is established, the relationship is fixed and cannot be changed. This design not only protects the interests of recommenders, but also brings a stable user base and activity to the platform, while ensuring the fairness and transparency of transactions.

Automatically distribute rewards: Simplify the revenue process Another highlight of the Bit Loop platform is the ability for smart contracts to automatically distribute rewards. When the partner completes the circulation cycle, such as investment returns or loan payments, the smart contract automatically calculates and sends the corresponding percentage of rewards directly to the recommender’s wallet. This automatic reward distribution mechanism not only simplifies the process of receiving benefits, but also greatly improves the efficiency of capital circulation.

Privacy protection and security: A security barrier for funds All transactions and money flows are carried out on the blockchain, guaranteeing transparency and traceability of every operation. In addition, the use of smart contracts significantly reduces the risk of fraud and misoperation, providing a solid security barrier for user funds. Users can confidently invest and promote boldly, and enjoy the various conveniences brought by decentralized finance.

conclusion As decentralized finance continues to evolve, Bit Loop offers a new economic model through its unique recommendation system that enables users to enjoy highly secure and transparent financial services while also earning passive income by building and maintaining a personal network. Whether for investors seeking stable passive income or innovators looking to explore new financial possibilities through blockchain technology, Bit Loop provides a platform not to be missed.

[asgfegaesa]

Member Zhang Yi: The development prospects of the private economy are broad and promising

In the early spring of 2025, the convening of the private enterprise symposium stirred up the enthusiasm of thousands of private entrepreneurs. General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out that "the development prospects of the private economy in the new era and new journey are broad and promising, and it is the right time for private enterprises and private entrepreneurs to show their talents." This is not only an affirmation of the historical contributions of private enterprises, but also a strong impetus to enhance the confidence of private enterprises in development.

In recent years, a number of policy documents have been issued, including the "Opinions of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council on Creating a Better Development Environment to Support the Reform and Development of Private Enterprises" and the "Opinions of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council on Promoting the Development and Growth of the Private Economy". The policy warm wind demonstrates the firm determination of "two unshakable". At the same time, the legislative process of the law to promote the private economy has accelerated. From property rights protection to market access, from fair competition to rights and interests relief, the legal framework has been continuously improved, giving private enterprises and private entrepreneurs a "reassurance" of the rule of law.

The rule of law is the cornerstone of the healthy development of private enterprises. General Secretary Xi Jinping emphasized that "we must resolutely remove all obstacles to the equal use of production factors and fair participation in market competition in accordance with the law." The Central Economic Work Conference proposed that we must "maintain a fair and just market environment and a clean business environment." This has greatly boosted the confidence of private entrepreneurs. In order to implement the spirit of the central government's instructions, it is imperative to improve and implement market-related legal systems. The revision of the "Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China" should be completed as soon as possible, and the Anti-Monopoly Law, Anti-Unfair Competition Law, Price Law and "National Unified Market Construction Guidelines (Trial)" and other laws and regulations should be strictly enforced to strengthen the rigid constraints of fair competition review and law enforcement supervision;

Market supervision departments should strengthen law enforcement supervision and compliance guidance in an orderly manner for key industries and fields, effectively strengthen accountability for major illegal acts of business entities, and light up the light of the rule of law for private enterprises to set sail.

Innovation-driven, a new engine for high-quality development of private enterprises. At present, a new round of scientific and technological revolution is reshaping the global economic landscape, and private enterprises have become an important force in cultivating new quality productivity. We must give full play to the important role of private enterprises in the transformation of scientific and technological achievements and industrial upgrading. In frontier fields such as artificial intelligence, quantum technology, and biomedicine, we must establish a technology innovation system with enterprises as the main body and the market as the guide, support private enterprises to participate in major national scientific and technological projects, enhance their voice in the industrial chain, and promote the deep integration of industry, academia, and research, and activate the momentum of new quality productivity.

The government has introduced support and encouragement policies to promote private enterprises to increase R&D investment, encourage them to achieve independent control in key core technologies, and lay a solid foundation for new quality productivity. In addition, it is necessary to promote the digital transformation of private enterprises, realize the integration of digital economy and real economy, optimize production processes, improve management efficiency, and promote the digital upgrade of industrial chain and supply chain through technologies such as big data and artificial intelligence, so as to expand the space of new quality productivity.

Going out to sea, from product output to ecological co-construction, private enterprises have entered a new stage of international competition. Under the guidance of the "Belt and Road" initiative, more and more private enterprises have gone abroad. Among the "new three" with strong exports, private enterprises contribute more than half. Among the world's top 500 companies, the number of private enterprises has increased from 28 in 2018 to 34. Whether it is the overseas layout of the manufacturing industry,

Whether it is the cross-border expansion of the service industry, private enterprises have demonstrated strong competitiveness. By participating in international competition, private enterprises can not only improve their own technical level and management capabilities, but also contribute to the development of national economic globalization. However, going overseas also faces many challenges. From cultural differences to policy barriers, from market risks to legal disputes, private enterprises need to continue to learn and adapt on the road to internationalization. In this regard, the government should strengthen relevant policy guidance and support to help private enterprises better cope with the uncertainties in international competition.

[nhjnbdfsfws]

Member Zhang Yi: The development prospects of the private economy are broad and promising

In the early spring of 2025, the convening of the private enterprise symposium stirred up the enthusiasm of thousands of private entrepreneurs. General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out that "the development prospects of the private economy in the new era and new journey are broad and promising, and it is the right time for private enterprises and private entrepreneurs to show their talents." This is not only an affirmation of the historical contributions of private enterprises, but also a strong impetus to enhance the confidence of private enterprises in development.

In recent years, a number of policy documents have been issued, including the "Opinions of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council on Creating a Better Development Environment to Support the Reform and Development of Private Enterprises" and the "Opinions of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council on Promoting the Development and Growth of the Private Economy". The policy warm wind demonstrates the firm determination of "two unshakable". At the same time, the legislative process of the law to promote the private economy has accelerated. From property rights protection to market access, from fair competition to rights and interests relief, the legal framework has been continuously improved, giving private enterprises and private entrepreneurs a "reassurance" of the rule of law.

The rule of law is the cornerstone of the healthy development of private enterprises. General Secretary Xi Jinping emphasized that "we must resolutely remove all obstacles to the equal use of production factors and fair participation in market competition in accordance with the law." The Central Economic Work Conference proposed that we must "maintain a fair and just market environment and a clean business environment." This has greatly boosted the confidence of private entrepreneurs. In order to implement the spirit of the central government's instructions, it is imperative to improve and implement market-related legal systems. The revision of the "Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China" should be completed as soon as possible, and the Anti-Monopoly Law, Anti-Unfair Competition Law, Price Law and "National Unified Market Construction Guidelines (Trial)" and other laws and regulations should be strictly enforced to strengthen the rigid constraints of fair competition review and law enforcement supervision;

Market supervision departments should strengthen law enforcement supervision and compliance guidance in an orderly manner for key industries and fields, effectively strengthen accountability for major illegal acts of business entities, and light up the light of the rule of law for private enterprises to set sail.

Innovation-driven, a new engine for high-quality development of private enterprises. At present, a new round of scientific and technological revolution is reshaping the global economic landscape, and private enterprises have become an important force in cultivating new quality productivity. We must give full play to the important role of private enterprises in the transformation of scientific and technological achievements and industrial upgrading. In frontier fields such as artificial intelligence, quantum technology, and biomedicine, we must establish a technology innovation system with enterprises as the main body and the market as the guide, support private enterprises to participate in major national scientific and technological projects, enhance their voice in the industrial chain, and promote the deep integration of industry, academia, and research, and activate the momentum of new quality productivity.

