Valid as of today CAT-260 test prep that never go wrong. gives you the legitimate, Latest, and 2022 refreshed CA AppLogic r3 Professional study guide and gave a 100 percent Guarantee. Anyway, 24 hours practice with VCE test system is required. Simply download CAT-260 Free Exam PDF and exam questions from your download segment and begin rehearsing. It will simply require 24 hours to prepare you for a genuine CAT-260 test.

Exam Code: CAT-260 Practice exam 2022 by team
CA AppLogic r3 Professional
CA-Technologies Professional history
Killexams : CA-Technologies Professional history - BingNews Search results Killexams : CA-Technologies Professional history - BingNews Killexams : The Rise of Therapists in Tech

Many things are virtually unrecognizable from when they began. Over one hundred years ago, most people still didn’t own cars, while today, folks are zipping around in their gas-free, futuristic-looking, self-driving contraptions. However, therapy in many ways has remained unchanged from the days of Freud (for reference, our good buddy Sigmund also conducted therapy around the first time cars were released to the public).

Before the naysayers chime in, yes, collectively, there has been a shift in therapeutic methods from outdated forms of psychoanalysis to behaviorally focused, solution-oriented evidence-based practices that seek to arm consumers with values-consistent skills and actions.

However, the format of therapy through the looking glass hasn’t changed. If anything, therapy has become more complicated to deliver given the red tape around large organizations, risk management issues that bog down providers with needless paperwork instead of offering genuine human connection when it’s most needed, questionable reimbursement practices by insurance companies, abysmally low wages in any system outside of private practice, and lack of organizational resources to support providers in their work.

This has led highly trained therapists to feel overextended and burnt out at a time in history when they are most needed societally. Therapy has also become more difficult to access by the everyday person, who may not know the difference between the largely unregulated space of coaching (a valid & useful tool for people with low acuity concerns), a prescribing psychiatrist (MD), a social worker (LCSW) specializing in connecting patients to needed community services, and a psychologist (Ph.D. or Psy.D.), or marriage and family therapist (MFT) providing therapy.

Moreover, prior to the Covid-19 pandemic, few therapists were providing services virtually due to constraints around billing “face to face” visits, organizational rigidities of companies for which they worked, and a general sense of unease around “how” virtual therapy might even work. Many providers are still of the mindset that unless a consumer is “in the room” physically with them, there is no way to impact behavior, though many consumers don’t have the time, resources, or inclination to show up “in the room” in the first place.

Research on the common factors that make therapy “work” shows this is not the case. Aligning with the client, a true empathy for someone’s difficulties without comparison, genuineness, and managing expectations are necessary but insufficient components of therapy, though we now know these components can and do convey on virtual platforms quite successfully.

Source: ra2 studio/Shutterstock

Complicating matters, we know therapy is not a one-size-fits-all solution, and different types of therapy will be more effective for different types of consumers. For example, dialectical behavior therapy, which teaches consumers skills in the areas of mindfulness, emotion regulation, distress tolerance, and interpersonal effectiveness alongside family-based therapy, has been shown to be particularly effective for eating disorders.

Meanwhile, exposure and response prevention therapies are the gold standards for anxiety disorders, including obsessive compulsive disorder, hoarding, and even perfectionism. However, for consumers with chronic medical conditions like asthma, COPD, diabetes, pain, or cancer, acceptance and mindfulness-based approaches like acceptance and commitment therapy are usually most effective. Moreover, the same principles of behavior change that make therapy “work” for certain groups of people also translate to the general population through harnessing the science of behavior.

Entrepreneurial businesspeople and venture capital investors have observed these gaps in care alongside the snails’ pace at which behavioral health has kept up with the times and transformed it into a lucrative opportunity. In a recent poll of over 100 therapists nationwide who are looking for work in the technology space, nearly half stated they are looking for roles where they do not provide any clinical services whatsoever.

This preference points to the same crisis that exists with the nationwide teaching shortage, in that teachers are flocking to other professions that provide a more stable, supportive, balanced career option with reduced barriers to effectiveness. Highly trained providers seek to use their expertise in behavior change in novel ways that move entire systems of care rather than continuing to operate within the broken system.

Unfortunately for these experts in behavior and consumers alike, most of these therapists aren’t seated in the positions of power (read: C-suite executive teams) to produce the type of change they know most needs to happen. There is more hope for health technology companies with behavioral health leaders or former therapists within their executive teams. And for the therapists who join these companies to continue offering services as a provider, on its façade, these companies appear to be a godsend for consumers who have been hopelessly trying to connect to therapy and for the therapists who are able to offer the skillset they know best, all while increasing their job satisfaction.

However, the dark side of these mental healthcare technology companies is that many (not all, of course) only offer contract positions, they do not vet or train their providers in evidence-based practices, tend to target newer providers with the lure of virtual work, and continue to pay substandard wages while businesspeople at the top are reaping profits off your friends and family members.

While this may seem quite bleak, the good news is that behavioral health systems are noticing. Leaders are noticing. Providers are noticing. Change is happening to mental healthcare, and it’s here to stay. Accessibility is increasing at a lightning pace (still not fast enough), with mobile healthcare technologies being offered directly both to businesses and consumers. Outdated care systems will collapse if the system doesn’t flex with the times because therapists know they can go elsewhere to offer their expertise, and consumers will follow.

Perhaps another 100 years from now, we will be able to look at our current pandemic as the catalyst for change in healthcare, and technology spaces will have increased representation by the therapists they rely on to make their offerings available and profitable in the first place.

To find a therapist near you, visit the Psychology Today Therapy Directory.


Coombs, N. C., Meriwether, W. E., Caringi, J., & Newcomer, S. R. (2021). Barriers to healthcare access among U.S. adults with mental health challenges: A population-based study. SSM - population health, 15, 100847.

Backhaus, A., Agha, Z., Maglione, M. L., Repp, A., Ross, B., Zuest, D., ... & Thorp, S. R. (2012). Videoconferencing psychotherapy: a systematic review. Psychological services, 9(2), 111.

Le Grange D, Hughes EK, Court A, Yeo M, Crosby RD, & Sawyer SM (2016). Randomized clinical trial of parent-focused treatment and family-based treatment for adolescent anorexia nervosa. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 55(8), 683–692. 10.1016/j.jaac.2016.05.007

Murray, S. B., Anderson, L. K., Cusack, A., Nakamura, T., Rockwell, R., Griffiths, S., & Kaye, W. H. (2015). Integrating Family-Based Treatment and Dialectical Behavior Therapy for Adolescent Bulimia Nervosa: Preliminary Outcomes of an Open Pilot Trial. Eating disorders, 23(4), 336–344.

Larson, C. (2022, Aug. 3) Talkspace Shifts Dozens of Full-Time Therapy Jobs to Contracted Work. Behavioral Health Business.…

Thu, 04 Aug 2022 11:21:00 -0500 en text/html
Killexams : Hudson Technologies: Huge EPS Beat, Still Cheap, Buy Thesis Reaffirmed
Многоэтническая команда синих воротничков ремонтников кондиционеров на работе.

fstop123/E+ via Getty Images

Introduction & Thesis

Hudson Technologies (NASDAQ:HDSN) is, in fact, the best stock pick I have ever made here on Seeking Alpha - I became aware of this small company in early winter 2021, a few months before it was listed as a Top-rated stock by SA's Quant Rating System. Since then, HDSN is up > 137% while the S&P 500 corrected >11%:

Seeking Alpha, my profile, HDSN

Seeking Alpha, my profile, HDSN

At that time, the company had just freed itself from its past credit dependence and was about to expand its operations thanks to the tailwind in the form of the AIM act, which assumed a significant expansion of the addressable market, in which the company was already the leader at that time, with a share of over 30%.

Relatively recently, I reiterated my buy recommendation, noting:

a) the company's still-low valuation multiples;

b) the longer-term phase-out of HFCs (by 2024), which should theoretically translate into longer-term EPS growth, and

c) the possibility of extending California-based OEMs requirements to other states, which should have expanded the company's TAM even more going forward.

