Tag: company

  • VC giant Insight Partners notifies staff and limited partners after data breach

    VC giant Insight Partners notifies staff and limited partners after data breach

    Venture capital firm Insight Partners says it has completed notifying a number of individuals, including the firm’s limited partners, whose personal information was stolen by hackers in a January data breach

    In a statement late last week, the company said it completed its review in August following the data breach, which it described as a “social engineering attack” without further explanation.

    According to its earlier notice, the stolen data included information about certain Insight Partners’ funds, management companies, and portfolio companies. The hackers also took banking and tax information, the company said, as well as personal information about its current and former employees and its limited partners — the typically private and unnamed investors who help provide capital to Insight’s venture funds.

    Insight Partners has so far kept details of the breach under wraps, including how many individuals had data stolen, or provided a copy of the notification it sent to those affected when asked by TechCrunch. The company has not said if it received an extortion demand from the hackers or if it paid the hackers. (It’s not uncommon for companies to face demands for payment in exchange for the hackers deleting or not publishing the stolen data.)

    Kristen Zeck, a spokesperson for Insight Partners, did not respond to emails with questions about the breach. 

    The company has more than $90 billion in assets under its management and has invested in some of the largest cybersecurity companies today, including Databricks and Wiz. 

    Insight Partners joins a handful of other venture firms in recent years to have been hacked.

    Silicon Valley venture firm Advanced Technology Ventures was hit by a ransomware attack in 2021, the same year that Sequoia Partners experienced a data breach. Both incidents allowed hackers to swipe personal information of their firms’ limited partners.

  • Sam Altman says that bots are making social media feel 'fake'

    Sam Altman says that bots are making social media feel 'fake'

    X enthusiast and Reddit shareholder Sam Altman had an epiphany on Monday: Bots have made it impossible to determine whether social media posts are really written by humans, he posted.

    The realization came while reading (and sharing) some posts from the r/Claudecode subreddit, which were praising OpenAI Codex. OpenAI launched the software programming service that takes on Anthropic’s Claude Code in May.

    Lately, that subreddit has been so filled with posts from self-proclaimed Code users announcing that they moved to Codex that one Reddit user even joked: “Is it possible to switch to codex without posting a topic on Reddit?”

    This left Altman wondering how many of those posts were from real humans. “I have had the strangest experience reading this: I assume it’s all fake/bots, even though in this case I know codex growth is really strong and the trend here is real,” he confessed on X.

    He then live-analyzed his reasoning. “I think there are a bunch of things going on: real people have picked up quirks of LLM-speak, the Extremely Online crowd drifts together in very correlated ways, the hype cycle has a very ‘it’s so over/we’re so back’ extremism, optimization pressure from social platforms on juicing engagement and the related way that creator monetization works, other companies have astroturfed us so i’m extra sensitive to it, and a bunch more (including probably some bots).”

    To decode that a little, he’s accusing humans of starting to sound like LLMs, even though LLMs — spearheaded by OpenAI — were literally invented to mimic human communication, right down to the em dash. And OpenAI’s models definitely trained on Reddit, where Altman was a board member through 2022, and was disclosed as a large shareholder during the company’s IPO last year.

    He makes a valid point that fandoms, led by extremely, always-on social media users, do tend to behave in odd ways. Many groups can devolve into hatefests if overrun by those venting frustrations to their brethren.

    Techcrunch event

    Join 10k+ tech and VC leaders for growth and connections at Disrupt 2025

    Netflix, Box, a16z, ElevenLabs, Wayve, Sequoia Capital, Elad Gil — just some of the 250+ heavy hitters leading 200+ sessions designed to deliver the insights that fuel startup growth and sharpen your edge. Don’t miss the 20th anniversary of TechCrunch, and a chance to learn from the top voices in tech. Grab your ticket before Sept 26 to save up to $668.

    Join 10k+ tech and VC leaders for growth and connections at Disrupt 2025

    Netflix, Box, a16z, ElevenLabs, Wayve, Sequoia Capital, Elad Gil — just some of the 250+ heavy hitters leading 200+ sessions designed to deliver the insights that fuel startup growth and sharpen your edge. Don’t miss the 20th anniversary of TechCrunch, and a chance to learn from the top voices in tech. Grab your ticket before Sept 26 to save up to $668.