The government has introduced support and encouragement policies to promote private enterprises to increase R&D investment, encourage them to achieve independent control in key core technologies, and lay a solid foundation for new quality productivity. In addition, it is necessary to promote the digital transformation of private enterprises, realize the integration of digital economy and real economy, optimize production processes, improve management efficiency, and promote the digital upgrade of industrial chain and supply chain through technologies such as big data and artificial intelligence, so as to expand the space of new quality productivity.

Going out to sea, from product output to ecological co-construction, private enterprises have entered a new stage of international competition. Under the guidance of the "Belt and Road" initiative, more and more private enterprises have gone abroad. Among the "new three" with strong exports, private enterprises contribute more than half. Among the world's top 500 companies, the number of private enterprises has increased from 28 in 2018 to 34. Whether it is the overseas layout of the manufacturing industry,

Whether it is the cross-border expansion of the service industry, private enterprises have demonstrated strong competitiveness. By participating in international competition, private enterprises can not only improve their own technical level and management capabilities, but also contribute to the development of national economic globalization. However, going overseas also faces many challenges. From cultural differences to policy barriers, from market risks to legal disputes, private enterprises need to continue to learn and adapt on the road to internationalization. In this regard, the government should strengthen relevant policy guidance and support to help private enterprises better cope with the uncertainties in international competition.

[easfdasfas]

Member Zhang Yi: The development prospects of the private economy are broad and promising

In the early spring of 2025, the convening of the private enterprise symposium stirred up the enthusiasm of thousands of private entrepreneurs. General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out that "the development prospects of the private economy in the new era and new journey are broad and promising, and it is the right time for private enterprises and private entrepreneurs to show their talents." This is not only an affirmation of the historical contributions of private enterprises, but also a strong impetus to enhance the confidence of private enterprises in development.

In recent years, a number of policy documents have been issued, including the "Opinions of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council on Creating a Better Development Environment to Support the Reform and Development of Private Enterprises" and the "Opinions of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council on Promoting the Development and Growth of the Private Economy". The policy warm wind demonstrates the firm determination of "two unshakable". At the same time, the legislative process of the law to promote the private economy has accelerated. From property rights protection to market access, from fair competition to rights and interests relief, the legal framework has been continuously improved, giving private enterprises and private entrepreneurs a "reassurance" of the rule of law.

The rule of law is the cornerstone of the healthy development of private enterprises. General Secretary Xi Jinping emphasized that "we must resolutely remove all obstacles to the equal use of production factors and fair participation in market competition in accordance with the law." The Central Economic Work Conference proposed that we must "maintain a fair and just market environment and a clean business environment." This has greatly boosted the confidence of private entrepreneurs. In order to implement the spirit of the central government's instructions, it is imperative to improve and implement market-related legal systems. The revision of the "Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China" should be completed as soon as possible, and the Anti-Monopoly Law, Anti-Unfair Competition Law, Price Law and "National Unified Market Construction Guidelines (Trial)" and other laws and regulations should be strictly enforced to strengthen the rigid constraints of fair competition review and law enforcement supervision;

Market supervision departments should strengthen law enforcement supervision and compliance guidance in an orderly manner for key industries and fields, effectively strengthen accountability for major illegal acts of business entities, and light up the light of the rule of law for private enterprises to set sail.

Innovation-driven, a new engine for high-quality development of private enterprises. At present, a new round of scientific and technological revolution is reshaping the global economic landscape, and private enterprises have become an important force in cultivating new quality productivity. We must give full play to the important role of private enterprises in the transformation of scientific and technological achievements and industrial upgrading. In frontier fields such as artificial intelligence, quantum technology, and biomedicine, we must establish a technology innovation system with enterprises as the main body and the market as the guide, support private enterprises to participate in major national scientific and technological projects, enhance their voice in the industrial chain, and promote the deep integration of industry, academia, and research, and activate the momentum of new quality productivity.

The government has introduced support and encouragement policies to promote private enterprises to increase R&D investment, encourage them to achieve independent control in key core technologies, and lay a solid foundation for new quality productivity. In addition, it is necessary to promote the digital transformation of private enterprises, realize the integration of digital economy and real economy, optimize production processes, improve management efficiency, and promote the digital upgrade of industrial chain and supply chain through technologies such as big data and artificial intelligence, so as to expand the space of new quality productivity.

Going out to sea, from product output to ecological co-construction, private enterprises have entered a new stage of international competition. Under the guidance of the "Belt and Road" initiative, more and more private enterprises have gone abroad. Among the "new three" with strong exports, private enterprises contribute more than half. Among the world's top 500 companies, the number of private enterprises has increased from 28 in 2018 to 34. Whether it is the overseas layout of the manufacturing industry,

Whether it is the cross-border expansion of the service industry, private enterprises have demonstrated strong competitiveness. By participating in international competition, private enterprises can not only improve their own technical level and management capabilities, but also contribute to the development of national economic globalization. However, going overseas also faces many challenges. From cultural differences to policy barriers, from market risks to legal disputes, private enterprises need to continue to learn and adapt on the road to internationalization. In this regard, the government should strengthen relevant policy guidance and support to help private enterprises better cope with the uncertainties in international competition.

[20dollarlolita]

Review: First Stop Cosplay's Lolita Patterns

So a while back I saw some patterns from a company called First Stop Cosplay. I asked them if I could review their patterns (since the last time I reviewed a small pattern company they did not appreciate it) and they actually sent me some patterns for free.

I had a lot of fun making these. Unlike when I reviewed Cut/Sew, I ended up with actual lolita garments, didn't get confused by any steps, and actually had a lot of fun. And at no point did I have to make this face:

So, here's our reviews.

First Stop Cosplay isn't a EGL fashion company or even a fashion company at all. They're a cosplay pattern company that happened to make five different lolita fashion patterns. Their lolita options consist of a petticoat, some short bloomers, a capelet, and the blouse and skirt that I'm reviewing. I don't have any evidence that anyone in their team wears lolita regularly or outside of comic conventions, although that isn't inherently a negative thing.

First Stop Cosplay's entire goal is to make handmade cosplay inclusive and accessible to everyone. They do this by making patterns that are very simple, and that have instructions that are so detailed and easy that new sewists can follow along without a problem. Their normal women's size catalog includes 14 different size options. We're going to stick a pin in "inclusive for new sewists" and "inclusive for all sizes" because I'm going to come back to those points in a minute. The patterns are sold as a single size, and are a bit on the expensive side relative to their market. Printed versions of both the patterns I received would run $50, though they do have a lolita bundle option. They are currently discontinuing their paper patterns and going fully digital, and there is a slight discount for buying the digitial download instead. Unlike most digital download patterns, there is a sizeable gap time between when you buy the pattern and when you receive it. I bought some digital patterns from them yesterday afternoon, put in the activation codes, and am still waiting to actually receive my patterns. For comparison, I bought some digital patterns off Etsy yesterday and had them within minutes. They have an elaborate and non-automated anti-piracy system to make sure their patterns and instructions are protected from people who didn't buy them. I don't think they have quite the right balance of intellectual property protection vs customer convenience, but that's maybe just my opinion.

I do think that First Stop's prices are justified by how high quality their instructions are. They really do walk through every step, and I think that most people whose sewing knowledge is how to thread their sewing machine and sew a pillow would have enough prerequisite knowledge to make their skirt pattern. I think anyone who successfully made their skirt pattern could follow the blouse pattern and have at least most success. Basically, with a First Stop Cosplay pattern, you're not buying a sewing pattern. You're buying a how-to-sew tutorial that's tailored to make the item you want to make. They are offering genuinely the best indie patterns I've found on the market. I do respect that they want to keep these pattern instructions secure, and I do think I'd have been a little bit annoyed if I spent $50 on some patterns and then found out that all the expensive instructions that I bought the pattern for were just available for free online. However, I don't love that there's several days between when you receive the product and when you're allowed to actually use the product.