Hudson Technologies reported its quarterly earnings yesterday, beating analysts' consensus estimates for revenue and EPS by 8.23% and 115.38%, respectively.

In my article today, I would like to draw your attention to the recent corporate events and analyze the financial reports with management's comments. My thesis remains unchanged based on the information I have analyzed - I still believe that HDSN stock has not yet fully realized its upside potential and should trade well above the current price level. The technical picture I described last time is still developing according to plan - if it continues like this, we will very likely see how the fundamental factors will be reflected in the development of quotations in the medium term.

Why do I think so?

HDSN's 10-Q will likely be released in a few days, but until then, we have preliminary results of the company's performance on key metrics that we can compare to previous quarters.

Author's calculations, based on HDSN's 8-K and Seeking Alpha

Author's calculations, based on HDSN's 8-K and Seeking Alpha

We see sales, gross profit, and EBIT growth slowing in Q2 2022, which some might take as a negative sign. However, I do not think so - if we look at the longer operating history, we recall that the company has had profitability issues in the past that HDSN had to solve with a very low starting point (I marked the growth from negative to positive as 100% in the chart above), and it is now perfectly normal for the growth rate to decline slightly. Much more important, in my opinion, is the company's margins, which are exceptionally improving quarter by quarter.

In the second quarter of 2022, the company's gross margin and EBIT margin were 55.34% and 47.92%, respectively - a record in recent decades:

YCharts, author's notes

YCharts, author's notes

Of course, the second quarter has historically been very successful for the company - as shown by the dynamics of absolute financial indicators in the first chart above. Therefore, it would be wrong to assume a gross margin of 55% for the whole FY2022. However, according to Mr. Coleman [CEO of HDSN], the company's gross margin for the full year will be at least in the mid-40% range - close to its all-time highs [chart #2]. In addition, given rising refrigerant prices and tailwinds in the form of regulatory changes, management expects full-year 2022 revenue to exceed $290 million - 50.5% year-over-year growth.

Previously, we also knew that Hudson was targeting EBIT of $72 million on sales of >$350 million.

HDSN's IR materials

HDSN's IR materials

Based on the results of the second quarter of 2022, management has decided to supply even longer guidance:

As it relates to the AIM Act implementation, we have seen an accelerated shift to what we expect will be significantly higher sustained profitability for the business going forward. Assuming further HFC price increases related to HFC phasedown and applying a slower pace to price increases than we saw in 2022, we are targeting an annualized revenue of greater than $400 million by 2025, with gross margins remaining above historical levels, but moderating over the next 3 years to approximately 35%.

Source: HDSN's Earnings Call

I tried to build a "napkin model" to understand how much EBITDA the company is set to generate in 2025, and soon realized that the market still does not seem to price management's words appropriately.

Here's why.

The Wall Street coverage of the company is rather poor - 3 analysts are covering the stock with a consensus 2023 EBITDA forecast of $72.21 million. EBITDA forecasts for 2024 and 2025 simply do not exist.

HDSN data by YCharts

However, we recall that HDSN management has forecast 2024 EBIT of $72 million on gross revenue of $105 million. At first glance, it may seem like something is wrong - it is! The company's presentation with these calculations has not been updated for several quarters - here are management's projections as of November 21, 2021, on which I based my very first article:

HDSN's IR presentation [November 23, 2021]

HDSN's IR presentation [November 23, 2021]

At the time, management expected the EBIT to gross margin (GP) ratio of 68.6% in E2024, not knowing that refrigerant prices would rise so much. Now they have already risen, but the financial projections remained unchanged in the presentation. If we assume that the EBIT of GP ratio in 2023 is at the same level as the old forecast, then HDSN should have an EBIT of $97 million if the gross profit margin is corrected according to the CEO's guidance, and thus the EBITDA in 2023 will be more than $100 million, which is 38% above the current consensus. Moreover, such a forecast may prove to be quite understated, as Hudson Technologies has only generated EBITDA of over $90 million in the last 6 months - if refrigerant prices remain relatively high or do not drop sharply in 2023, then my forecast will be out of touch with reality.

The company's current enterprise value is $508 million, according to YCharts. Then it turns out that with a projected EBITDA of $100 million in 2023, HDSN is worth only 5x its forward EBITDA today - that's 2 times less than the company was worth in 2017, and 2 times less than the median company in the Industrials sector is worth.

Data by YCharts

In my opinion, the 3 analysts covering this company should revise their forecasts soon, taking into account the updated guidance of the company's management. At the same time, it would be nice to see an update of the targeted financials in the presentation of the company itself. Once that happens, the market should begin to re-evaluate HDSN's prospects for the coming years. In my view, the stock is still undervalued by a factor of about 2 - once the market understands that, a rally should follow to correct such injustice.


I admit that I could be wrong in my calculations and choice of target valuation multiple for comparison - perhaps the company is rightly trading at 5x EV/EBITDA and the market is discounting its future operating success based on past failures. However, it is very clear to me that this is not the same company it was in 2017-18 - HDSN is earning more, growing faster, and has much more tailwinds than before against a backdrop of fewer headwinds (=less debt).

Another risk is a possible recession that could hit the demand side. However, during the last earnings call, the CEO assured that the industry might be better insulated than other markets - these words reassure me a bit as a shareholder.

I am not a professional market technician, but my guess from the last article about the formation of a "handle" for a "cup" still stands:

TrendSpider Sofware, HDSN, Daily chart

TrendSpider Software, HDSN, Daily chart

TrendSpider Sofware, HDSN, Weekly chart

TrendSpider Software, HDSN, Weekly chart

The long-term moving average (weekly chart) has only recently begun to show a reversal (I use multi time frame analysis), so I hope that HDSN can still show its full glory in the medium term, despite the market's strange negative reaction to such a strong report. So I reiterate my early Buy rating and recommend that all current shareholders continue to hold HDSN.

Final note: Hey, on September 27, we'll be launching a marketplace service at Seeking Alpha called Beyond the Wall Investing, where we will be tracking and analyzing the latest bank reports to identify hidden opportunities early! All early subscribers will receive a special lifetime legacy price offer. So follow and stay tuned!

Thu, 04 Aug 2022 16:56:00 -0500 en text/html
Killexams : The agricultural revolution is here. Will Canada keep up and invest in agtech?

Kristjan Hebert, farmer and principal managing partner of Hebert Grain Ventures, northwest of Fairlight, Sask., checks a John Deere Field Connect soil moisture probe in one of his canola fields.Tim Smith/The Globe and Mail

From mushroom-picking robots in British Columbia to drones buzzing over Saskatchewan wheat fields that hunt for weeds, companies in Canada’s emerging agtech sector are racing to remove the least efficient element of modern-day farming from the equation: humans.

That push to bring the worlds of technology and agriculture together has taken on new urgency in recent months amid threats to food supplies from high fertilizer and commodity prices, the war in Ukraine, labour shortages and drought across many parts of the world. In just the first half of this year, venture capital investors injected a record US$5.6-billion into agtech companies worldwide, up nearly 20 per cent from the same period a year ago, according to U.S. market data firm Pitchbook.

Yet a disconnect exists between Canada’s vast agricultural resources and what many people in the industry see as its underwhelming agtech footprint. While Canada has produced many cutting-edge agtech companies, the country lags the United States in financing and developing technologies that can Excellerate farm yields, create new products and slash emissions.

How successful Canada is at closing that gap could go a long way in determining whether the country lives up to the oft-repeated rhetoric of being an agricultural superpower or settles as an also-ran.

A John Deere s770 combine with AI capabilities is shown during CES 2019 in Las Vegas.DAVID MCNEW/AFP/Getty Images

“Agtech has suddenly become an asset class that’s critical in the short term to preserve our ability to feed our own population here in Canada, but, more importantly, we’ve got a growing worldwide population, so we need to increase yields while also reducing our carbon footprint in this space,” says Sean O’Connor, managing director of the venture capital arm of Saskatchewan’s Conexus Credit Union and its Emmertech agtech fund.