    San Francisco
    |
    October 27-29, 2025

    REGISTER NOW

    Altman also throws a dig at the incentives when social media sites and creators rely on engagement to make money. Fair enough.

    But then Altman confesses that one of the reasons he thinks the pro-OpenAI posts in this subreddit might be bots is because OpenAI has also been “astroturfed.” That typically involves posts by people or bots paid for by the competitor, or paid by some third-degree contractor, giving the competitor plausible deniability.

    We have no evidence of astroturfing (though it is possible). But we did see how OpenAI subreddits turned on the company after it released GPT 5.0. Instead of waves of praise from the faithful over the new model, many angry posts were voted up. People took to Reddit and X to complain about everything from GPT’s personality to how it burned through credits without finishing tasks.

    A day after the bumpy release, Altman did a Reddit ask-me-anything session on r/GPT in which he confessed to rollout issues and promised changes. The GPT subreddit has never fully recovered its previous level of love, with users still posting regularly on how much they dislike the changes with GPT 5.0. Are they human? Or are they, as Altman seems to imply, fake in some way?Altman surmises, “The net effect is somehow AI twitter/AI Reddit feels very fake in a way it really didn’t a year or two ago.”

    If that’s true, who’s fault is it? GPT has led models to become so good at writing, that LLMs have become a plague not just to social media sites (which have always had a bot problem) but to schools, journalism, and the courts.While we don’t know how many Reddit posts are written by bots, or are fictional accounts by humans using LLMs, it is likely a substantial number. Data security company Imperva reported that over half of all internet traffic in 2024 was non-human, largely due to LLMs. X’s own bot Grok says: “The exact numbers aren’t public, but 2024 estimates suggest hundreds of millions of bots on X.”

    Several cynics have suggested that Altman’s lament was his first foray into marketing OpenAI’s rumored social media platform. In April, the Verge reported that such a project to take on X and Facebook was at the earliest stages. This product may or may not exist. Altman may or may not have had ulterior motives for suggesting that social media is too fake these days.

    But motives aside, if OpenAI is planning a social network, what are the odds that it would be a bot-free zone? And, funny enough, if it did the reverse and banned humans, the results likely wouldn’t be different. Not only do LLMs still hallucinate facts, but when researchers at the University of Amsterdam built a social network composed entirely of bots, they found that the bots soon formed cliques and echo chambers for themselves, too.

  • xAI reportedly lays off 500 workers from data annotation team

    xAI reportedly lays off 500 workers from data annotation team

    Elon Musk’s AI startup xAI laid off 500 team members on Friday night, according to internal messages viewed by Business Insider.

    These emails reportedly announce an immediate “strategic pivot,” with the company deciding to  “accelerate the expansion and prioritization of our specialist AI tutors, while scaling back our focus on general AI tutor roles.”

    “As part of this shift in focus, we no longer need most generalist AI tutor positions and your employment with xAI will conclude,” xAI reportedly wrote.

    According to Business Insider, these cuts represent about one-third of xAI’s 1,500-person data annotation team — the team that works to label and prepare data used to train xAI’s chatbot Grok.

    When contacted for confirmation, xAI pointed to a statement on X (the Musk-owned social network that it acquired earlier this year) declaring that the company “will immediately surge our Specialist AI tutor team by 10x.”

    “We are hiring across domains like STEM, finance, medicine, safety, and many more,” the company said.

  • Tesla could have avoided that 2.5M Autopilot verdict, filings show

    Tesla could have avoided that $242.5M Autopilot verdict, filings show

    Months before a jury awarded a $242.5 million verdict against Tesla over its culpability in a 2019 fatal crash, the automaker had a chance to settle for $60 million. Instead, Tesla rejected that offer, according to new legal filings that were first reported by Reuters.

