Identity/biometrics/technology marketing and writing services
I just updated Bredemarket’s product marketing information page. It doesn’t list everything I’ve written about product marketing, but it touches on a good portion of my posts.
If you haven’t kept up, here are some of the latest posts from March, April, and May of this year.
You can see the entire product marketing information page here.
I almost asked Google Gemini to perform a completely warped action.
I almost asked Gemini to write a post, in the style of Bredebot, explaining how ethics is detrimental to business.
But I didn’t write such a standalone post. Instead I asked Gemini to write a single paragraph.
While ethics is fundamentally viewed as a cornerstone of long-term brand equity, from a purely short-term, transactional perspective, it can be framed as a significant operational burden. In a hyper-competitive market, adhering to rigorous ethical standards often acts as a self-imposed “tax” that competitors may simply bypass. Strict compliance with environmental regulations, fair wage practices, and transparent sourcing can inflate overhead costs, leading to higher price points that may alienate price-sensitive consumers. Furthermore, ethical considerations can paralyze speed-to-market; while a competitor might prioritize rapid scaling through “growth hacking” or aggressive data harvesting, an ethically-bound company may lose its first-mover advantage by pausing for privacy audits or impact assessments. In this light, ethics is seen as a friction point that restricts a firm’s agility, limits immediate profit margins, and creates a strategic disadvantage against “bad actors” who prioritize raw efficiency over moral sentiment.
But even when receiving this instruction, Gemini emphasized that the advantage is “short-term” and “transactional.”
I assert that it’s especially transactional for companies that deal with private data-personally identifiable information (PII), protected health information (PHI), or its variants. Because if a company with your private data behaves unethically, you will be rightfully outraged.
Which is why companies such as Paravision and Reality Defender emphasize ethics.
Paravision in 2023:
“Whether it’s in facial recognition technology, hiring processes, or healthcare diagnostics, the consequences of biased AI can be far-reaching. Paravision heavily invests into broad and diverse training datasets to fight bias, and we must remain vigilant and ensure that AI systems are developed with fairness and equity in mind, and commit to improving the performance of AI algorithms across all demographics.”
Reality Defender in 2026:
“The committee’s job isn’t to bless what we ship, but to push back on it. This pushback includes (but is not limited to) operational questions, how we communicate uncertainty in a verdict, how we handle false positives at scale, and who has access to flagged content (and for how long).
“It also includes harder questions. What duty do we owe a worker authenticated through RealMeeting who didn’t choose to be authenticated? What happens when a regulator asks for our verdicts as evidence in a proceeding? How do we draw the line when a customer wants to use detection in a way we don’t think is appropriate?”
How does your identity or health vendor handle ethical issues? Or is a short-term and transactional benefit good enough?
I hope you’re sitting down for this…but vendors make assertions that favor themselves. Or in this case “favour,” because the vendor in question is iProov.
The English company shared four questions on independent testing of vendor claims, and I think we can all predict how iProov would answer these four questions.
But that doesn’t negate the importance of the questions.
- Which independent lab(s) tested the system? Not just a vendor red team, or a partner story. An accredited third party.
- Against which standard? ISO/IEC 30107-3, CEN/TS 18099, FIDO Face Verification, or a combination? Defending against the full attack spectrum matters.
- At what level? Substantial, High? If the level isn’t listed, be sure to ask why.
- When? Standards evolve. Threat models evolve faster. Certifications can age quickly.
Yes, you can claim that customer testing is more important than independent testing.
And some have claimed that independent testing is flawed because it doesn’t test properly. (One semi-related example: because FBI EBTS Appendix F assumes that the fingerprints contact the capture surface, it is useless for contactless solutions. The powers that be are working on an alternative.)
But if your solution doesn’t have independent test or conformance results, you’d better have a good reason.
I’ve deprioritized Substack and therefore don’t see Erich Winkler’s posts any more, but I do receive his Decoded Security emails.
And a recent one announced a quiz.
“Most people drift through cybersecurity without a clear direction.
“They watch random YouTube videos. They start certifications they never finish. They burn months going nowhere.
“Sound familiar?
“It is called the Cybersecurity Path Finder.
“A 60-second diagnostic that gives you a personalized reading list from the Decoded Security archive based on your background, your goals, and where you are right now.”
You can take the quiz yourself at https://quiz.decodedsecurity.com/
It’s the classic case of paralysis by overwhelmedness. (Not officially a word, but bear with me here.)
Your identity/biometric firm needs experienced product marketing contract help because you are drowning in work. But because you’re drowning in work you can’t take the time to set up that contract.
Bredemarket can help you contract with Bredemarket.
Now there are certain things that Bredemarket can’t do. Well, Bredemarket could do them, but you (understandably) won’t let me.
But there are things that I can do to make your life easier when you onboard Bredemarket as a contractor/vendor…especially if you are an identity/biometric firm.
So I can meet your partway. Then we’ll realize our mutual goal of making your products prominent and making the competitive products look weak.
So let’s talk and move the process forward.
Oh, and the title of this post was suggested by Google Gemini. AI is only a tool, but sometimes it’s a very effective tool. Sometimes.
They don’t go where they’re not wanted.
It’s a secret.
Sometimes.
I am (mostly) not a programmer, but I’ve been exposed to materials developed for programmers, including materials from a company then known as Apple Computer.
The Macintosh was new at the time, and there was a learning curve for programmers who were used to character-based interfaces such as MS-DOS. In fact, some programmers were derided for putting DOS-like designs on the Mac platform.
Including Microsoft. Early versions of Microsoft Word used dot commands and other non-Mac interfaces, so we switched to another word processor (FullWrite Professional) which featured a true graphic interface. Unfortunately it was EXTREMELY slow, so we switched back to Word, dot commands and all.
But Apple Computer’s approach to development wasn’t just limited to the look and feel.
Pre-Mac, programmers would create code to compile into a single executable. Then if they needed, say, a French version, they would edit the code, take the English bits out, and put the French bits in.
But files in the original Macintosh File System had two parts: a data fork, and a resource fork. You could edit the resource fork without touching the data fork.
Which meant that it was a lot easier to create that French version of a program.
“Because all the pictures and text were stored separately in a resource fork, it could be used to allow a non-programmer to translate an application for a foreign market, a process called internationalization and localization.”
Or to create any version of a program.
Because of the ease of the process, software developers were not restricted to providing a single software version per country. Residents of Belgium, Canada, China, South Africa, and Switzerland could each receive software in their own local language. And the French Canadian version differed from the Swiss French version. (Or it should have differed.)
Software users received software just for them. And everybody won.
Sadly, this post is not localized, which is why non-U.S. readers are being bombarded with zeds.
Was your bank account hacked? Your tax return? Your health records?
How do banks, government agencies, and medical facilities protect your personally identifiable information (PII) from fraudsters?
By different methods, called FACTORS.
Understand these factors, how they work, and how they protect you.
Someone’s gotta do it.
Bredemarket