The term agtech is a catch-all for a lot of different innovations in the agriculture sector and includes everything from vertical farming – in which layers of crops are grown indoors to maximize space and robotics – to remote crop monitoring, alternative proteins and biosciences.

And yes, self-driving tractors. Earlier this year tractor giant John Deere rolled out its first fully autonomous tractor at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. Equipped with six stereo cameras and advanced artificial intelligence, the tractor can make its own way to a field to plow soil and sow seeds, navigate around obstacles and be fed new tasks from a farmer’s smartphone.

What all these technologies aim for is to do more with less. Available farmland per capita is in decline around the world, meaning even without the current disruptions to food supplies from war, supply chain bottlenecks, labour shortages and high prices, yields must rise to avoid a spiralling food crisis.

Global investment firms have latched onto the sudden interest in agtech. Last year Seoul-based Mirae Asset Global Investments launched the Globe X AgTech Food and Innovation ETF, which trades on Nasdaq. Then, this past April, BlackRock launched the iShares Emergent Food and AgTechETF.

Regina-based Emmertech, which launched last year, raised $60-million from farmers, agribusiness owners and financial institutions focused on the agricultural space, including $15-million from the Saskatchewan government.

Sean O'Connor, managing director of Conexus Venture Capital and Emmertech.DARRYL DYCK/The Globe and Mail

That made Emmertech the largest pure agtech fund in Canada, which Mr. O’Connor considers a badge of success, but also a “pretty big red flag.”

“If we’re the biggest in Canada it shows there’s a lot more room for growth,” he says. “We need someone to come take the mantle from us in the future.”

Data compiled for The Globe and Mail by Pitchbook show how Canada’s agtech sector has fallen short. Last year, US$6.9-billion in venture capital financing flowed to U.S. agtech companies, while Canadian agtech companies attracted just US$270-million. One Vancouver-based agtech company, Semios, which provides crop analytics and pest management tools to fruit and nut tree growers, accounted for US$79-million of that haul alone.

Based on the rule of thumb related to the 10-to-one population ratio between Canada and the U.S., agtech investments here should have been closer to US$700-million. If a roughly five-to-one ratio of available farmland were used, much more than US$1-billion could have been expected to make its way to Canadian companies last year.

“One of the biggest things holding back the industry in Canada is the lack of available capital,” says Mr. O’Connor. “It’s not just, can we get capital into this space, it’s can we get capital that follows the right playbook for agtech.”

Technology is in no way new to the world of farming, at least among progressive farm operators.

On Kristjan Hebert’s 22,000-acre grain and oilseed operation outside Moosomin, Sask., near the border with Manitoba, large screens in his office display detailed maps of the varied nutrient and water levels across his fields, all fed by soil probes deployed every four acres, as well as the location of all his equipment, where it’s been and how much fuel has been used. When he’s not in the office, all that information is fed in real time to his smartphone.

“The top businesses in the world are going to be those that can pivot and adapt to changing circumstances the quickest,” says Mr. Hebert, a chartered professional accountant who left that sector 13 years ago to return to the family farm.

Mr. Hebert now sits on Emmertech’s advisory board, and he regularly beta tests new technologies from agtech companies around the world, including farm management software, high-efficiency fertilizers, grain bin monitors and algorithm-driven apps that monitor soil moisture to forecast yields.

“You want data that can be used to make decisions, not to just sit in a binder on a corner of the desk,” he says. Tech entrepreneurs can easily get wrapped up in the excitement of new innovations, but not every idea is a good idea or one that’s financially feasible for farm owners.

To that end, Cultivator, an agtech accelerator program associated with Emmertech, has launched the Million Acres project, with the goal of recruiting farmers worldwide who represent that total area of land to advise agtech startups on actual problems those farmers want solved.

“A lot of times there’s a disconnect because producers are left out of the rooms where innovations are happening so we want to get them involved from the earliest stage possible,” says Ami Caragata, a program co-ordinator at Cultivator.

Kristjan Hebert, of Hebert Grain Ventures, sprays herbicide on a crop of canola.Tim Smith/The Globe and Mail

The demands on agtech companies can also be very different from the software and other information technology sectors in which Canada has had more success building big, international players, and where most venture capital is currently directed. According to data from the Canadian Venture Capital Association, agribusinesses raised just $1 of capital for every $52 that flowed to companies in the information and communications technology space last year.

For one thing, the startup mantra of “fail fast, fail often” that dominates so many parts of the tech world is particularly ill-suited to the business of agriculture. Unlike a software or e-commerce company that can quickly bring a product to market, then learn from user feedback and make iterative improvements over time, agtech innovations tend to require more upfront capital to create a finished product, often with a hardware component, that’s reliable for customers from Day 1.

“These farmers are trusting you with potentially one-30th of their lifetime income every year, so the penalty for failure is very high,” says Daniel McCann, the chief executive officer of Regina-based Precision AI, which is developing aerial drones powered by artificial intelligence that are capable of precision spraying weeds in fields.

Launched in 2018, Precision raised $20-million last year, in seed equity and grants, to develop its 20-foot-wingspan drones. With a database of more than 14 million images of various types of plants, the AI on board the company’s prototype drones can differentiate weeds from crops while flying at up to 70 kilometres an hour. “Yeah, these things rip,” he quips.

‘Precision Spray Drone’ is Precision AI Inc.'s existing drone.Handout

Currently that weed map can be fed to industrial-sized sprayers that activate spray nozzles solely over weed patches, as opposed to broadcast spraying weed killer on entire fields. In time, Precision plans for its drones to self-deploy from a trailer, spray weeds directly, then return to home base to recharge and reload.

Ultimately, Mr. McCann envisions a spray-as-a-service model involving swarms of Precision drones, replacing the need for farmers to each buy spraying equipment that can easily cost more than $500,000 and requires people to operate it.

“Artificial intelligence is probably the greatest game changer in food production in human history,” Mr. McCann says. “The robots are going to be growing our food and that’s not just aspirational geek talk.”

As that digital revolution in farming unfolds, it will increasingly take place away from Canada’s traditional centres of finance and innovation, and closer to end users such as farmers, agronomists, crop insurers and others in the industry. The result will be a more geographically diverse agtech ecosystem than sectors such as fintech and AI, which have tended to form around hubs such as Toronto and Montreal.

“This is the first wave of innovation we’ve really ever seen in Canada that belongs in these areas,” says Mr. O’Connor, pointing to places such as Saskatoon, Regina, Brandon, Man., Guelph, Ont., B.C.’s Okanagan region and parts of New Brunswick. “We’ve always fought over the crumbs Bay Street, Montreal and Vancouver spit out to us.”

For Mike Boudreau, the founder and CEO of TechBrew in Salmon Arm, B.C., in the province’s Interior, the potential for robotics to revolutionize how crops are picked drew him to the sector. TechBrew has designed and built robots that can squeeze into mushroom growing racks to gently pick, trim, clean and pack mushrooms.

It’s an industry facing an acute shortage of labour at a time when the market is growing 10 per cent a year, says Mr. Boudreau, who noted the work environment is “stinky, cold and humid,” and producers require overwhelming numbers of temporary foreign workers. Also, because mushrooms double in size every 24 hours, a robot that can pick around the clock can result in up to 20 per cent higher yields, he says.

“This is the biggest market opportunity I’ve seen in 40 years,” says Mr. Boudreau, who previously built vision-guided robotics for the forestry and food manufacturing sectors.

TechBrew Robotics Inc.'s mushroom-harvesting robot in British Columbia.Handout

The company has been testing its pilot robots at mushroom farms in B.C.’s Fraser Valley and is in talks for its first commercial orders. Having raised $4.5-million to date, including a seed investment from Emmertech, plus a similar amount in government grants, TechBrew hopes to raise a second round of capital this fall to ramp up production of its robots.

Even without the recent upheavals in financial markets, however, many agtech companies have struggled to find investors in Canada who understand the sector.