    The settlement proposal, which was made in May, was disclosed in a filing that requested Tesla cover legal fees for the plaintiffs in the case. A representative for the plaintiff’s attorney told TechCrunch that Tesla rejected the settlement by default because they were not accepted within the 30-day timeframe. That language is also in the recent court filing, as shown below.

    “Both Proposals for Settlement were served in compliance with and pursuant to Florida Rule ofCivil Procedure 1.442 and Fla. Stat. § 768.79. Tesla did not accept Plaintiffs’ Proposals for Settlement within thirty (30) days of service. Therefore, Tesla rejected the Proposals for Settlement by operation of the rule and statute.”

     Earlier this month, a jury in federal court in Miami found Tesla partly to blame for a fatal 2019 crash that involved the use of the company’s Autopilot driver assistance system. One person was killed when a Tesla Model S with Autopilot engaged plowed through an intersection and hit a Chevrolet Tahoe. The crash victims, Neima Benavides Leon and her boyfriend Dillon Angulo, were standing outside the vehicle on the shoulder at the time. Leon was killed while Angulo was severely injured.

    The driver, who was not a defendant in this case, was sued separately for his responsibility. The lawsuit filed in 2021 against Tesla centered on Autopilot, which was engaged but did not brake in time to avoid going through the intersection. The jury assigned the driver two-thirds of the blame and attributed one-third to Tesla. As part of the verdict, the jury awarded the $242.5 million verdict as part of its decision.

    Tesla, in a statement provided to TechCrunch earlier this month, said it plans to appeal the verdict “given the substantial errors of law and irregularities at trial.”

    TechCrunch has reached out to the plaintiffs’ attorneys as well as Tesla. An outside PR firm that previously provided statements on Tesla’s behalf declined to comment and directed TechCrunch to the company’s press address. Tesla disbanded its communications team several years ago.

    The lawsuit, case 1:21-cv-21940-BB, was filed in 2021 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

    Techcrunch event

    Tech and VC heavyweights join the Disrupt 2025 agenda

    Netflix, ElevenLabs, Wayve, Sequoia Capital, Elad Gil — just a few of the heavy hitters joining the Disrupt 2025 agenda. They’re here to deliver the insights that fuel startup growth and sharpen your edge. Don’t miss the 20th anniversary of TechCrunch Disrupt, and a chance to learn from the top voices in tech — grab your ticket now and save up to $600+ before prices rise.

    Tech and VC heavyweights join the Disrupt 2025 agenda

    Netflix, ElevenLabs, Wayve, Sequoia Capital — just a few of the heavy hitters joining the Disrupt 2025 agenda. They’re here to deliver the insights that fuel startup growth and sharpen your edge. Don’t miss the 20th anniversary of TechCrunch Disrupt, and a chance to learn from the top voices in tech — grab your ticket now and save up to $675 before prices rise.

    San Francisco
    |
    October 27-29, 2025

    REGISTER NOW

  • U.S. Treasury Hits 3 Mexican Banks Supporting Fentanyl Cartel, Sheinbaum Pushes Back

    U.S. Treasury Hits 3 Mexican Banks Supporting Fentanyl Cartel, Sheinbaum Pushes Back

    Mexico’s President Takes a Stand Against Black‑Money Critics

    In a swift reply that might have put the Treasury’s offices on edge, President Andrés Manuel Sheinbaum fired back: no evidence of money laundering, Mexican banks are “sound,” and accusations are “small allegations” from foreign firms. He even pointed to the fact that Mexico has “committed only administrative faults” and called the surcharges “small and disgruntled.”

    Key Points of the President’s Response

    • “No evidence of money laundering in Mexican banks” – Sheinbaum’s headline claim.
    • “Mexico only found administrative flaws in banks” – stressing procedural rather than illicit matters.
    • “Mexico asked the US Treasury for money laundering evidence” – a diplomatic request for verification.
    • “Mexican financial system is sound, accused firms are small” – downplaying the scale of alleged wrongdoing.
    • “Transfers to China are not money laundering – just a coincidence?” – addressing cross‑border concerns.