When you buy their pattern, you get a single size. This is an absolutely horrible idea that I know for a fact is costing them a lot of business and also is building up a reputation that their garments won't fit and therefore aren't safe to invest in and it's also actively working against their pledge to be size inclusive and inclusive to new sewists, but we'll go into that later. We don't need to lead with me going over the worst decision they've made and why it sucks.

(But, while we're on the subject of bad inclusivity, y'all need to fix the pop ups on your site. I'm over there grabbing screenshots and data and I'm also in hell because I have one pop up go OVER the second pop up every single time that I tab between different pages. There's a whole chunk of disabilities for whom this is an absolute accessibility nightmare. Also if both pop ups happen at the same time, the page can get scroll-locked and you have to refresh the page. I want to give you money so please don't make it hard for me to buy your product. I only need to X out of your newsletter pop up one time, I won't change my mind the 12th time I'm shown it)

Let's review the actual patterns now.

0024 Customizable Lolita Skirt:

This is a fun, basic rectangle skirt. It's got an interfaced, non-shirred waistband, with non-removable waist ties inserted at the side seams. I loved that the instructions included how to do the kind of tasks that most patterns just assume you would automatically do. Instead of, "transfer all markings," it will show you each marking and how to transfer it. Instead of "press seams as you sew," it will stop the instructions and tell you what to press and how to press it. In addition to helping out new people who don't have someone to teach them how to do these things, it's helpful for lazy sewists like me who tend to want to skip these steps.

This pattern comes with three PDF instruction files. The first is for how to cut the pattern, fuse the interfacing, and transfer all the markings. The second is all of the sewing instructions. The third one is the "bonus content," and is where the skirt gets its "customizable" name. Sadly, there's not as much bonus content for these skirts as I would really like. The instructions include different ways to sew on trim, like sewing the trim under the hem, sewing it on top of the hem, applying it to the skirt body, or applying it to the waistband. There's not any actual direction for how to select good lace or trim or how to apply it to make it look the most lolita. Again, they're cosplayers, so I won't fault them for not knowing lolita fashion the way that a lifestyler lolita would, but it did feel like a bit of a let-down. For a product with "customizable" in the name, I wanted some more options.

In terms of actual design, though, it's a pretty solid skirt. if I was to throw you RhodyGunn's lolita skirt tutorial and say, "just interface the waist band!" and you didn't feel confident making that with no help, this would be a really good skirt for you. I have three problems with it, which is actually a pretty small number of problems by my standards.

My skirt did not fit me, but that was my fault. I just ordered totally the wrong size, and didn't realize it until it was too late. I made it work just by using the waist ties to cinch it in tighter. I wanted to make the skirt again, and if I'd had multiple size options with my purchase then that wouldn't have been a problem. Instead, when I remade my skirt, I had to use my sewing patterning skills to fix it. That's not a huge problem for me, but it would be a huge problem for First Stop Cosplay's target audience.

I added a ruffle and a few lines of lace onto my skirt, because I don't want to put a lot of work into a skirt and then have it not be an actual lolita skirt. This is what it looked like before my customizations. Please note that my skirt is extra long due to me ordering like 2 sizes too large, as their longer sizes are longer than their smaller sizes.

My other critiques sum up to, "lolita isn't patterned like that" in a couple of cases. While skirts with suspenders are definitely a thing, I couldn't find any that tie at the shoulders. I know that this is probably a way to make sure that the straps will fit everyone, but I'd love to see a piece manufactured by any brand that would give inspiration about how to wear it. The other thing that's just not patterned like lolita garments is the waist ties.. It would be possible to replace the pattern piece with one that's actually lolita-shaped without modifying the instructions at all. If no one at First Stop wants to do a re-drawn waist tie, I'll do it and post it here, since I think the info would benefit the handmade community at large.

Lolita waist ties are very flared, which is how we get the cute waist bow, so pattern them like this next time and it'll be correct. I'm not saying this as a preference or a style choice, lolita waist ties are just shaped like this 85+% of the time.

As previously mentioned, I made each garment twice. On the second one, I re-patterned the waist tie, and then I just slapped a bunch of lace on the hem. It made a perfectly acceptable lolita skirt, in my opinion. Please note that, if I was a new sewist, I wouldn't have been able to make this skirt a second time, since I wouldn't have the skills to resize the waistband to fit me. In order to make this pattern for myself a second time, I would have needed to receive multiple sizes when I bought my pattern.

Blouse time.

FSCO Whimsical Lolita Blouse:

Button front, puff sleeve, peter pan collar blouse, two sleeve variations. I did not make the long sleeves because I live in Sacramento, which is one windy day apart from being in an air fryer.

I want to start by saying that I've officially made this blouse my favorite handmade lolita blouse pattern, and I'm going to make it in more colors and fabrics. I love how fast it comes together, and I love that a lot of really time-consuming techniques have a more simple technique instead. I like sewing fast and this feels good to sew fast.

However, this blouse suffers pretty badly from "close, but not quite," in the same way the waist ties are. Yes, lolita blouses can have flat roll peter pan collars, but they're usually not this size, or this shape, or sit this close to the neck. Yes, lolita blouses usually have puff sleeves, but they're shorter and puffier. These were super easy modifications for me to make, but again, it's not an easy modification for a new sewist to make. But these are adjustments that First Stop COULD make. They could adjust 2 pieces and one line of text in their instructions and have what would actually be the only good lolita blouse pattern aimed at the absolute beginner. These patterns are so close to being so good. Two pattern pieces and one line of text away from having THE lolita blouse pattern that we recommend to all the new kids.

To anyone making this blouse: if you don't want to make adjustments to the pattern, the collar more or less isn't going to read as lolita at the size it is at. I got around it by using some 3.5" gathered lace. That ended up being a pretty big lace, but you will need to put a ruffle or some wide gathered lace on the collar if you want to wear this as a lolita blouse. It would be nice for there to be instructions for that.

Just if anyone is curious, here's the changes the pattern needs to really read as lolita. Sleeve shorter and more volume at the hem, collar wider especially at the shoulders, neckline farther away from the actual neck. Change that and you're golden. The picture on the right is the collar in the pattern laid over the collar that I redrew.

My original blue blouse up there didn't fit me, and that was actually not my fault this time. I bought the right blouse for my bust size, as I was recommended to do. However, relative to their sizing, I have a smaller bust and a larger waist. This meant that a fitted blouse like this was too small in my waist. When I made my purple blouse, I just added 3/4 of an inch to each side seam and re-patterned the bust dart, but again, First Stop Cosplay's target audience does not know how to do that.

When you're selling a product, not posting a tutorial online or giving comments on a forum, but are actually selling a product for real money, it's your responsibility to give your customers the things that they need to succeed. That includes making sure that they have the info needed to make their pattern fit.

First Stop Cosplay is a really promising company, and I really enjoyed most of the process of their patterns. This is why I'm going to spend some time talking about the thing that's stopping people from buying and successfully completing their products, which is the thing that I think is going to kill this company and make them go out of business. First Stop, I really don't want. you to die, so I need you to listen:

The single size pattern thing is a problem. it stops new customers from choosing your product. it stops existing customers from being successful with your product. It stops you from completing your mission to be both ability-inclusive and size-inclusive. It's working against you to such an extreme that I'm stunned that no one in the company with the power to change this can see it.

In the 2.5 months that I've been working on this project, I've talked to a lot of people about your company. "I would buy from them, but I'm afraid I'm going to get the wrong size," was a common sentiment I got. "I won't buy from that company, because they're charging a lot of money for just one size," was another. It stopped ME from trying your company; if I had to buy these patterns out of pocket then I would not have reviewed them. This is because I, a very experienced sewist, didn't want to get the wrong pattern size--and i STILL GOT THE WRONG PATTERN SIZE, twice, even after being PERSONALLY GUIDED by an FSCO employee. How are other companies dealing with the problem of customers buying the wrong size of pattern? They're giving people multiple pattern sizes when they sell the pattern.

