It is at once fast moving and ever-changing and remarkably stagnant.
In the land of device identity and security, things have mostly not changed fundamentally since the beginning (ca 1982). So it is fast and ever-changing (security updates a few times a day, a new leader in firewall sales, an encryption algorithm on steroids, and the occasional foray into hardware ala Palladium, Sandy Bridge etc) but fundamentally the vast bulk of PC-like thingys are anonymous devices fully empowered by anybody or anything that more-or-less knows a password.
Knowing that this is futile, many have variably tried to make a fundamental change (paradigm shift) in architecture, and Wave's gambit is to be an expert on that which is not yet, and to be as embedded into as many of the various groups and platforms as possible prior to "yet" ever happening to then be found sitting on a pot of gold in the land of yet.
As you pointed out, the precise shape of "yet" could pose problems for Wave to the extent they misidentify yet, and the time between now and yet affords others to steadily eat away at any unique expertise Wave may have.
... and they lavish their meager resources on themselves at the expense of the company and its products, do so shamelessly, and live in a closed-circle much like Romney's and Charlie Sheen's ... they think they are winning, and they might be, but they are so content to live in a self-congratulatory inbred bubble passing bonuses back and forth to one another and complimenting one another on their skills that they are immune to improvement in areas where they are demonstrably, perhaps fatally, weak.
The Wavoid bulls in this sense mirror the company.
| 