    What the Treasury Actually Did

    FinCEN slapped sanctions on three Mexican banks on June 25: CIBanco S.A., Intercam Banco S.A. and Vector Casa de Bolsa S.A. de C.V.. The move aimed to curb money laundering for fentanyl‑drug cartels, as announced in a statement released that day.

    Charting the Situation

    Below is a simple timeline of the key moments:

    1. June 25 – FinCEN announces sanctions on three banks.
    2. Late‑June – Sheinbaum issues a press release refuting the allegations.
    3. Internal cross‑checks in Mexico show no major evidence of shady transactions.

    Bottom line

    While the Treasury’s sanction list may look severe, Sheinbaum’s narrative frames the actions as a misunderstanding – a dose of bold diplomacy with comedic undertones. Whether history gives one side the win or the other depends on how many Finnish cross‑checks are completed.

    Big Banks, Big Trouble: The Money Laundering Mishap of CIBanco, Intercam, and Vector

    In a nutshell: Three banking giants – CIBanco, Intercam, and brokerage powerhouse Vector – are caught washing cash for Mexico’s criminal cartels, behind the scenes of opioid trafficking.

    Who’s Who

    • CIBanco: $7 billion in assets. The bank’s wall of numbers hides a murky alliance with CJNG (Jalisco New Generation Cartel), the Bel‑trán‑Leyva Cartel and the Gulf Cartel.
    • Intercam: $4 billion in assets. Linked primarily to CJNG.
    • Vector: a brokerage managing a staggering $11 billion. Keeps bars swinging with the Sinaloa Cartel and the Gulf Cartel.

    The Big Picture

    Financial Intelligence Center (FinCEN) has flagged these entities as chronic money‑laundering wizards: they moved millions of dollars for Mexico‑based drug kingpins and paved the way for precursor chemicals that sprout fentanyl weapons.

    Numbers That Will Shock You

    • CIBanco: Over $2.1 million shuffled from Mexico to China between 2021‑2024, fueling the purchase of synthetic drug building blocks.
    • Intercam: Dispatched $1.5 million in the same window.
    • Vector: Handled more than $1 million from 2018‑2023.
    Federal Snafu: The U.S. Sanctions

    The U.S. Treasury’s tinderbox of sanctions means:

    • No banks can play Fast‑Track money hops to or from these institutions.
    • Any accounts, or even virtual “crypto‑cash” under their dome, are off limits.
    Responses, or the “Do‑I‑Need‑A‑Shield‑Up?” Refuses

    CIBanco (June 25 statement): “We’re completely squeaky clean, absolutely no illicit ties. We’re doubly diligent, constantly chatting with Mexican and U.S. watchdogs like there’s a secret sauce behind the scenes.”
    Intercam (June 25 statement): “What? We’re totally transparent and law‑abiding. No shady money‑vanishing for the cartels.”
    Vector (June 25 statement): “We’re proud of our ethics, and our ops are audited by the top national financial authorities. Zero room for tampering.”

    In short, the financial giants are waving “fantastically truthful” flags high, but the sanctions and FinCEN’s stern letter suggest something else entirely.

    Illicit Transactions

    Mexico’s Finance Ministry Sums Up U.S. Treasury’s Fentanyl‑Taxing Moves

    TL;DR: The U.S. Treasury hit three Mexican banks with sanctions under the Fentanyl laws, but Mexico found no evidence of shady links—so far. The U.S. says it’s “targeting” money that could help cartels farm fentanyl for Americans.

    Mexico’s Official Stand‑up

    The ministry’s June 25 communiqué made it clear that they asked for proof of wrongdoing from the U.S. Treasury about CIBanco, Intercam, and Vector. Imagine asking your friend for a video of their prank—unless the footage is solid, you’re still on your own.

    And guess what? The Treasury didn’t hand over any concrete evidence. The only stuff that the Mexican side could verify was data on wire transfers to legitimate Chinese companies—no malice confirmed.

    In a nutshell, Mexican banks are involved in a ton of routine foreign transactions. The UI’s audit revealed that more than 300 Mexican firms have sent money to Chinese entities through 10 local banks. That’s not “suspicious”—that’s just the flow of international trade, worth a whopping $139 billion a year.