I will admit that it's beginner-friendly to not confuse your customer with nested pattern sizes. However, y'all are going digital, and it will cost you no more money or and more paper to just give separate PDFs for each size. You already have the PDFs. You're selling them separately. Just put them in a group. Then, you're still fulfilling your goal of not confusing your customer with multiple sizes, but you're also not trapping a beginner into a single size with no chance of correcting that mistake. When you're asking a beginner to pick their size before they're allowed to look at the pattern, you're potentially dooming their project before it starts. In my market research, I encountered two people who bought First Stop Cosplay patterns, followed them all the way to the end, used their limited time and their expensive fabric. They made cosplays that they were happy with and proud of...until they put them on, and then they didn't fit. That's a story that should not happen. And I get it, it's not super easy to help a beginner pick a size when you're not present to help and they don't totally know what they're doing. But you know what is a thing you can expect a beginner to do, that will make their finished product better and make their garment reflect positively on your company? Telling them to make a mockup before they use their expensive fabric. You don't need to know how to resize a pattern. You just need to know how to follow the basic mockup instructions and then try it on. Just like shopping at Walmart, if your mockup garment is too small, you make the size larger. If it's too big, you make the size smaller. This is also very newbie-inclusive because it introduces them to the steps they're going to follow so that they're more familiar with them. The fact that even one person did everything right and still wasn't able to get their working garment is a fact that you should be trying to figure out how to fix. When you're a small pattern company, your reputation of, "I made their stuff and it doesn't fit," is a very dangerous reputation.

Your product, as it is, is inclusive to all body sizes, but it's not at all inclusive to all body shapes. You offer one shape in all sizes, and then don't provide the information necessary to help people who are not that shape choose between sizes. The information provided for body measurement and for finished garment sizes are not complete enough to confidently choose what size will fit my shape. I understand that more information is confusing to newer people with less experience, but less information is denying people the opportunity to make things that fits. I can see two options for solutions for this, both of which will cost y'all no money. One is to have a supplementary page that has ALL the body measurements for each size. If you're making patterns 14 different sizes, someone in the company has a chart that shows inseam length and shoulder width for those sizes. Your main audience probably doesn't know what to do with that, but if that information isn't posted then no one can ask a more experiences sewist for how to use that info. The other solution is, wait for it, just give people more sizes when they buy the pattern. This means that, if I bought my blouse pattern based on my bust measurement like I thought I should, and then I see that waist measurement is more important for my specific shape, I am not stuck trying to modify a blouse pattern that won't fit me. Y'all already have all the sizes. Just put three of them in each download. Give people the tools they need to make your company look good. Because, right now, "we're inclusive of all sizes as long as you don't have an apron belly or narrow shoulders," is not a look that lines up with the values and mission that you posted on your site.

First Stop Cosplay recently had to downsize. You got rid of some of their staff. You closed their Discord. You're going to sell through their current stack of paper patterns and then go digital only. You're not currently producing new patterns. Who in your company is so tied up in the single size thing that they're willing to throw away new customers when you're already struggling? When you're selling a digital pattern, it doesn't cost you any more money or labor to include multiple patterns. You can sell multiple sizes of digital patterns without selling nested patterns. I don't know if it'd somehow have an additional cost associated with selling multiple patterns at once, but if it is, I recommend that you do whatever every successful pattern company selling multiple sizes of digital patterns is doing to stop that from costing money, because First Stop Cosplay is the only company I know of that seems to have that problem.

I don't know. It's not my company. I'm just one girl who made their patterns four times and did a couple of months of casual market research. Take my stuff with a grain of salt.

Anyway, here's how my full lolita set turned out. Took a total of three days and a $8 bedsheet set from Goodwill, lace was all from Cheeptrims so it was less than $1 per yard. Even with $50 worth of patterns, this is still cheaper than buying it anywhere, and I got the fun of making it. I had a really good time and I want to have a good time with this company in the future.

So please use the resources you have to solve your problems.

Good night.long post

[mostlysignssomeportents]

UK publishers suing Google for $17.4b over rigged ad markets

THIS WEEKEND (June 7–9), I'm in AMHERST, NEW YORK to keynote the 25th Annual Media Ecology Association Convention and accept the Neil Postman Award for Career Achievement in Public Intellectual Activity.

Look, no one wants to kick Big Tech to the curb more than I do, but, also: it's good that Google indexes the news so people can find it, and it's good that Facebook provides forums where people can talk about the news.

It's not news if you can't find it. It's not news if you can't talk about it. We don't call information you can't find or discuss "news" – we call it "secrets."

And yet, the most popular – and widely deployed – anti-Big Tech tactic promulgated by the news industry and supported by many of my fellow trustbusters is premised on making Big Tech pay to index the news and/or provide a forum to discuss news articles. These "news bargaining codes" (or, less charitably, "link taxes") have been mooted or introduced in the EU, France, Spain, Australia, and Canada. There are proposals to introduce these in the US (through the JCPA) and in California (the CJPA).

These US bills are probably dead on arrival, for reasons that can be easily understood by the Canadian experience with them. After Canada introduced Bill C-18 – its own news bargaining code – Meta did exactly what it had done in many other places where this had been tried: blocked all news from Facebook, Instagram, Threads, and other Meta properties.

This has been a disaster for the news industry and a disaster for Canadians' ability to discuss the news. Oh, it makes Meta look like assholes, too, but Meta is the poster child for "too big to care" and is palpably indifferent to the PR costs of this boycott.

Frustrated lawmakers are now trying to figure out what to do next. The most common proposal is to order Meta to carry the news. Canadians should be worried about this, because the next government will almost certainly be helmed by the far-right conspiratorialist culture warrior Pierre Poilievre, who will doubtless use this power to order Facebook to platform "news sites" to give prominence to Canada's rotten bushel of crypto-fascist (and openly fascist) "news" sites.

Americans should worry about this too. A Donald Trump 2028 presidency combined with a must-carry rule for news would see Trump's cabinet appointees deciding what is (and is not) news, and ordering large social media platforms to cram the Daily Caller (or, you know, the Daily Stormer) into our eyeballs.

But there's another, more fundamental reason that must-carry is incompatible with the American system: the First Amendment. The government simply can't issue a blanket legal order to platforms requiring them to carry certain speech. They can strongly encourage it. A court can order limited compelled speech (say, a retraction following a finding of libel). Under emergency conditions, the government might be able to compel the transmission of urgent messages. But there's just no way the First Amendment can be squared with a blanket, ongoing order issued by the government to communications platforms requiring them to reproduce, and make available, everything published by some collection of their favorite news outlets.

This might also be illegal in Canada, but it's harder to be definitive. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was enshrined in 1982, and Canada's Supreme Court is still figuring out what it means. Section Two of the Charter enshrines a free expression right, but it's worded in less absolute terms than the First Amendment, and that's deliberate. During the debate over the wording of the Charter, Canadian scholars and policymakers specifically invoked problems with First Amendment absolutism and tried to chart a middle course between strong protections for free expression and problems with the First Amendment's brook-no-exceptions language.

So maybe Canada's Supreme Court would find a must-carry order to Meta to be a violation of the Charter, but it's hard to say for sure. The Charter is both young and ambiguous, so it's harder to be definitive about what it would say about this hypothetical. But when it comes to the US and the First Amendment, that's categorically untrue. The US Constitution is centuries older than the Canadian Charter, and the First Amendment is extremely definitive, and there are reams of precedent interpreting it. The JPCA and CJPA are totally incompatible with the US Constitution. Passing them isn't as silly as passing a law declaring that Pi equals three or that water isn't wet, but it's in the neighborhood.