“When you talk about agtech with a lot of people here they go cross-eyed and have no idea what you’re talking about, because they think technology for agriculture means sharper hoes,” says Robert Saik, a Red Deer, Alta.-based agricultural consultant and entrepreneur who has launched 15 farming, agri-retail and fertilizer companies over his 40-year career.

His latest venture, AGvisorPro, is a platform that connects farm operators with experts in real time to answer questions about subjects such as equipment repair, pest control and ailing livestock. “Like eHarmony for agriculture,” says Mr. Saik, who launched the company with $1.7-million of his own money.

On a recent trip to San Francisco to meet with potential investors, he found himself growing frustrated by the situation.

“Why am I in California chasing money from Silicon Valley and Boston and Israel when there’s billions of dollars sitting on the sidelines in Calgary, let alone Canada,” Mr. Saik says, arguing the federal government should create an investment tax credit to draw capital to the sector.

Precision AI Inc. testing a drone.handout

The good news is more private-sector investors are eyeing Canada’s agtech sector. In 2020, Ontario-based Ag Capital Canada launched a $24-million fund targeting early-stage companies in the agriculture sector. Vancouver-based Telus Corp. established a Telus Agriculture division that same year to focus on digitizing globe food-supply systems, and has ramped up agtech investments through its Telus Ventures arm.

Earlier this year, Calgary-based Koan Capital launched an early seed agtech fund. Techbrew was among its first four investments.

Meanwhile Calgary-based The51, which bills itself as a “financial feminist” platform and aims to grow the number of female investors and entrepreneurs in Canada, is currently raising $50-million for its first food and agtechfund. The fund will target agtech startups run by diverse founders, says Alison Sunstrum, the fund’s general manager, meaning anyone “that would not normally be well represented accessing capital.”

She says the fund is expected to announce its first funding close in the coming weeks and has a wide array of companies in its investment pipeline, including startups focused on alternative proteins, automated fruit and vegetable picking, and advanced packaging that preserves food without the need of low-temperature supply chains.

There are signs Canada is catching up with the U.S. in agtech financing. Over the past five years, the amount of venture capital injected into Canadian agtech companies grew at a compound annual rate of 27 per cent, slightly edging out the U.S. rate of 24 per cent.

Even at that pace, however, it will take considerable time to close the gap with the U.S. And while some people have argued for greater federal government spending to boost innovation, Ms. Sunstrum predicts that approach will ultimately fall short.

“We have to quit looking to the government to spur on innovation,” she says. “We need to increase our expenditures on research and development and increase the amount of investing capital and banking capital that’s available. Canada has done this in oil and gas.”

“We’re a world player in energy,” she adds. “We need to be a world player in sustainable agriculture.”

Your time is valuable. Have the Top Business Headlines newsletter conveniently delivered to your inbox in the morning or evening. Sign up today.

Fri, 05 Aug 2022 07:04:00 -0500 en-CA text/html
Killexams : Unsung climate hero: Heat pumps can cool homes and lower emissions No result found, try new keyword!To see how, let’s examine just one of these technologies: heat pumps, a solution that more states and cities are considering to reduce building emissions. Replacing fossil fuel-powered heating and ... Tue, 02 Aug 2022 08:00:00 -0500 en-us text/html Killexams : Vislink 5G Wireless Camera Technology is Featured in 2022 Commonwealth Games Private Network Trial

Vislink Technologies, Inc.

Vislink Technologies, Inc.

Vislink 5G Wireless Camera

Latest High-Profile Sporting Event to Showcase Vislink’s Premium-Quality,
Low-Latency Mobile Video Connectivity

Mt. Olive, NJ, Aug. 08, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Vislink (Nasdaq: VISL), a global technology leader in the capture, delivery and management of high quality, live video and associated data in the media & entertainment, law enforcement and defense markets, is pleased to announce its 5G wireless camera technology has been featured in an innovative 5G private network trial taking place during the 2022 Commonwealth Games.

Vislink is participating in the trial with BT Media and Broadcast and the BBC, who are trialling the standalone 5G private network for broadcast coverage of the Commonwealth Games. This represents the first time the cutting-edge technology has been deployed anywhere in Europe for an event on this scale. Vislink is providing its reliable, premium-quality, low latency mobile video connectivity technology for use during the trial.

By using Vislink Mobile Viewpoint UltraLink-Air 5G cellular encoders to enable wireless camera connectivity, camera operators can roam freely within the network area during the event, as opposed to relying on broadcast cameras that connect to the outside broadcast solely using radio (RF) signals that rely on proprietary equipment. This enables the delivery of smooth, uninterrupted video feeds, and the ability to interface directly into IP-based content delivery networks utilizing 5G internet connectivity.

Mickey Miller, CEO of Vislink said, “We are grateful for our participation in the Commonwealth Games 5G network trial. This is another in a series of marquee sporting events that showcases the advantages of our public and private 5G wireless camera solutions. These include the ability to leverage a low-latency, uncontended network that enables a robust and reliable transmission platform for video capture, while serving viewing audiences an immersive experience that brings them right into the heart of the action.”

He continued, “In addition, by providing a 5G camera solution, the Vislink system allows tighter integration into an all-IP remote production environment, and that simplifies video networks, reduces costs and creates streamlined, flexible processes for broadcast professionals.”

The Commonwealth Games network trial follows an event in May where Vislink innovations were on display at the Gallagher Premiership Rugby match between Saracens and the Northampton Saints at StoneX Stadium in London. At that event, Vislink proudly supported a BT-led project to highlight the potential for 5G in broadcast contributions, which centred on the connection of the matchday cameras to a standalone private 5G network.

The 2022 Commonwealth Games are being held in Birmingham, England from July 28 to August 8. Over 5,000 athletes from 72 nations are competing in 19 different sports as England hosts the event for the third time in its history.

About Vislink Technologies, Inc.

Vislink is a global technology business specializing in the collection, delivery, and management of high quality, live video and associated data from the scene of the action to the viewing screen. For the broadcast markets, Vislink provides solutions for the collection of live news, sports, and entertainment events. Vislink also furnishes the surveillance and defense markets with real-time video intelligence solutions using a variety of tailored transmission products. Through its Mobile Viewpoint product lines, Vislink also provides live streaming solutions using bonded cellular, 5G and AI-driven technologies for automated news and sports productions.

The Vislink team also provides professional and technical services utilizing a staff of technology experts with decades of applied knowledge and real-world experience to the areas of terrestrial microwave, satellite, fiber optic, surveillance, and wireless communications systems, to deliver a broad spectrum of customer solutions. Vislink’s shares of Common Stock are publicly traded on the Nasdaq Capital Market under the ticker symbol “VISL.” For more information, visit

Nicole Rosen

Investor Relations:


Mon, 08 Aug 2022 01:24:00 -0500 en-CA text/html
Killexams : ICS Announces Acquisition of Cards Technology

ENDICOTT, N.Y.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Aug 1, 2022--

ICS, a portfolio company of ClearLight Partners and leading provider of Information Technology (IT) Managed Services to a vast array of client profiles, announced it has acquired Cards Technology (Cards), also a leading provider of Managed IT Services to small to medium businesses, headquartered in Ocean City, Maryland.

This press release features multimedia. View the full release here:

Cards was founded in 2000 and has grown by helping small-to-medium sized businesses in the markets surrounding Ocean City, MD achieve success by providing technology solutions and support. Cards offers managed IT and cybersecurity services, hardware and software procurement, cloud solutions, and a wide array of ancillary technologies such as telephone systems and security cameras.

Kevin Blake, CEO of ICS, commented: “We are thrilled to partner with Sam and the excellent team at Cards. They share our values and we are excited to grow the ICS Family. ICS’ mission is to make a difference in our employees’ lives, our customers’ businesses, and the communities we serve. We are looking forward to growing in the Mid-Atlantic.”

“The ICS team are true professionals and the resources they bring to the table will allow us to expand the high quality services we are known for providing to our clients. I’m excited for the next chapter of our story,” said Sam Card.