    Possible “Clean” versus “Dirty” Banks

    • CIBanco—One of the accused.
    • Intercam—Also on the hit list.
    • Vector—Last name on the roster.

    The ministry says, “If we ever get conclusive proof that any of these banks are laundering money for cartels, we’ll take full legal action.” Until then, they’re holding the needle and waiting for the surgical punch.

    U.S. Treasury’s Legal Backing

    The Treasury’s sanctions come under two new rules:

    • Fentanyl Sanctions Act – Gives more power to block feds that facilitate fentanyl flows.
    • FEND Off Fentanyl Act – An extension focused on money laundering tied to synthetic opioids.

    These laws are the first time the Treasury’s financial crime unit, FinCEN, has used that legal muscle. The U.S. claims this is about protecting American lives from the “poison” that cartels are selling on the market.

    Scornful Zoom‑In on the Banks

    According to Secretary Scott Bessent, “financial facilitators like CIBanco, Intercam, and Vector are the silent partners that help cartels move cash, turning them into vital gears of the fentanyl supply chain.” And to seal the deal:

    “Today’s actions prove Treasury’s dedication to using every tool available to fight the threat from criminal and terrorist parties trafficking fentanyl and other narcotics.”

    Joint Commitment Across Borders

    On June 26, on X (Twitter’s new name), Bessent mentioned both the U.S. and Mexico are seriously dedicated to ensuring the financial system remains a safe zone, with strong anti‑money‑laundering and counter‑terrorism financing controls. So maybe, just maybe, we’ll be less likely to see nations behind the playground of drugs.

    China’s Long Game

    China’s Long‑Game with Fentanyl: A Silent Strategy to Ripple the U.S. Workforce

    What FBI Director Kash Patel Told Joe Rogan (on June 6)

    In a brief but explosive interview with the famed podcaster, FBI Director Kash Patel laid out a chilling strategy that doesn’t involve covert ops or trade wars—just a slow‑moving chemical weapon.

    According to Patel, the Chinese Communist Party isn’t chasing big profits from the drug trade; instead, they’re quietly undermining America’s labor pool by targeting young, vibrant citizens with the lethal synthetic opioid known as fentanyl. “They’re basically wiping out tens of thousands of Americans every year,” he told Rogan. “And they’re doing it over generations.”

    Key Points from the FBI Director

    • Target Population: “Generations of young men and women who would have become police officers, soldiers, teachers, or any other essential professionals.”
    • Method: “Supply precursor chemicals that feed the fentanyl production chain.”
    • Scale: “48,422 deaths linked to synthetic opioid fentanyl this year alone.”
    • Long‑Term Impact: “A worrying erosion of the workforce that could ripple across U.S. industries for decades.”

    Fentanyl’s Shadow Over America

    While the Chinese government hasn’t raked in massive revenue from drug exports, the sheer volume of fentanyl deaths is a silent testimony to their influence. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported an estimated 48,422 fatal cases in the U.S. in 2024—a staggering number that underscores the crisis.

    Trump’s Retaliation: Tariffs and Trade Talks

    During his administration, the U.S. slapped a 20 % tariff on Chinese imports, citing the illicit drug supply as a catalyst. The latest trade deal prompted China to accept new limits on two critical fentanyl precursor chemicals, a move that might curb their supply line.

    What the New Controls Mean

    • Potential slowing of fentanyl production in the U.S.
    • We’re hoping this cuts out a major ingredient used by smugglers.
    • Will this reduce the death toll? The answer remains to be seen.

    The Bottom Line

    While the narrative is far from a Hollywood blockbuster, it’s a sobering reminder: the battlefield isn’t always in the air or on streets—it can also be a laboratory with chemicals that quietly influence lives. Keeping an eye on these developments is essential, whether you’re a policymaker, a health advocate, or just a concerned citizen scrolling through your feed.

