Month: June 2019

Claire Stapleton, a longtime Google employee who helped organize a 20,000-person walkout of Google employees last November over the company’s handling of sexual harassment allegations, announced today on Medium that she has left the outfit.

She cited her health, saying she is having another child this fall. But she also said the move ties to retaliation she has alleged she faced after helping stage the walkout, writing: “I made the choice after the heads of my department branded me with a kind of scarlet letter that makes it difficult to do my job or find another one. If I stayed, I didn’t just worry that there’d be more public flogging, shunning, and stress, I expected it.”

Stapleton — who joined Google in 2007 to work in global communications, later joining the Google Creative Writing Lab for just shy of two years before moving on YouTube, where she has focused on curation for the last five years —  said in April that she and fellow organizer Meredith Whittaker had faced retaliation from Google management following the walk-out.

For her part, Stapleton posted on numerous internal Google mailing lists that two months after the protest, she was told she’d be demoted from her marketing manager job at YouTube and to lose half her reports. She said she then turned to human resources but that rather than find relief, the retaliation worsened.

“My manager started ignoring me, my work was given to other people, and I was told to go on medical leave, even though I’m not sick,” Stapleton wrote to her colleagues. A lawyer hired by Stapleton prompted the company to conduct an investigation and reverse her demotion, she said, but she added in writing that her work environment remained hostile and that “I consider quitting nearly every day.”

In leaving, Stapleton says she remains fond of Google, adding she still believes “this place is magic.” But she also traces how she arrived at such a public resignation.

I have such a simple, pure nostalgia around the years I spent at Google in Mountain View, 2007–2012, that it almost figures in my mind like a childhood — a blur of grass and sun. I used to go out of my way to check out a weekly dodgeball game (that was a thing then). I whizzed around campus on those primary-colored bikes. I dabbled in veganism. But the most potent sense-memory I have comes from five years’ worth of Fridays standing at the side of the stage in Charlie’s, half a beer deep, watching Larry and Sergey and TGIF in a kind of (half-a-beer-buzzed) state of rapture. Google’s lore, its leadership, its promise — the whole thing lit me up, filled me with a sense of purpose, of inspiration, of privilege to be here.

Fast forward a few years and I’d moved to New York, cycled through Creative Lab and landed at YouTube. As I neared the ten-year mark, my first boss, Sally Cole, who’d left Google many years before, joked that I was surely due for an existential crisis. But when I got back to work after having my son Malcolm in 2017, it wasn’t me who was having an existential crisis. It was Google itself. The world had changed, dramatically altering the context of our work and the magnitude of our decisions, especially at YouTube. Google’s always had controversies and internal debates, but the “hard things” had intensified, and the way leadership was addressing them suddenly felt different, cagier, less satisfying. It was the way that management answered the TGIF questions about the Andy Rubin payout–the sidestepping, the jokes, the total lack of accountability–that inspired me to call for the Walkout.

The walkout, which involved Google employees around the globe, was effective. One week later, Google said it would end its practice of forced arbitration for claims of sexual harassment or assault. CEO Sundar Pichai further told employees Google would overhaul its reporting processes for harassment and assault to provide more transparency to employees about incidents reported to the company, and that it would ratchet up the pressure on employees who do not complete updated and mandatory sexual harassment training by dinging them in their in their performance reviews.

The protest followed an explosive New York Times investigation last year that reported Google had protected Android cofounder Andy Rubin after he had been “credibly accused of sexual harassment.” Instead of fire him, said the Times, the company handed him a $90 million exit package, paid in installments of about $2 million a month for four years.

Rubin has strongly denied the claims.

Google has more recently said it will no longer force employees to settle disputes with the company in private arbitration, expanding on that earlier pledge to do away with the practice in cases relating to sexual harassment or assault.

In closing her Medium post, Stapleton writes that it is her “greatest hope in leaving that people continue to speak up and talk to each other, stand up for one another and for what’s right, and keep building the collective voice.