Kyle Burke, a Partner at ClearLight said, “Kevin Blake and the ICS team have been outstanding partners. We see continued secular tailwinds for the IT managed services space, and believe Cards is an excellent complement to the ICS business.”

About ICS

ICS is a provider of IT managed services, cybersecurity, cloud migration and other project-based services, and hardware and software reselling for small to medium-sized organizations. The company offers on-site and remote support to clients in the Northeastern US and throughout the United States, with an emphasis on serving small-to-medium sized businesses and clients within government, education, healthcare, financial services, professional services, manufacturing, retail, and other industries. ICS was founded in 1986 and is currently led by 20+ year industry veteran Kevin Blake.

For more information, visit

About ClearLight Partners

ClearLight Partners is a private equity firm in Southern California that invests in established, profitable middle-market companies with significant growth potential. Since its inception, ClearLight has raised $900 million in capital across three funds from a single limited partner. The team at ClearLight has extensive operating and financial experience and has a history of successfully partnering with owners and management teams to drive growth and create value.

For more information, visit

View source version on

CONTACT: Samantha Wyatt

Marketing Manager



SOURCE: ClearLight Partners

Copyright Business Wire 2022.

PUB: 08/01/2022 07:14 PM/DISC: 08/01/2022 07:14 PM

Copyright Business Wire 2022.

Mon, 01 Aug 2022 11:14:00 -0500 en text/html
Killexams : California Enacts EPR Law Aimed at Single-Use Plastic Packaging and Food Service Ware

Wednesday, July 27, 2022

On June 30, 2022, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill 54 (S.B. 54) or the Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility Act (the Act) into law. The Act establishes an aggressive extended producer responsibility (EPR) program for single-use plastic packaging and plastic single-use food service ware by requiring all covered material sold in or imported into California to be recyclable or compostable by 2032. The Act also requires a 25% reduction in the use of plastic packaging by 2032 and a 65% recycling rate of the remaining single-use plastic packaging by the same year. Although S.B. 54 seeks to promote plastic recycling, the legislative history intended to restrict the use of plastic recycling technologies, such as pyrolysis and gasification.

In order to fund development of the infrastructure needed to implement these ambitious goals, the Act requires Producer Responsibility Organizations (PROs) to remit a $500 million surcharge to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration on an annual basis beginning in 2027. These funds will be deposited into the California Plastic Pollution Mitigation Fund, which is projected to amass over $5 billion over the next ten years based on the collection of surcharges, interest, penalties, and other collected amounts. As drafted, the compliance onus will be on brand owners who will likely shift the requirements upstream, but, as we discuss below, the Act will likely affect a much broader range of businesses.

What is Regulated?

S.B. 54 regulates two classes of “covered material,” including (a) single-use packaging that is routinely recycled, disposed of, or discarded after its contents have been used or unpackaged, and typically not refilled or otherwise reused by the producer; and (b) plastic single-use food service ware, including, but not limited to, plastic-coated paper or plastic-coated paperboard, paper or paperboard with plastic intentionally added during the manufacturing process, and multilayer flexible material.[1]

Single-use packaging encompassed by the definition of “covered material” includes a broad array of packaging for both food and non-food purposes unless exempted. Indeed, “packaging” includes “any separable and distinct material component used for the containment, protection, handling, delivery, or presentation of goods by the producer for the user or consumer, ranging from raw materials to processed goods.”[2] The term should be read broadly to apply to packaging components, sales or primary packaging, secondary packaging, and transport packaging used to protect products during transport.

Food service ware, on the other hand, will include (but is not limited to) plastic-coated paper or plastic-coated paperboard, paper or paperboard with plastic intentionally added during the manufacturing process, and multilayer flexible material. This category includes food trays, plates, bowls, clamshells, lids, cups, utensils, stirrers, hinged or lidded containers, and straws as well as wraps or wrappers and bags sold to food service establishments.[3]

Notably, the term “plastic” as used in the above definition, and throughout the Act, includes:

synthetic or semisynthetic material chemically synthesized by the polymerization of organic substances that can be shaped into various rigid and flexible forms, and includes coatings and adhesives.[4]

This definition includes polyethylene terephthalate (PET), high density polyethylene (HDPE), polyvinyl chloride (PVC), low density polyethylene (LDPE), polypropylene (PP), polystyrene (PS), polylactic acid (PLA), and aliphatic biopolyesters, such as polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA) and polyhydroxybutyrate (PHB). However, natural rubber or naturally occurring polymers such as proteins or starches are not considered “plastics” for the purposes of the Act.[5]

Some plastic packaging used for products regulated or defined under other laws are exempted from the Act.[6] Exemptions include packaging for medical products and products defined as devices or prescription drugs by the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA); animal products regulated under the FDCA or the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); infant formula and certain supplements; products regulated by FIFRA; certain dangerous or hazardous materials; beverage containers subject to the California Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Reduction Act; packaging for long-term storage of products determined by CalRecycle to have a lifespan of at least five years; and packaging associated with products covered under California’s Architectural Paint Recovery Program.

Who is Affected?

As with other EPR laws, S.B. 54 seeks to leverage business relationships to effectuate change throughout the supply chain.  Thus, the law does not focus on packaging manufacturers but rather those companies that sell or distribute “products” using such packages in the state.  Specifically, Section 42041(w)(1) defines a “producer” for purposes of the Act as:

…a person who manufactures a product that uses covered material and who owns or is the licensee of the brand or trademark under which the product is used in a commercial enterprise, sold, offered for sale, or distributed in the state.

If there is no person meeting this definition in California, then Section 42041(w)(2) defines a “producer” as:

…the owner or, if the owner is not in the state, the exclusive licensee of a brand or trademark under which the covered product using the covered material is used in a commercial enterprise, sold, offered for sale, or distributed in the state.  For purposes of this subdivision, a licensee is a person holding the exclusive right to use a trademark or brand in the state in connection with the manufacture, sale, or distribution of the product packaged in or made from the covered material.

If no person meets either of the above definitions, then a “producer” is:

…the person who sells, offers for sale, or distributes the product that uses the covered material in or into the state.

In short, the Act will primarily affect those companies that put their product name and brand on the covered material, whether or not they have actually manufactured the plastic packaging. Otherwise, retailers or distributors will be obligated to comply.  We anticipate, however, that the effects of this regulation will be felt throughout the supply chain as product manufacturers and/or brand owners incorporate S.B. 54 compliance in purchase agreements.

Requirements for Brand Owners

Brand owners importing, selling, or distributing products in California that are packaged in covered material must comply with several requirements.  Specifically, they must ensure that: 

  • The overall amount of plastic covered material, including the number of products packaged in covered material, in the state of California is source reduced by 10% by January 1, 2027, 20% by January 1, 2030, and 25% by January 1, 2032.[7] Methods of source reduction include, but are not limited to, shifting covered material to reusable or refillable packaging or a reusable product or eliminating unnecessary packaging.[8]

  • All covered material is recyclable or compostable within the state by January 1, 2032.[9] As defined by the Act, “recycling” involves the process of collecting, sorting, cleansing, treating, and reconstituting materials that would otherwise be disposed of and returning them to the economic mainstream in the form of recovered material for new, reused, or reconstituted products, including compost.[10] Recycling does not, however, include combustion, incineration, energy generation, fuel production (with limited exception), or other forms of disposal.[11] CalRecycle is expected to expand upon this list of exclusions in the forthcoming regulations, which must establish criteria to exclude plastic recycling technologies that produce significant amounts of hazardous waste from the definition of “recycling.”[12] According to the legislative history, the definition is “intended to exclude technologies, such as gasification, pyrolysis, and solvent-based technologies,” and thus, poses significant concerns for chemical recycling solutions that are often used to recover valuable feedstocks from mixed plastic streams.[13]