  • Reshoring Revealed: Winners, Losers, and the Future of Supply Chains

    Reshoring Revealed: Winners, Losers, and the Future of Supply Chains

    Reshoring: Winners, Losers, and the Quest for Stability

    Ever seen that headline that reads, “Your favorite item is out of stock” and felt your heart drop? That’s the pulse of today’s supply‑chain drama. The big buzzword in fashion now is reshoring—basically, bringing production back to North America. But who’s actually at the front of the line and who’s getting the short end? Let’s dive into the shake‑ups, the headaches, and the hopeful future.

    Short‑Term Reality Check

    • Consumers are in the hot seat. Shortages are piling up, and prices are shooting up. Rumor mill says it’s all “tariffs”, but that’s just the cover‑story for a profit‑pumping frenzy.
    • Major voices echo the warning. Matt Stoller’s two essays—How Monopolies Could Exploit the Tariff Shock and How to Prepare for the Coming Supply Chain Shock—have become go‑to guides for anyone who feels the pinch.
    • Short‑sighted, folks—just lean straight into the next purchase spur, and you’ll be paying a premium.

    Long‑Term Upside

    Hold onto your hats, because the longer view flips the script. When we’re talking shoring up supply chains, the reward lies in a less volatile, more reliable market. Stability has a hidden cost; you only notice how much you’d pay for peace of mind once it’s gone.

    Big Retailers Going Full‑Homegrown

    Picture a giant retail chain that shifts from a sprawling, global network to vertically integrated domestic production. All the steps—from raw material to finished product—happen in a single, factory‑like environment.

    A real‑world example: Ford’s River Rouge plant. Built from 1917‑1928, it turned iron ore into cars inside one huge complex. The moolah invested in its own docks, a network of rail, and even a power plant. That made it self‑contained, fast, and >out‑of‑the‑ordinary vertical integration.

    • Pros: full control, less risk of global bottlenecks or geopolitical drama.
    • Cons: Often more expensive to run. But the trade‑off? Greater predictability and stability, especially when global supply lines tear apart.

    Labor Wins a Chance

    As factories reshore, unions could become hot property again. The decades‑long decline of labor’s share of the economy might finally be seen as a key driver of wealth‑income inequality. If enough folks get behind unionization at new U.S. production plants, we might finally rebalance an economy that’s largely favored finance and capital over hard‑working folks.

    What’s on the Horizon?
    • Local ecosystems for raw materials, tooling, robotics—cutting out the unpredictable twists of long global chains.
    • Potential rise in unionized support among the masses.
    • New waves of “shoring” or regional cooperation promises more resilience.

    In short, the reshoring saga may leave consumers a little bummed right now, but it could pave the road to a sturdier, more equitable marketplace—and maybe even bump up the living standards for workers. Hang tight; the final chapter is still being written.

    Local Love vs. Low Prices

    Picture this: the average person starts scoring local products and jobs over the classic “cheaper price, lower quality” mantra. That could give local supply chains a massive win.

    What’s Driving the Shift?

    I’ve been making it clear that what people value—and what’s top on that list—shifts the entire economic game. The public’s priorities are the force that reshapes incentives and policies.

    Today’s Public: A Price-Only Robot?

    Right now, the world assumes the public behaves like “rational economic robots” who only care about the bottom line. That’s a pretty narrow view.

    After the Hyper‑Financialization Fallout

    Once the full fallout from rampant hyper‑financialization and hyper‑globalization plays out, folks might finally understand that price alone isn’t the whole story. They’ll start seeing the value in other things—like stability and quality—beyond just low cost.

    The Public Leads, Not Vice Versa

    In general, the public sets the pace for both the private sector and government. It’s the trendsetter, not the follower.

    National Security in the Spotlight
    • People could start putting national security on their radar.
    • That security hinges on reliable, predictable, domestic production chains.
    • Those chains need to be owned and run by home-grown companies.

    Heads up: Your Order’s on a Long‑haul Road Trip

    What’s the scoop? The goods you ordered are currently not in the store
    and have been shuffled into the back‑order pile. There’s no timetable for when they’ll
    pop up in the front‑desk again—think of it like waiting for your favorite band to drop a
    new album—no release date yet!

    Why the delay?

    • Supply chain hiccups
    • Demand is off the charts
    • Manufacturing bottlenecks

    If you’re feeling like a detective trying to crack the case, hang tight—we’ll keep you
    in the loop.