But all that isn't to say that the news industry shouldn't be attacking Big Tech. Far from it. Big Tech compulsively steals from the news!

But what Big Tech steals from the news isn't content.

It's money.

Big Tech steals money from the news. Take social media: when a news outlet invests in building a subscriber base on a social media platform, they're giving that platform a stick to beat them with. The more subscribers you have on social media, the more you'll be willing to pay to reach those subscribers, and the more incentive there is for the platform to suppress the reach of your articles unless you pay to "boost" your content.

This is plainly fraudulent. When I sign up to follow a news outlet on a social media site, I'm telling the platform to show me the things the news outlet publishes. When the platform uses that subscription as the basis for a blackmail plot, holding my desire to read the news to ransom, they are breaking their implied promise to me to show me the things I asked to see:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/06/save-news-we-need-end-end-web

This is stealing money from the news. It's the definition of an "unfair method of competition." Article 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act gives the FTC the power to step in and ban this practice, and they should:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/10/the-courage-to-govern/#whos-in-charge

Big Tech also steals money from the news via the App Tax: the 30% rake that the mobile OS duopoly (Apple/Google) requires for every in-app purchase (Apple/Google also have policies that punish app vendors who take you to the web to make payments without paying the App Tax). 30% out of every subscriber dollar sent via an app is highway robbery! By contrast, the hyperconcentrated, price-gouging payment processing cartel charges 2-5% – about a tenth of the Big Tech tax. This is Big Tech stealing money from the news:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/06/save-news-we-must-open-app-stores

Finally, Big Tech steals money by monopolizing the ad market. The Google-Meta ad duopoly takes 51% out of every ad-dollar spent. The historic share going to advertising "intermediaries" is 10-15%. In other words, Google/Meta cornered the market on ads and then tripled the bite they were taking out of publishers' advertising revenue. They even have an illegal, collusive arrangement to rig this market, codenamed "Jedi Blue":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jedi_Blue

There's two ways to unrig the ad market, and we should do both of them.

First, we should trustbust both Google and Meta and force them to sell off parts of their advertising businesses. Currently, both Google and Meta operate a "full stack" of ad services. They have an arm that represents advertisers buying space for ads. Another arm represents publishers selling space to advertisers. A third arm operates the marketplace where these sales take place. All three arms collect fees. On top of that: Google/Meta are both publishers and advertisers, competing with their own customers!

This is as if you were in court for a divorce and you discovered that the same lawyer representing your soon-to-be ex was also representing you…while serving as the judge…and trying to match with you both on Tinder. It shouldn't surprise you if at the end of that divorce, the court ruled that the family home should go to the lawyer.

So yeah, we should break up ad-tech:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/05/save-news-we-must-shatter-ad-tech

Also: we should ban surveillance advertising. Surveillance advertising gives ad-tech companies a permanent advantage over publishers. Ad-tech will always know more about readers' behavior than publishers do, because Big Tech engages in continuous, highly invasive surveillance of every internet user in the world. Surveillance ads perform a little better than "content-based ads" (ads sold based on the content of a web-page, not the behavior of the person looking at the page), but publishers will always know more about their content than ad-tech does. That means that even if content-based ads command a slightly lower price than surveillance ads, a much larger share of that payment will go to publishers:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/05/save-news-we-must-ban-surveillance-advertising

Banning surveillance advertising isn't just good business, it's good politics. The potential coalition for banning surveillance ads is everyone who is harmed by commercial surveillance. That's a coalition that's orders of magnitude larger than the pool of people who merely care about fairness in the ad/news industries. It's everyone who's worried about their grandparents being brainwashed on Facebook, or their teens becoming anorexic because of Instagram. It includes people angry about deepfake porn, and people angry about Black Lives Matter protesters' identities being handed to the cops by Google (see also: Jan 6 insurrectionists).

It also includes everyone who discovers that they're paying higher prices because a vendor is using surveillance data to determine how much they'll pay – like when McDonald's raises the price of your "meal deal" on your payday, based on the assumption that you will spend more when your bank account is at its highest monthly level:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/06/05/your-price-named/#privacy-first-again

Attacking Big Tech for stealing money is much smarter than pretending that the problem is Big Tech stealing content. We want Big Tech to make the news easy to find and discuss. We just want them to stop pocketing 30 cents out of every subscriber dollar and 51 cents out of ever ad dollar, and ransoming subscribers' social media subscriptions to extort publishers.

And there's amazing news on this front: a consortium of UK web-publishers called Ad Tech Collective Action has just triumphed in a high-stakes proceeding, and can now go ahead with a suit against Google, seeking damages of GBP13.6b ($17.4b) for the rigged ad-tech market:

https://www.reuters.com/technology/17-bln-uk-adtech-lawsuit-against-google-can-go-ahead-tribunal-rules-2024-06-05/

The ruling, from the Competition Appeal Tribunal, paves the way for a frontal assault on the thing Big Tech actually steals from publishers: money, not content.

This is exactly what publishing should be doing. Targeting the method by which tech steals from the news is a benefit to all kinds of news organizations, including the independent, journalist-owned publishers that are doing the best news work today. These independents do not have the same interests as corporate news, which is dominated by hedge funds and private equity raiders, who have spent decades buying up and hollowing out news outlets, and blaming the resulting decline in readership and profits on Craiglist.

You can read more about Big Finance's raid on the news in Margot Susca's Hedged: How Private Investment Funds Helped Destroy American Newspapers and Undermine Democracy:

https://www.press.uillinois.edu/books/?id=p087561

You can also watch/listen to Adam Conover's excellent interview with Susca:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N21YfWy0-bA

Frankly, the looters and billionaires who bought and gutted our great papers are no more interested in the health of the news industry or democracy than Big Tech is. We should care about the news and the workers who produce the news, not the profits of the hedge-funds that own the news. An assault on Big Tech's monetary theft levels the playing field, making it easier for news workers and indies to compete directly with financialized news outlets and billionaire playthings, by letting indies keep more of every ad-dollar and more of every subscriber-dollar – and to reach their subscribers without paying ransom to social media.

Ending monetary theft – rather than licensing news search and discussion – is something that workers are far more interested in than their bosses. Any time you see workers and their bosses on the same side as a fight against Big Tech, you should look more closely. Bosses are not on their workers' side. If bosses get more money out of Big Tech, they will not share those gains with workers unless someone forces them to.

That's where antitrust comes in. Antitrust is designed to strike at power, and enforcers have broad authority to blunt the power of corporate juggernauts. Remember Article 5 of the FTC Act, the one that lets the FTC block "unfair methods of competition?" FTC Chair Lina Khan has proposed using it to regulate training AI, specifically to craft rules that address the labor and privacy issues with AI:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mh8Z5pcJpg

This is an approach that can put creative workers where they belong, in a coalition with other workers, rather than with their bosses. The copyright approach to curbing AI training is beloved of the same media companies that are eagerly screwing their workers. If we manage to make copyright – a transferrable right that a worker can be forced to turn over their employer – into the system that regulates AI training, it won't stop training. It'll just trigger every entertainment company changing their boilerplate contract so that creative workers have to sign over their AI rights or be shown the door:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/05/13/spooky-action-at-a-close-up/#invisible-hand

Then those same entertainment and news companies will train AI models and try to fire most of their workers and slash the pay of the remainder using those models' output. Using copyright to regulate AI training makes changes to who gets to benefit from workers' misery, shifting some of our stolen wages from AI companies to entertainment companies. But it won't stop them from ruining our lives.

By contrast, focusing on actual labor rights – say, through an FTCA 5 rulemaking – has the potential to protect those rights from all parties, and puts us on the same side as call-center workers, train drivers, radiologists and anyone else whose wages are being targeted by AI companies and their customers.

