The data used by the tool are real, not the most updated but free!

http://files.motiviti.com/wp-uploads/gartner-hype-cycle-20121.gif

But actually we have evidence of some experiments in fashion industry that are close to a Second Life Experience. If Zegna in Store experience is a branded example

Spotlight is a startup that want to extent this approach at community level

My Stylmee Boutique! from Stylmee on Vimeo.

The 6 Habits of True Strategic Thinkers | Inc.com.

Like a catwalk model pivoting on the runway, Garmz, a startup which allows upcoming fashion designers to cut out the traditional network of buyers and sell clothes straight to consumers, is today rebranding as Lookk and announcing new Seed investment.

Eden Ventures has taken the lead on the investment. Terms were undisclosed but sources say Eden went in for just over £500,000. Other Angels investors have joined the round including 500 Startups founder Dave McClure, Kima Ventures, and Angel investors Sherry Coutu, Richard Titus, Tom Hulme and Net-a-Porter founder Carmen Busquets. The startup is a former 2010 Seedcamp winner and took the standard £50,000 investment then.

Lookk lets new fashion designers upload designs – these are then voted on by consumers. The winning designs are produced by Lookk own in-house operation with Lookk responsible for the the manufacturing, distribution and disbursement of the pieces, including all associated costs.

As you can imagine there are lots of aspiring fashion designers who would jump at such a chance to leap-frog the relatively slow-moving fashion industry.

Andreas Klinger, co-founder and COO of Lookk, says the name change does not mean a change in business model or direction of the company, but more an attempt to better reflect its appeal to designers. The new site is certainly a lot better looking that the previous incarnation.

He explains that it takes several years to gain a reputation as a fashion designer amongst the buying networks. “Buyers can’t trust new designer’s names to sell so they (Read more...)

Quando la ”repubblica” massonica chiamata Stati Uniti fu fondata nel 1776, non c’erano imposte e le persone erano generalmente libere di fare quello che preferivano, fino a che non avessero danneggiato la persona o la proprietà altrui. Sfortunatamente, ogni anno i governi federali e quello dello stato, che sono sempre stati controllati di “interessi particolari”, hanno approvato sempre più leggi, distrutto la libertà delle persone, provocato la morte per migliaia di individui. Gli Stati Uniti e il resto del mondo vivono oggi nel sistema neo-feudale del Nuovo Ordine Mondiale.

Shared by Max
I like this concept of adjacent innovation, in an open knowledge environment
"combining the best innovations of others to create a completely new and singular experience. Apple used the power of dig i tal tech nol o gy to spot, inte grate, develop and deploy several adjacent innovations in a single product. That’s the cen tral the o ry of inno vat ing the adja cent pos si ble: tak ing dig i tal short cuts to har ness and com bine adja cent inno va tions into a new thing."

Everyone wants to create the next big thing. In the tech world, that desire has been translated as: “How can I invent the next iPad?”

The question, no matter how it’s asked, is the wrong one. When people ask about the next big thing, they see innovation as a linear progression toward some brand new, revolutionary technology. Naturally, everyone is trying to invent that new “thing,” but there is no straight line and no linear pattern to innovation.

Thanks to this demise of linear innovation, the next big thing isn’t going to take years of research and development. It won’t be developed in a big scientific lab by dozens of Ph.Ds; it won’t have a public launch date over which the press drools; and it won’t take years to generate millions of dollars.

Instead, the next big (Read more...)

Everyone wants to create the next big thing. In the tech world, that desire has been translated as: “How can I invent the next iPad?”

The question, no matter how it’s asked, is the wrong one. When people ask about the next big thing, they see innovation as a linear progression toward some brand new, revolutionary technology. Naturally, everyone is trying to invent that new “thing,” but there is no straight line and no linear pattern to innovation.

Thanks to this demise of linear innovation, the next big thing isn’t going to take years of research and development. It won’t be developed in a big scientific lab by dozens of Ph.Ds; it won’t have a public launch date over which the press drools; and it won’t take years to generate millions of dollars.

Instead, the next big thing is going to come from left field. It will bundle together a patchwork of innovations in a seemingly amorphous way. The next big thing will be created by innovating the “adjacent possible.” The term was first used by Steven Johnson, who borrowed it from evolutionary biology. Basically, it refers to any innovation that stems directly from the present. The iPad, as an example, didn’t reinvent the wheel, but instead reapplied the concepts of Apple’s iPhone and laptops into a new, revolutionary product.

The genius of Apple’s accomplishment didn’t involve invention, but adjacent (Read more...)