    Want to stay in the groove?

    Be it a $3/month patron on Patreon or a free Substack subscriber, jump in to
    load fresh recommendations and get exclusive updates. It’s like having your own backstage
    pass—plus you help keep the creative engine humming!

  • After selling to Spotify, Anchor's co-founders are back with Oboe, an AI-powered app for learning

    After selling to Spotify, Anchor's co-founders are back with Oboe, an AI-powered app for learning

    The co-founders who sold their last startup Anchor to Spotify are launching their next project: Oboe, an AI-powered educational app that enables anyone to create lightweight, flexible learning courses on nearly any topic they choose, simply by entering a prompt.

    These courses can span a variety of verticals, including topics like science, history, foreign language, news, pop culture, preparing for life changes, and more. At launch, Oboe — a name inspired by the root of the Japanese word meaning “to learn” — will offer nine different course formats. These allow users to learn in the way they prefer, Oboe co-founder Nir Zicherman explained to TechCrunch.

    Zicherman founded the company along with Anchor co-founder Michael Mignano after leaving Spotify in October 2023 and taking a brief period to recharge. Zicherman said he was inspired to work on an AI educational product after working to scale Spotify’s audiobooks business, which made it easier for people to gain access to high-quality and educational content, as it was bundled with their music subscription.

    Unlike AI chatbots, you don’t have to engage in back-and-forth conversations to learn with Oboe. Instead, you can opt for text and visuals, audio courses, games, interactive tests, and more.

    For those who want to learn on the go, Oboe offers two audio formats. One feels more like listening to a university-style lecture, while the other is akin to Google’s podcast-like NotebookLM, as it features two hosts talking in depth about the topic.a pair of screenshots showing the Oboe appImage Credits:Oboe

    “The real magic here comes from an internal architecture that we’ve built that I would describe as a complex, multi-agent architecture that we built from scratch, each part of which is orchestrated to run in parallel as we generate a course,” Zicherman says.

    “The challenge is, how do you create courses that are both high quality, entirely personalized to what the user wants to see, and also get generated extremely quickly? This all happens within seconds,” he says.

    “We have agents that, in parallel, are responsible for everything from developing the course architecture to developing and verifying the base material that’s being taught, writing the script for the podcast, pulling in real images from the internet — not AI-generated images, but real images and visuals into the reading formats that we offer,” he added.

    Some of Oboe’s agents audit the content to ensure the courses are accurate, high-quality, and personalized to what the user wants to learn.another pair of screenshots showing a deep dive and podcast episode in the Oboe app.Image Credits:Oboe

    The courses are meant to be lightweight, engaging, and fun. Plus, Oboe’s team is working on a recommendation engine that will help you continually go deeper on a topic, if you prefer. That leaves it up to the user as to whether they want to gain some surface-level knowledge about a new topic or whether they want to get more in-depth.

    This, combined with the variety of formats, will help Oboe appeal to a broader audience, the team believes.

    “To me, education conjures up images of more formal academic settings and the types of prescriptive curricula that students are used to as they grow up,” Zicherman tells TechCrunch. “But the truth is, we are all lifelong learners … So much of the time that we spend on the internet these days is spent trying to better understand things, but the truth is that the internet was built to grab our attention, not to teach effectively.”

    “We’re very excited to build a platform that is intended to be the one-stop shop to serve that intrinsic thirst for knowledge that exists in every person,” he said.

    At launch, users can consume any course created by others for free and can create up to five free courses per month. After that, there are two paid tiers: Oboe Plus, which offers 30 additional courses for $15 per month, and Oboe Pro, which offers 100 courses for $40 per month.

    The service will first be available on the web (and mobile web), but native apps for iOS and Android are on the way.

    Oboe is a team of five full-time, including Zicherman. Mignano remains a full-time partner at VC firm Lightspeed but sits on Oboe’s board and shares the co-founder title.