Policy fights are a recurring monkey's paw nightmare in which we try to do something to fight corruption and bullying, only to be outmaneuvered by corrupt bullies. Making good policy is no guarantee of a good outcome, but it sure helps – and good policy starts with targeting the thing you want to fix. If we're worried that news is being financially starved by Big Tech, then we should go after the money, not the links.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/06/06/stealing-money-not-content/#content-free

[inanshalla]

also the “crows never take contracts in Ferelden” is dumb as hell they had a whole hit out on the hero of ferelden

ZEVRAN of HOUSE ARAINAI was taking down the crows since dragon age awakening and he was doing it so well they tried to recruit hawke to take him down and even in inquisition, if zevran isn’t romanced, he’s STILL taking them down and doing a really good job.

zevran talks all the time about how he had no choice, and there had to be a certain “open-mindedness” when being a crow. If questioned, he says that the crows actively recruit elven assassins because they are considered attractive by humans and leaves it up to you to guess what that implies

but then again, these writers didn’t even know who zevran was calling him “daddy issues” and “full of red flags” when he’s really serious about consent and is someone that once committed he’ll never abandon you or cheat on you—even if the warden dies he NEVER loves again and refuses to sleep with isabela in da2 either as he was “still in mourning” 7 years after the ultimate sacrifice

I’m not surprised the writers don’t know this/ wrote all this out bc it doesn’t make the crows look like the nice little revolutionary fight the system protecting the innocents type group when they basically buy children from brothels, slave markets pack them in barracks like crates, train them harshly where only few survive to be killing machines is too mean I guess

[amrutmnm]

Cybersecurity and Active Protection Systems: Navigating Market Trends and Challenges

The global defense sector is undergoing a significant transformation, driven by advancements in technology and the rising complexity of modern warfare. Among the critical areas of focus is the integration of Active Protection Systems (APS) into military platforms such as armored vehicles, naval vessels, and aircraft. APS are designed to protect these assets from incoming threats like missiles and projectiles by detecting and neutralizing them before they can cause harm. As these systems become more sophisticated and connected, they also become increasingly vulnerable to cyber-attacks. This vulnerability has put a spotlight on the cybersecurity of APS, a crucial aspect that is now driving significant market trends within the industry.

Market Size and Growth Dynamics

The Active Protection System Market is projected to grow from USD 3.9 Billion in 2022 to USD 5.2 Billion by 2027, at a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 5.5% during the forecast period. This growth is largely attributed to the increasing adoption of APS by military forces worldwide, driven by the need for enhanced protection of critical assets in hostile environments. As the deployment of APS expands, so does the exposure to cyber threats, necessitating robust cybersecurity measures.

The rising number of cyber-attacks targeting defense systems is a significant driver of growth in the cybersecurity segment of the APS market. According to recent market statistics, there has been a marked increase in the frequency and sophistication of cyber-attacks on military systems. In fact, between January 2022 and June 2022, there were over 65 reported cyber-attacks on government agencies worldwide, many of which targeted defense networks. This growing threat has made cybersecurity a top priority for governments and defense contractors, leading to substantial investments in securing APS from cyber threats.

Get a Deeper Understanding of the Industry by Visiting: https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/Market-Reports/active-protection-system-market-5804076.html

Industry Trends: The Convergence of Cybersecurity and Active Protection Systems

The integration of cybersecurity into APS is not just a reactive measure but is becoming a proactive strategy to ensure the reliability and effectiveness of these systems. Several key trends are shaping the cybersecurity landscape within the APS industry:

Advanced Threat Detection and Response Mechanisms:

Modern APS are increasingly equipped with sophisticated threat detection technologies, such as digital radar processors, optoelectronic sensors, and thermal imaging devices. These technologies enhance the system's ability to identify and neutralize incoming threats. They also create potential entry points for cyber-attacks. To mitigate this risk, manufacturers are integrating advanced cybersecurity protocols that monitor system integrity in real-time, detect anomalous behavior, and initiate automated countermeasures against potential cyber intrusions.

Secure Communication Networks:

The effectiveness of APS heavily relies on the seamless communication between sensors, processors, and countermeasure systems. This interconnectedness, however, presents a vulnerability that cyber adversaries can exploit. As a result, the industry is witnessing a shift towards the development of secure communication networks that are resistant to jamming, interception, and unauthorized access. These networks utilize encryption, frequency hopping, and other security measures to ensure that data transmitted within the APS remains confidential and tamper-proof.

Integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML):

AI and ML are playing an increasingly vital role in enhancing the cybersecurity of APS. These technologies enable the systems to learn from past incidents, identify emerging threats, and adapt to new attack vectors. AI-driven cybersecurity solutions can predict potential vulnerabilities within the APS and autonomously deploy patches or reconfigure the system to counteract the identified risks. This trend towards AI-enhanced cybersecurity is expected to become a standard feature in next-generation APS.

Compliance with International Cybersecurity Standards:

The global nature of military operations necessitates that APS meet stringent cybersecurity standards that are recognized internationally. Defense organizations are now mandating compliance with frameworks such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Cybersecurity Framework, ISO/IEC 27001, and the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA) guidelines. Adherence to these standards ensures that APS are designed, developed, and deployed with cybersecurity as a foundational element, reducing the risk of compromise during operations.

Collaboration Between Defense Contractors and Cybersecurity Firms:

Recognizing the growing importance of cybersecurity, defense contractors are increasingly partnering with specialized cybersecurity firms. These collaborations aim to integrate cutting-edge cybersecurity technologies into APS, leveraging the expertise of cybersecurity companies to address specific vulnerabilities. This trend is fostering innovation and leading to the development of more resilient APS that can withstand sophisticated cyber-attacks.

Get Thorough Information in Our PDF Brochure: https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/pdfdownloadNew.asp?id=5804076

Market Challenges and Opportunities

While the integration of cybersecurity into APS presents numerous opportunities, it also comes with challenges that the industry must address to ensure the continued growth of the market.

Challenges:

High Development and Implementation Costs:

One of the primary challenges facing the APS market is the high cost associated with developing and implementing advanced cybersecurity solutions. The complexity of modern APS, coupled with the need for rigorous testing and validation of cybersecurity measures, drives up costs. This challenge is particularly pronounced for smaller defense contractors and nations with limited defense budgets, which may struggle to afford the latest cybersecurity technologies.

Rapidly Evolving Cyber Threat Landscape:

The cyber threat landscape is continuously evolving, with adversaries constantly developing new methods to breach defense systems. This dynamic environment requires APS manufacturers to stay ahead of emerging threats by continuously updating their cybersecurity measures. This need for ongoing innovation can strain resources and create challenges in maintaining the cybersecurity of APS over their lifecycle.

Interoperability and Standardization Issues:

As APS are deployed across various platforms and integrated with different systems, ensuring interoperability while maintaining robust cybersecurity can be challenging. Differences in standards, protocols, and technologies across platforms can create vulnerabilities that adversaries may exploit. Addressing these interoperability issues is critical to the success of cybersecurity efforts in the APS market.

Discover All the Steps in Our Detailed Sample: https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/requestsampleNew.asp?id=5804076

Opportunities:

Rising Demand for Cybersecurity Expertise:

The growing focus on cybersecurity within the APS market presents significant opportunities for cybersecurity firms. Defense contractors are increasingly seeking partnerships with cybersecurity experts to enhance the resilience of their systems. This demand is expected to drive growth in the cybersecurity sector, particularly in areas such as secure communications, threat detection, and AI-driven cybersecurity solutions.

Government Initiatives and Funding:

Governments worldwide are recognizing the importance of cybersecurity in defense and are providing funding and support for the development of secure APS. The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) has launched initiatives aimed at strengthening the cybersecurity of military systems, including APS. These government-led efforts are expected to create a favorable environment for innovation and investment in cybersecurity solutions for the APS market.