  • Plastic covered material offered for sale, distributed, or imported in or into California meets specified recycling rates of 30% by January 1, 2028, 40% by January 1, 2030, and 65% by January 1, 2032.[14] A separate schedule is established for expanded polystyrene (EPS), which prohibits any producer from selling, offering for sale, distributing, or importing EPS food service ware into California unless it is recycled at a rate of 25% by January 1, 2025, 30% by January 1, 2028, 50% by January 1, 2030, and 65% by January 1, 2032.[15]

Producer Responsibility Organizations

All producers of covered material (as noted above, “producers” are the manufacturers of products that use covered materials) must form and join a PRO by January 1, 2024. Once the PRO plan is approved, or no later than January 1, 2027, producers will be prohibited from selling, offering for sale, importing, or distributing covered materials in California unless the producer is approved to participate in a PRO’s plan. Producers may be exempt from participating in a PRO’s plan if they assume individual responsibility and liability for compliance with the Act and demonstrate a recycling rate of 65% for three consecutive years before 2027 and 70% thereafter.[16] As with S.B. 343, the state is effectively requiring that manufacturers have in place a take-back program with a recycling rate of 65% in order to be exempt. Except for toner manufacturers, we are not aware of individual programs achieving such rates. If a producer is unable to meet these recycling rates, it may also be exempted if it meets each of the following requirements:

  1. From the 2013 calendar year to the 2022 calendar year, inclusive, the producer achieved a net 5 percent or greater source reduction of its covered materials through shifting to refill, reuse, or elimination.

  2. From the 2013 calendar year to the 2022 calendar year, inclusive, the producer achieved a net 8 percent or greater source reduction of its covered materials through optimization, concentration, right-sizing, bulking, shifting to a nonplastic packaging, or lightweighting, or increasing the number of consumer uses.

  3. Seventy-five percent of the producer’s covered material sold, offered for sale, distributed, or imported into the state is in a covered material category that meets a 30-percent recycling rate as of January 1, 2023.[17]

PROs will collect fees from member producers based on a fee schedule to be developed by the PRO pursuant to Section 42053(c).[18] This schedule is to be developed as a part of the PRO plan and must be sufficient to ensure the requirements of this chapter, such as the $500 million remittance, are met and that the PRO budget is fully funded. The initial schedule must be based on the estimated costs of implementing the plan, operation, completing the needs assessment, reimbursing the department, and costs to cover the environmental mitigation surcharges.[19] Notably, in addition to the fees collected from member producers, the PRO may also collect up to $150 million from plastic resin manufacturers that sell plastic covered material to member producers.[20]

Penalties assessed under S.B. 54 will also be deposited in the state Plastic Pollution Mitigation Fund. Penalties will be costly for producers as CalRecycle is authorized to assess penalties of up to $50,000 per day per violation of the Act.

* We would like to acknowledge Summer Associate, Catarina Conran, who assisted in drafting this article.


[1] Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 42041(e)(1)

[2] Id. at § 42041(s).

[3] Id. at § 42041(e)(1)(B)(i)-(ii).

[4] Id. at § 42401(t). 

[5] Id.

[6] Id. at § 42041(e)(2)(A).

[7] Id. at § 42050(a). The California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) has the authority under the Act to increase these required percentage reductions of plastic covered material under certain conditions and will conduct evaluations every five years, beginning in 2030, to determine whether such increase is necessary (i.e., if the amount of plastic in the economy and waste stream increases). Id. at § 42057(h).

[8] Id. at § 42041(aj).

[9] Id. at § 42050(b). 

[10] Recycled products must meet the quality standards necessary to be used in the marketplace. Id. at § 42041(aa)(1).

[11] Id. at § 42041(aa)(2). 

[12] Id. at § 42041(aa)(5); Assembly Floor Analysis, S.B. 54 (June 26, 2022) at 4. 

[13] Assembly Floor Analysis, S.B. 54 (June 26, 2022) at 4-5.

[14] Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 42050(c).

[15] Id. at § 42057(i).

[16] Id. at § 42051(b)(2)(A).

[17] Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 42051(b)(2)(A)(i)-(iii).

[18] Id. at § 42053. 

[19] In the third year of the PRO plan, and each successive year after that, producers will pay an annual fee as established in the PRO plan based on factors such as the cost to develop and sustain viable end markets for each category of covered material and costs associated with collecting, sorting, removing contamination from, aggregating, and transporting the covered material. See id. at §§ 42053(b) and (d). 

[20] Id. at 42064(e)(3). This provision raises significant questions about the basis under which PROs could collect fees from resin manufacturers and the state’s authority to authorize such collection. Tracing resin used in a package back to a particular manufacturer, let alone proving that the resin is used in specific covered material, will likely prove quite difficult given the number of actors involved between resin production and packaging of a product. Such tracing will be even more difficult for covered materials sourced outside of California or the United States. 

Tue, 26 Jul 2022 12:00:00 -0500 en text/html
Killexams : MaRC Technologies, Inc. Adds Tim Nadzam to Service and Support Washington and Idaho Portions of Northwest Territory No result found, try new keyword!MaRC Technologies, Inc., a manufacturers’ representative organization, is pleased to announce the addition of Tim Nadzam to its sales team. Nadzam has joined MaRC Technologies as the existing addition ... Wed, 27 Jul 2022 11:54:00 -0500 text/html Killexams : SIGGRAPH 2022 Presents its Lineup of Featured Speakers

From the Metaverse to Artificial Intelligence, Industry Experts Touch on Some of the Most Prominent syllabus in Computer Graphics

CHICAGO, Aug. 8, 2022 /PRNewswire/ -- SIGGRAPH 2022 presents its lineup for its Featured Speakers program. Industry experts will discuss a variety of syllabus from artificial intelligence and the metaverse to accelerated computing and digital realities. Their talks will cover themes such as the advancements and evolution in technology, their personal and professional experiences, and how art, design, and technology can be blended to create amazing storytelling. The 49th annual conference will run 8–11 August in person, and virtually 25 July–31 October 2022.

“We’re honored to have these distinguished and notable Featured Speakers at SIGGRAPH 2022,” said Munkhtsetseg Nandigjav, SIGGRAPH 2022 Conference Chair. “Our community continues to create and merge art, design, and technology, developing and innovating for the future, and our celebrated speakers are a big part of this progression. Having Sougwen Chung, Ed Catmull, Pat Hanrahan, Sarah Bond, and Ime Archibong, among others, share their experiences with us is a unique distinction that only SIGGRAPH can provide. Their talks on how the various disciplines in the SIGGRAPH community can help the industry move forward and grow will be invaluable.”

Featured Speaker: Sougwen 愫君 Chung
Monday, 8 August 2022
9–10:15 am PT

Sougwen Chung’s performance lecture, ‘Seeing Double—Bridging Dualities with Relational Intelligence’ questions: Where does “AI” end and “we” begin? Chung’s ever-evolving work in human and machine collaboration builds upon a decade-long international journey. Starting with a simple line, the process has led to interdisciplinary insights, philosophical inquiry, and technological invention through pioneering artistic practice. Intertwining perspectives in art and science, Chung’s practice envisions alternative futures for the relationship of humans and machines.

Sougwen 愫君 Chung is a Chinese-Canadian artist and researcher, and is the founder and artistic director of Scilicet, a London-based studio exploring human & non-human collaboration. Chung is a former research fellow at MIT’s Media Lab and is considered a pioneer in the field of human-machine collaboration—exploring the mark-made-by-hand and the mark-made-by-machine as an approach to understanding the dynamics of humans and systems.

Turing Award Lectures
Featured Speakers: Ed Catmull and Pat Hanrahan
Monday, 8 August 2022
2:15–3:15 pm PT

Ed Catmull and Pat Hanrahan will discuss the history and advancements of the computer graphics industry in a combined session. In “Shading Languages and the Emergence of Programmable Graphics Systems,” Hanrahan charts the path of shading languages; first pioneered by Ken Perlin and Rob Cook, then becoming widely available in Pixar’s RenderMan. This talk will review their history and discuss the broader implications for computing and the future of computer graphics.