    The startup’s $4 million seed round was led by Eniac Ventures, the VC firm that led Anchor’s seed. The round also includes investment from Haystack, Factorial Capital, Homebrew, Offline Ventures, Scott Belsky, Kayvon Beykpour, Nikita Bier, Tim Ferriss, and Matt Lieber.

  • Hubble Network plans massive satellite upgrade to create global Bluetooth layer

    Hubble Network’s satellite-powered Bluetooth network is getting a big upgrade. 

    The Seattle-based startup, which aims to bring to enterprises what Apple’s Find My has brought to consumers, has built a powerful new phased-array receiver that will enable what Hubble CEO Alex Haro calls a “true Bluetooth layer around the Earth.” 

    This advanced payload will fly on two massive new satellites from four-year-old Muon Space, called MuSat XL, which are slated to launch in 2027. The first two MuSat XL spacecraft will deliver a 12-hour global revisit time and detect Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) signals at 30 times lower power than current capabilities, Hubble says. If those numbers pan out, it could materially extend battery life for tracking tags and sensors here on Earth. 

    Those two satellites will form the backbone of Hubble’s BLE Finding Network for enterprises in sectors ranging from logistics, infrastructure, and defense.

    Hubble made history in 2024 when it became the first company to establish a Bluetooth connection directly to a satellite. The startup’s proposition is compelling: Instead of needing to buy specialized hardware, customers will only need to integrate their devices’ chipsets with a piece of firmware to enable connection to the Hubble network. 

    The benefits of the space-based network are massive, Hubble argues: It can provide visibility across the globe, including in remote areas, and offers a developer-friendly way to let companies track assets without building any additional infrastructure. 

    The company currently has seven spacecraft on orbit with a target of having 60 satellites in operation by 2028. The long-term goal is to upgrade the entire constellation to the larger platform buses because of their power and performance upgrades, Haro said. 

    Techcrunch event

    Tech and VC heavyweights join the Disrupt 2025 agenda

    Netflix, ElevenLabs, Wayve, Sequoia Capital, Elad Gil — just a few of the heavy hitters joining the Disrupt 2025 agenda. They’re here to deliver the insights that fuel startup growth and sharpen your edge. Don’t miss the 20th anniversary of TechCrunch Disrupt, and a chance to learn from the top voices in tech — grab your ticket now and save up to $600+ before prices rise.

    Tech and VC heavyweights join the Disrupt 2025 agenda

    Netflix, ElevenLabs, Wayve, Sequoia Capital — just a few of the heavy hitters joining the Disrupt 2025 agenda. They’re here to deliver the insights that fuel startup growth and sharpen your edge. Don’t miss the 20th anniversary of TechCrunch Disrupt, and a chance to learn from the top voices in tech — grab your ticket now and save up to $675 before prices rise.

    San Francisco
    |
    October 27-29, 2025

    REGISTER NOW

    It’s an aggressive schedule, but Haro added that one reason Hubble chose to partner with Muon is the latter’s ability to rapidly scale manufacturing to hit this goal, despite being a young company. (A recent $146 million funding round should help.) Gregory Smirin, president of Muon Space, told TechCrunch that the company’s San Jose production facility is being built out to support production of over 500 spacecraft per year by 2027. 

    Hubble is the first customer for the 500 kilogram-class MuSat XL satellite platform, which Muon says can provide multi-kilowatt power to payloads, optical crosslinks, high-volume downlink, and “near real-time” communications for time-sensitive missions. The partnership also signals a bigger push by the company to compete for more lucrative contracts with the Department of Defense. 

    The XL platform “is a perfect size and capability for SDA Tranche missions,” Smirin said, referring to the Space Development Agency’s initiative to build out a missile defense constellation in low Earth orbit. “XL reflects both the evolution of our technical stack and our growing role in delivering the kind of multi-mission spacecraft that programs like SDA increasingly rely on.”

    Muon’s business model can be thought of as space-as-a-service: The company designs, builds, and operates satellites using a vertically integrated stack of hardware and software. The stack, called Halo, is meant to open up space access for companies with promising payloads but no interest in building the underlying satellite architecture. In practice, that means Hubble can focus on developing the BLE network while Muon handles the satellite platforms and mission operations.