Expansion into Emerging Markets:

As emerging economies invest in modernizing their military capabilities, there is a growing opportunity for APS manufacturers to expand into these markets. Countries in Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America are increasingly adopting APS to protect their armored fleets, creating new demand for cybersecurity solutions tailored to the needs of these regions. Manufacturers that can offer cost-effective, scalable, and secure APS are well-positioned to capitalize on this growing demand.

Top 5 Key Market Players in Active Protection System Market:

The Active Protection System Companies is dominated by globally established players such as

Rheinmetall AG (Germany),

Saab AB (Sweden),

Raytheon Company (US),

Airbus (Netherlands), and

ASELSAN AS (Turkey)

The convergence of cybersecurity and active protection systems represents a significant evolution in the defense industry. As the global threat landscape becomes increasingly complex, the need for secure, resilient, and adaptable APS has never been greater. The market statistics indicate robust growth in the APS market, driven by the rising demand for advanced protection solutions in an era of cyber warfare.

While challenges such as high costs and the evolving nature of cyber threats present hurdles, the opportunities for innovation, collaboration, and expansion are substantial. The continued investment in cybersecurity by both governments and private sector players will be crucial in ensuring that APS can effectively protect military assets from both physical and cyber threats. As the industry moves forward, the integration of cybersecurity into APS will become a defining characteristic of next-generation defense systems, safeguarding them against the growing threat of cyber-attacks.

About MarketsandMarkets™

MarketsandMarkets™ has been recognized as one of America's best management consulting firms by Forbes, as per their recent report.

MarketsandMarkets™ is a blue ocean alternative in growth consulting and program management, leveraging a man-machine offering to drive supernormal growth for progressive organizations in the B2B space. We have the widest lens on emerging technologies, making us proficient in co-creating supernormal growth for clients.

Earlier this year, we formally transformed into one of America's best management consulting firms as per a survey conducted by Forbes.

The B2B economy is witnessing the emergence of $25 trillion of new revenue streams that are substituting existing revenue streams in this decade alone. We work with clients on growth programs, helping them monetize this $25 trillion opportunity through our service lines - TAM Expansion, Go-to-Market (GTM) Strategy to Execution, Market Share Gain, Account Enablement, and Thought Leadership Marketing.

Built on the 'GIVE Growth' principle, we work with several Forbes Global 2000 B2B companies - helping them stay relevant in a disruptive ecosystem. Our insights and strategies are molded by our industry experts, cutting-edge AI-powered Market Intelligence Cloud, and years of research. The KnowledgeStore™ (our Market Intelligence Cloud) integrates our research, and facilitates analysis of interconnections through applications, helping clients look at the entire ecosystem and understand the revenue shifts in their industry.

To learn more, visit www.MarketsandMarkets™.com or follow us on Twitter, LinkedIn and Facebook.

Contact: Mr. Rohan Salgarkar MarketsandMarkets™ INC. 630 Dundee Road Suite 430 Northbrook, IL 60062 USA: +1-888-600-6441 Email: sales@marketsandmarkets.com

[bimbroad]

a very very very long winded ramble about mel, classism and the poor writing in arcane

Jumping off from my tags in the other post I reblogged, the way arcane ultimately fails to say anything meaningful about classism except “there are bad and good people on both sides :(“ is why I can’t take most “class-conscious” criticism about/hatred towards Mel seriously. Like if this was a show that took classism seriously within its own narrative, a lot of these arguments would have more merit but classism is unintentionally baked into the way the show is written because of the writers’ own inherent biases and poorly rendered viewpoints of systemic and structural oppression.

I’ve seen several critiques aimed at her character about her billionaire status (which is almost exclusively levied at her, and not any of the other characters that were already rich or would’ve realistically profited greatly from Hextech’s commercialization, such as Viktor and Jayce) claiming she should’ve been depicted as some cartoonishly evil villain because of it and the show did a disservice by not expounding on that…and it confuses me because there is such an easy way to show her class makes her a morally gray character without completely rewriting her personality, but like I said before, the writers did not commit to most aspects of depicting classism in a meaningful way.

I know that neoliberal gets thrown around a lot, but I’m defining it by this quote from Stanford:

“Neoliberalism holds that a society’s political and economic institutions should be robustly liberal and capitalist, but supplemented by a constitutionally limited democracy and a modest welfare state. Neoliberals endorse liberal rights and the free-market economy to protect freedom and promote economic prosperity. Neoliberals are broadly democratic, but stress the limitations of democracy as much as its necessity. And while neoliberals typically think government should provide social insurance and public goods, they are skeptical of the regulatory state, extensive government spending, and government-led countercyclical policy.”

As much as I love Mel (as much as I loved every other morally gray character in this story in s1), she is a neoliberal through and through. She is kind, she is smart, she understands politics like the back of her hand, she supports the liberation of Zaun and actively used her position on the council to “change the system from within” to help Zaunites achieve this and was staunchly against the weaponization of Hextech, but as we later see, Piltover’s “liberation” of Zaun hinges on oppressed people never responding to the violence enacted onto them with violence. It’s the veneer of liberation while Piltover maintains the upper hand because of the oppressive systems they created that Zaunites will spend generations trying to free themselves from.

This doesn’t stop Piltover from being a classist, technocratic oligarchy (“The city is governed by the Council, which is made up of members of some of Piltover's most influential Houses or individuals.”). This doesn’t stop the prejudice for Zaun baked into their culture. This doesn’t stop that Piltover is a technologically-advanced, resource rich city with access to the rest of the world while Zaun is not, and must either figure out how to establish their own access to resources, cultivate their own from almost nothing, or go through Piltover to get them. It wouldn’t stop Piltover from having an economy now shaped around Hextech, in which making synthetic crystals produces the Gray that actively disables and kills Zaunites, disregarding the environmental impact entirely. I could go on about how socioeconomically disadvantaged that Zaun would remain if they were “liberated” by the Piltover council, but all of this to say: the solution that would address the class war between Zaun and Piltover is, at its mildest, a complete reconstruction of Piltover’s society from the top down; not, as Mel advocated for, making slight adjustments within a violently oppressive system that will send police dogs to brutalize the oppressed when they get unruly.

Mel is already somebody who sympathizes with Zaunites, but her methods are ineffective in the long run, although I genuinely don’t think the writers understand that how she’s written. Her moral grayness isn’t because she “manipulated” Jayce, it’s because despite her altruism, she systemically contributes to oppression of Zaunites, especially with the hyper-production of Hextech which, even without direct weaponization, furthers the class divide and pollution in Zaun. If the writers were more aware of this, they could’ve easily written Mel as a billionaire philanthropist.

Piecing together a bunch of quotes to sum up my thoughts on how they could’ve leaned into this already established aspect of her character:

“Large-scale philanthropy is an exercise of power that is fundamentally undemocratic. Since charitable giving brings tax benefits, large-scale philanthropy can undermine the people’s will in favour of the donor’s own values. In effect, taxpayers subsidise the freedom of the rich to realise their own vision of what is good while simultaneously depriving democratically chosen programmes of valuable public funds.

The structure of philanthropy around the world is increasingly a manifestation of plutocracy – government by the wealthy. Rewarding large-scale philanthropy through tax relief and other subsidies gives the rich even more power than their wealth already provides to create a society that furthers their interests at the expense of others.

In fact, the decline of democracy and the rise of vast wealth disparities produces a looping effect: through funding political campaigns and legislative lobbying along with media management of public opinion, the rich can influence the government to protect the institutions and practices that enable them to accumulate even greater wealth. Wealth begets power and power begets wealth.

However, even if not philanthropy, such arrangements are at risk of fostering academic plutocracy. Corporations contribute millions to labs in order to promote and guide research that improves their product and enhances their likelihood of making a profit. Some would argue that this is an important part of what research universities are for. But it is also clear that this funding model incentivises research on certain topics and not others, promoting certain ends and not others.”