With “The Wild, Unexpected, Exponential Ride Through Computer Graphics,” Catmull will address the early belief in the promise of computer graphics, the depiction of the research in graphics as impractical, the incorporation of graphics in workstations, the role of the SIGGRAPH community leading to advances enabling movies, the incorporation of algorithms in GPUs, and the exponential rise of computing power in those GPUs driven by the game industry leading to completely unexpected results.

Pat Hanrahan is the Canon Professor of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering in the Computer Graphics Laboratory at Stanford University. His research focuses on rendering algorithms, graphics processing units, and visualization. As a founding employee at Pixar Animation Studios in the 1980s, Hanrahan was part of the design of the RenderMan Interface Specification and the RenderMan Shading Language.

Dr. Ed Catmull is a co-founder of Pixar Animation Studios and served as president of Pixar for 33 years, while also serving as president of Walt Disney Animation Studios for 13 of those 33 years. Catmull founded three of the leading centers of computer graphics research—including the computer division of Lucasfilm Ltd. and Pixar Animation Studios. Catmull earned B.S. degrees in physics and computer science and a Ph.D. in computer science from the University of Utah.

Featured Speaker: Sarah Bond
Tuesday, 9 August 2022
9–10 am PT

In her fireside chat, Sarah Bond will discuss “How Digital Worlds Today Can Make the Real World Better Tomorrow.” Bond will address how gaming inspires empathy by fostering collaboration and enabling players to experience different perspectives. With 3D interactive experiences evolving from gaming to non-gaming environments, there will be an explosion of incredible content from a wave of new creators. As people experience the world through their screens, now more than ever, these worlds need to be built inclusively to cultivate their unique ability to break barriers, spark imagination, and create empathy.

Sarah Bond is the corporate vice president of the Game Creator Experience and Ecosystem at Xbox. She leads the company’s engineering, business, and strategy to grow creator success, helping them create and publish more games, and reach more players on any device. Prior to Microsoft, Bond was a senior leader at T-Mobile and an Associate Partner at McKinsey. She holds a B.A. in Economics from Yale University and an MBA from Harvard Business School. Bond sits on the Board of Councilors at the USC School of Cinematic Arts, as well as the Board of Directors at the Entertainment Software Association (ESA), Zuora, and CHEGG.

Featured Speaker: Ime Archibong
Thursday, 11 August 2022
2:15–3:45 pm PT

Ime Archibong will speak to how contributors to the computer graphics and interactive techniques community can—and should—help design the future, including the metaverse. In this fireside chat, he will talk about experimentation as an approach to innovation, share some examples of innovative ways people with a design mindset from around the world are more empowered than ever to build, and why it’s so important that designers of all expertise help make the next era a reality.

Ime Archibong is Head of New Product Experimentation (NPE) at Meta, where he leads the unit testing new product experiences outside of Meta’s main platforms. He was previously the company’s Vice President of Product Partnerships, where he built the global team that worked with startups and developers to build new products with Meta’s platform tools and technology. Archibong is a listed inventor on more than a dozen technical patents. He holds a B.S. in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science from Yale University and an MBA from the Stanford Graduate School of Business.

Presented by NVIDIA: NVIDIA Special Address at SIGGRAPH 2022
Featured Speakers: Jensen Huang, NVIDIA; Rev Lebaredian, NVIDIA; Sanja Fidler, NVIDIA/University of Toronto, Ontario; Simon Yuen, NVIDIA; and Steven Parker, NVIDIA
Tuesday, 9 August 2022
9–10 am PT

Computer graphics is one of the most challenging computer science problems of our time. With GPU accelerated computing, AI, and physically accurate virtual world simulation, NVIDIA continues to deliver generational leaps to advancing the field of graphics. 3D worlds are no longer just for fun and games but for solving the world’s most challenging important problems. Join NVIDIA’s CEO and senior leaders for a special address at SIGGRAPH 2022 to get a glimpse into the future of AI-infused virtual worlds that provide new frontiers for artistic expression and creativity, or perfectly replicate nature’s systems — and the research and technology that power them.

NVIDIA founder Jensen Huang has served as president, chief executive officer, and a member of the board of directors. Starting out in PC graphics, NVIDIA helped build the gaming market into the largest entertainment industry in the world today. The company’s invention of the GPU made possible real-time programmable shading, which defines modern computer graphics, and later revolutionized parallel computing. He holds a B.S. in electrical engineering from Oregon State University and an M.S. in electrical engineering from Stanford University in California.

Rev Lebaredian is vice president of Omniverse and simulation technology at NVIDIA. For the last five years at NVIDIA, he and his teams have been combining the rendering, physics simulation, and artificial intelligence technologies pioneered by NVIDIA into a single platform for creating and simulating physically accurate virtual worlds — NVIDIA Omniverse. Lebaredian continues to lead the Omniverse product, engineering, and research teams.

Sanja Fidler is an associate professor at the Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Ontario. She is also the vice president of AI research at NVIDIA. Previously, she was a research assistant professor at TTI-Chicago, a philanthropically endowed academic institute located on the campus of the University of Chicago, Illinois.

Simon Yuen is senior director of avatar technology at NVIDIA where he leads the digital human efforts with the goal of developing new character technology and deep learning-based solutions that allow new and more efficient ways of creating high-quality digital characters. Prior to NVIDIA, Yuen spent over 21 years in the visual effects industry, straddling both the art and technology sides of the problem at many studios including Method Studios, Digital Domain, Sony Pictures Imageworks, Dreamworks, Blizzard Entertainment, and others, building teams and technologies that push the envelope of photorealistic digital character creation.

Dr. Steven Parker is vice president of professional graphics at NVIDIA Corporation, where he holds responsibility for several ray tracing technologies, including NVIDIA RTX™ drivers and APIs such as NVIDIA OptiX™, the RTX™ rendering systems in NVIDIA Omniverse™, the Material Definition Language, and the NVIDIA IndeX® scientific visualization system. Combining a history of ray tracing, rendering, and high-performance computing, Parker has been focused on bringing physically based rendering systems to interactive applications.

Presented by Hexagon AB: Even Better Than the Real Thing: Worldbuilding With Digital Twins and AI
Featured Speaker: Burkhard Boeckem
Wednesday, 10 August 2022
9–10 am PT

Burkhard Boeckem, chief technology officer at Hexagon AB, will unveil a new category of digital reality technologies that fundamentally change how we think about worldbuilding, design, and production. Burkhard’s passion is the democratization of digital realities, which led to Hexagon’s development of the Leica BLK line of laser scanners, the launch of HxDR, a powerful visualization and collaboration platform, and recently led to the acquisition of Immersal, an AR technology for spatial mapping and anchoring. Discover the massive potential digital realities hold for worldbuilding, visualization, and immersive storytelling — from VFX to AEC, from metaverse to virtual production — in a world where ideas know no constraints.

Burkhard Boeckem is the CTO of Hexagon AB and has worked in the geospatial industry for over 20 years. As CTO, he is responsible for driving innovation and development of Hexagon’s autonomous technology vision. Throughout his career, he has focused on R&D, delivering innovation in digital reality, and working with the latest advances in disruptive technologies, such as AI and 5D visualization. Boeckem holds an M.S. in geodesy from the University of Bonn in Germany, and a PhD from the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH Zurich).

Presented by Unity: Lion: A Glimpse of the Future With Unity Art Tools
Featured Speakers: James Jacobs, Unity Technologies; Sara Hansen, Unity Technologies; Anton Blake, Moving Picture Company/Monster Emporium; Julio Cesar Garcia, Rocket Science VFX
Wednesday, 10 August 2022
2:15–3:15 pm PT

Watch the premiere of Unity’s latest demo, Lion. This production features innovations in real-time technology that shows content created with Ziva, Wētā Digital, SyncSketch, SpeedTree, and the Unity Editor artist tools. Lion showcases plans to help artists create boundary-pushing visuals, as well as foundations for richer creator workflows.