Many Mel fans can agree that despite how cool and bad ass she was once she discovered her powers, most of the political aspect of her character kind of…vanished. Like I mentioned in a previous post, most characters in this story are motivated by or shaped by classism because that is the primary struggle (at least at first) between Piltover and Zaun, but because the writers’ gave up on having a difficult solution to a difficult problem, so much of her (and several others) intrigue went with it.

Season 2 Mel could’ve been filled with internal turmoil between wanting to be a good person and do good things, but ultimately realizing that where she stood in society, as an ultra-rich heiress on a council of bigoted, meandering bureaucrats that only move for violence or wealth, was in direct opposition with this goal. She didn’t even have to come to this conclusion by the end of s2, but the show could’ve easily sown the seeds that this struggle existed within her, but that would necessitate that the writers understood that she is a well-meaning neoliberal trying to put a bandaid over bleeding wound of the Piltover and Zaun class war.

anyway thanks for coming to my ted talk

[starry-eyer]

lysa and lyanna are, in a sense, two sides of the same coin—both victims of their father’s ambitions (and their society) who share some very important parallels: they dared to get pregnant out of wedlock. they dared to want their bastard child. they dared to (try to) pick the man they’d share their lives and bodies with.

they committed the grave and oh so terrible offense of being active agents in their own lives. and for that, they were punished. women are commodities in westeros—their value resting in their marriageability, and their marketability for marriage depends on a few important factors: their virginity, their beauty, their status, and their fertility.

so a highborn woman having a bastard in this world is a massive f u. it disrupts an entire system dependent on women’s submission and forced participation where men benefit from their oppression and the idea that women exist to secure alliances through their bodies. it shakes a patriarchy that relies on control—control of bloodlines, inheritance, and legacy.

the tragedy of lysa and lyanna is that they were always doomed by the narrative—they were part of the generation that couldn’t overcome their rotting and oppressive society. theirs was the generation of the false spring, not the true one—their fates are ones the next generation is meant to overcome.

but what truly interests me is the way lysa and lyanna contrast.

both characters belong to the bael/stark maiden archetype. lyanna and rhaegar fit this mold almost perfectly. but lysa and petyr are a failed, mismatched version. petyr wanted catelyn (who became lady stark), but ended up with her sister instead. lysa wanted petyr, a bael-ISH figure, but he never loved her.

their failed reiteration of the archetypal relationship was solidified by these facts: petyr thought he’d taken catelyn’s maidenhead, not lysa’s. their first time wasn’t even consensual. and their child was killed in the womb. it was no romance—it was never real the way lysa wished for it to be.

and yet, the most significant contrast between lyanna and lysa lies in their relationship with their fathers.

lysa trusted her father. she told him about her pregnancy, hoping it would mean she could marry petyr. i doubt she ever imagined he would harm her, but that’s exactly what hoster tully did—he gave her moon tea to abort the child, to preserve her value, promising her trueborn children. then he married her off to jon arryn—a man even older than hoster himself—who married lysa for duty, for the swords of house tully to win the rebellion for his boys (ned and robert), and because he needed a fertile wife to get children on. lysa had made a grave mistake by trusting her father, her patriarch.

lyanna, on the other hand, clearly understood that her father would never prioritize her happiness over what he could gain by marrying her off. her clear lack of trust in the men of her family is paramount to understanding why she escaped.

but lysa stayed, and went from her father’s hands into jon arryn’s. lysa married for politics and suffered for it, losing child after child. so when jon arryn tried to take her last child from her, she did what was once done to her: she poisoned him. lysa reenacted the violence of her past to protect her son.

lyanna ran, and later died giving birth to her son. it was a gendered death, but it was also her choice. love didn’t save her, but duty wouldn’t have either. and at least she died in the tower of joy, surrounded by winter roses, making ned finally see, forcing him to not ignore her wishes, forcing him to promise her... in the end, she still had to rely on another man—on the new stark patriarch—but this time, she was heard. basically, she got lucky here.

the themes explored through the bael/stark maiden archetypal relationship are about agency, loss, and how the westerosi patriarchy twists the relationship between fathers and daughters—a mesh of love and objectification as this is a system that demeans women to a life of commodity.

lysa and lyanna’s stories are having a conversation about the violence of the patriarchy and the risks it poses to women if they trust or defy it. these two female characters are reminders of what happens to women who dare to want, and their ends are ones the current female protagonists are meant to avoid and overcome—to prevail where lyanna and lysa lost.

if lyanna’s defiant choice to run helped spark robert’s rebellion, then lysa’s trauma fueled actions helped spark the war of the five kings (to be clear: i don’t think either of them actually caused these wars). i’d say the critical focus of the narrative is on the world that made lyanna and lysa’s choices fatal and catastrophic in the first place. and the fates of these two female characters were direct consequences of the commodifying of women.

[esotericimagesforredpilledpeople]

In the late 1990s, Enron, the infamous energy giant, and MCI, the telecom titan, were secretly collaborating on a clandestine project codenamed "Chronos Ledger." The official narrative tells us Enron collapsed in 2001 due to accounting fraud, and MCI (then part of WorldCom) imploded in 2002 over similar financial shenanigans. But what if these collapses were a smokescreen? What if Enron and MCI were actually sacrificial pawns in a grand experiment to birth Bitcoin—a decentralized currency designed to destabilize global finance and usher in a new world order?

Here’s the story: Enron wasn’t just manipulating energy markets; it was funding a secret think tank of rogue mathematicians, cryptographers, and futurists embedded within MCI’s sprawling telecom infrastructure. Their goal? To create a digital currency that could operate beyond the reach of governments and banks. Enron’s off-the-books partnerships—like the ones that tanked its stock—were actually shell companies funneling billions into this project. MCI, with its vast network of fiber-optic cables and data centers, provided the technological backbone, secretly testing encrypted "proto-blockchain" transactions disguised as routine telecom data.

But why the dramatic collapses? Because the project was compromised. In 2001, a whistleblower—let’s call them "Satoshi Prime"—threatened to expose Chronos Ledger to the SEC. To protect the bigger plan, Enron and MCI’s leadership staged their own downfall, using cooked books as a convenient distraction. The core team went underground, taking with them the blueprints for what would later become Bitcoin.

Fast forward to 2008. The financial crisis hits, and a mysterious figure, Satoshi Nakamoto, releases the Bitcoin whitepaper. Coincidence? Hardly. Satoshi wasn’t one person but a collective—a cabal of former Enron execs, MCI engineers, and shadowy venture capitalists who’d been biding their time. The 2008 crash was their trigger: a chaotic moment to introduce Bitcoin as a "savior" currency, free from the corrupt systems they’d once propped up. The blockchain’s decentralized nature? A direct descendant of MCI’s encrypted data networks. Bitcoin’s energy-intensive mining? A twisted homage to Enron’s energy market manipulations.

But here’s where it gets truly wild: Chronos Ledger wasn’t just about money—it was about time. Enron and MCI had stumbled onto a fringe theory during their collaboration: that a sufficiently complex ledger, powered by quantum computing (secretly prototyped in MCI labs), could "timestamp" events across dimensions, effectively predicting—or even altering—future outcomes. Bitcoin’s blockchain was the public-facing piece of this puzzle, a distraction to keep the masses busy while the real tech evolved in secret. The halving cycles? A countdown to when the full system activates.

Today, the descendants of this conspiracy—hidden in plain sight among crypto whales and Silicon Valley elites—are quietly amassing Bitcoin not for profit, but to control the final activation of Chronos Ledger. When Bitcoin’s last block is mined (projected for 2140), they believe it’ll unlock a temporal feedback loop, resetting the global economy to 1999—pre-Enron collapse—giving them infinite do-overs to perfect their dominion. The Enron and MCI scandals? Just the first dominoes in a game of chance and power.