James Jacobs is a Sci-Tech Academy Award-winning VFX artist with over 25 years of expertise. He has held leadership positions at Weta Digital, Digital Domain, DreamWorks, Mr. X, and Method Studios. In 2015, James cofounded Ziva Dynamics, a company dedicated to solving challenging and high-value character obstacles in media and entertainment. At Unity, he leads the continued development of Ziva tools and finds new ways to bring the realism and quality of film characters into the game/real-time industry.

Sara Hansen is a CG generalist with 11 years of VFX industry experience. With more than 25 film and television projects, her experience spans multiple areas in CG including texturing, look development, layout, lighting, hair, simulation, and rendering. Her work led her to Wētā Digital as a groom artist, and she joined Ziva in 2020, where she now collaborates with Unity. She is passionate about creating assets from start to finish, using a mix of her technical and artistic skill sets.

Anton Blake has been a professional animator for 13 years, having worked in film, TV, and game industries. After contributing to “The Lion King,” he chose to explore teaching and mentorship, starting with a tutorial based on the cubs from the film. The popularity of this tutorial motivated Anton to create entire animation workshops, eventually leading to Monster Emporium. He now works at MPC during the day and runs the Monster Emporium school at night.

Julio Cesar Garcia is a VFX pipeline developer who enjoys mixing technology and art. He is currently working at Rocket Science VFX in Toronto. Julio’s strong passion for animal behavior led him to apply his knowledge to creature animation and simulation. In 2020, he joined Monster Emporium as pipeline developer and creature TD, where he develops new technologies and improves creature assets.

Presented by AMD: The Collision of Technology and Art
Featured Speakers: James Knight, AMD; Dylan Sisson, Pixar; Leif Pedersen, Pixar; and Francois Chardavoine, Lucasfilm
Thursday, 11 August 2022
9–10am PT

This address with James Knight, Dylan Sisson, Leif Pedersen, and Francois Chardavoine will discuss how technology and art push each other to benefit great storytelling. Using examples of how some of the world’s best creatives leverage advanced computing, giving artists more time with their pixels, they will explore how the creative sandbox is bigger and deeper than ever before.

Dylan Sisson, marketing manager, Pixar Animation Studios, is an accomplished artist with more than 20 years of experience in feature film visual effects, combining a deep knowledge of computer graphics with a traditional background of painting, illustration, and toy design. Sisson brings a unique artistic style and a record of creative leadership to a diverse portfolio of work.

James Knight is the global director of media and entertainment at AMD (Advanced Micro Devices), where he supports video streaming, VFX, virtual production, and post-production computing applications for the largest media brands, studios, and content streaming platforms in the world. Knight’s work spans two decades in production, post-production, real-time visual effects, and virtual production.

Leif Pedersen has more than 15 years of production experience. He is a RenderMan specialist and CG generalist on Pixar’s RenderMan team, where he loves to showcase some of the most artistic and technical aspects of the renderer.

As the chief technology officer, Francois Chardavoine is responsible for all aspects of global studio technology for Lucasfilm, Industrial Light & Magic, and ILMxLAB. With more than 20 years of experience in the VFX and animation industry, he is also a member of the VES Technology Committee and co-chair of the Academy of Motion Picture’s Science and Technology Awards subcommittee.

Access to the Featured Speakers program at SIGGRAPH 2022 is available in person and online. Learn more and register for the conference at


ACM, the Association for Computing Machinery, is the world’s largest educational and scientific computing society, uniting educators, researchers, and professionals to inspire dialogue, share resources, and address the field’s challenges. ACM SIGGRAPH is a special interest group within ACM that serves as an interdisciplinary community for members in research, technology, and applications in computer graphics and interactive techniques. The SIGGRAPH conference is the world’s leading annual interdisciplinary educational experience showcasing the latest in computer graphics and interactive techniques. SIGGRAPH 2022, the 49th annual conference hosted by ACM SIGGRAPH, will take place as a hybrid event, with live events 8–11 August at the Vancouver Contention Centre and virtual content available starting 25 July through 31 October. Click here for news from the conference and its partners.

View original content to obtain multimedia:


Mon, 08 Aug 2022 00:05:00 -0500 en text/html
Killexams : What Type Of Shareholders Own The Most Number of Procore Technologies, Inc. (NYSE:PCOR) Shares?

The big shareholder groups in Procore Technologies, Inc. (NYSE:PCOR) have power over the company. Large companies usually have institutions as shareholders, and we usually see insiders owning shares in smaller companies. I generally like to see some degree of insider ownership, even if only a little. As Nassim Nicholas Taleb said, 'Don’t tell me what you think, tell me what you have in your portfolio.

Procore Technologies is a pretty big company. It has a market capitalization of US$6.4b. Normally institutions would own a significant portion of a company this size. In the chart below, we can see that institutions own shares in the company. We can zoom in on the different ownership groups, to learn more about Procore Technologies.

See our latest analysis for Procore Technologies


What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Procore Technologies?

Institutional investors commonly compare their own returns to the returns of a commonly followed index. So they generally do consider buying larger companies that are included in the relevant benchmark index.

We can see that Procore Technologies does have institutional investors; and they hold a good portion of the company's stock. This suggests some credibility amongst professional investors. But we can't rely on that fact alone since institutions make bad investments sometimes, just like everyone does. When multiple institutions own a stock, there's always a risk that they are in a 'crowded trade'. When such a trade goes wrong, multiple parties may compete to sell stock fast. This risk is higher in a company without a history of growth. You can see Procore Technologies' historic earnings and revenue below, but keep in mind there's always more to the story.


Investors should note that institutions actually own more than half the company, so they can collectively wield significant power. Procore Technologies is not owned by hedge funds. ICONIQ Capital, LLC is currently the company's largest shareholder with 34% of shares outstanding. In comparison, the second and third largest shareholders hold about 9.0% and 4.7% of the stock. In addition, we found that Craig Courtemanche, the CEO has 4.3% of the shares allocated to their name.

On looking further, we found that 52% of the shares are owned by the top 4 shareholders. In other words, these shareholders have a meaningful say in the decisions of the company.

Researching institutional ownership is a good way to gauge and filter a stock's expected performance. The same can be achieved by studying analyst sentiments. There are plenty of analysts covering the stock, so it might be worth seeing what they are forecasting, too.

Insider Ownership Of Procore Technologies

While the precise definition of an insider can be subjective, almost everyone considers board members to be insiders. Company management run the business, but the CEO will answer to the board, even if he or she is a member of it.

Most consider insider ownership a positive because it can indicate the board is well aligned with other shareholders. However, on some occasions too much power is concentrated within this group.

Our most recent data indicates that insiders own some shares in Procore Technologies, Inc.. This is a big company, so it is good to see this level of alignment. Insiders own US$452m worth of shares (at current prices). It is good to see this level of investment by insiders. You can check here to see if those insiders have been buying recently.

General Public Ownership

The general public-- including retail investors -- own 12% stake in the company, and hence can't easily be ignored. This size of ownership, while considerable, may not be enough to change company policy if the decision is not in sync with other large shareholders.

Private Equity Ownership

With a stake of 9.0%, private equity firms could influence the Procore Technologies board. Some might like this, because private equity are sometimes activists who hold management accountable. But other times, private equity is selling out, having taking the company public.

Next Steps:

I find it very interesting to look at who exactly owns a company. But to truly gain insight, we need to consider other information, too. For example, we've discovered 3 warning signs for Procore Technologies that you should be aware of before investing here.

But ultimately it is the future, not the past, that will determine how well the owners of this business will do. Therefore we think it advisable to take a look at this free report showing whether analysts are predicting a brighter future.

NB: Figures in this article are calculated using data from the last twelve months, which refer to the 12-month period ending on the last date of the month the financial statement is dated. This may not be consistent with full year annual report figures.

Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at)

This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned.

Join A Paid User Research Session
You’ll receive a US$30 Amazon Gift card for 1 hour of your time while helping us build better investing tools for the individual investors like yourself. Sign up here

Tue, 26 Jul 2022 02:39:00 -0500 en-CA text/html
CAT-260 exam dump and training guide direct download
Training Exams List