I hope that leadership listens. Because if they won’t lead, we will.”

One of the bigger security announcements from Apple’s Worldwide Developer Conference this week is Apple’s new requirement that app developers must implement the company’s new single sign-on solution, Sign In with Apple, wherever they already offer another third-party sign-on system.

Apple’s decision to require its button in those scenarios is considered risky — especially at a time when the company is in the crosshairs of the U.S. Department of Justice over antitrust concerns. Apple’s position on the matter is that that it wants to give its customers a more private choice.

From a security perspective, Apple offers a better option for both users and developers alike compared with other social login systems which, in the past, have been afflicted by massive security and privacy breaches.

Apple’s system also ships with features that benefit iOS app developers — like built-in two-factor authentication support, anti-fraud detection, and the ability to offer a one-touch, frictionless means of entry into their app, among other things.

For consumers, they get the same fast sign-up and login as with other services, but with the knowledge that the apps aren’t sharing their information with an entity they don’t trust.

Consumers can also choose whether or not to share their email with the app developer.

If customers decide not to share their real email, Apple will generate a random — but real and verified — email address for the app in question to use, then will route the emails the app wants to send to that address. The user can choose to disable this app email address at any time like — like if they begin to get spam, for example.

The ability to create disposable emails is not new — you can add pluses (+) or dots (.) in your Gmail address, for example, to set up filters to delete emails from addresses that become compromised. Other email providers offer similar features.

However, this is the first time a major technology company has allowed customers to not only create these private email addresses for sign-ins to apps  — but to also disable those addresses at any time if they want to stop receiving emails to them.

Despite the advantages to the system, the news left many wondering how the new Sign In with Apple button would work, in practice, at a more detailed level. We’ve tried to answer some of the more burning questions to common questions. There are likely many more questions that won’t be answered until the system goes live for developers and Apple updates its App Review Guidelines, which are its hard-and-faste rules for apps that decide entry into the App Store.

1) What information does the app developer receive when a user chooses Sign In with Apple?

The developer only receives the user’s name associated with their Apple ID, the user’s verified email address — or the random email address that routes email to their inbox, while protecting their privacy — and a unique stable identifier that allows them to set up the user’s account in their system.

Unlike Facebook, which has a treasure trove of personal information to share with apps, there are no other permissions settings or dialog boxes with Apple’s sign in that will confront the user with having to choose what information the app can get access to. (Apple would have nothing more to share, anyway, as it doesn’t collect user data like birthday, hometown, Facebook Likes or a friend list, among other things.)

2) Do I have to sign up again with the app when I get a new iPhone or switch over to use the app on my iPad?

No. For the end user, the Sign In with Apple option is as fast as using the Facebook or Google alternative. It’s just a tap to get into the app, even when moving between Apple devices.

3) Does Sign In with Apple work on my Apple Watch? Apple TV? Mac? 

Sign In with Apple works across all Apple devices — iOS/iPadOS devices (iPhone, iPad and iPod touch), Mac, Apple TV, and Apple Watch.

4) But what about Android? What about web apps? I use my apps everywhere!

There’s a solution, but it’s not quite as seamless.

If a user signs up for an app on their Apple device — like, say, their iPad — then wants to use the app on a non-Apple device, like their Android phone, they’re sent over to a web view.

Here, they’ll see a Sign In with Apple login screen where they’ll enter their Apple ID and password to complete the sign in. This would also be the case for web apps that need to offer the Sign In with Apple login option.

This option is called Sign In with Apple JS as it’s Javascript-based.

(Apple does not offer a native SDK for Android developers, and honestly, it’s not likely to do so any time soon.)

5) What happens if you tap Sign In with Apple, but you forgot you already signed up for that app with your email address?

Sign In with Apple integrates with iCloud Keychain so if you already have an account with the app, the app will alert you to this and ask if you want to log in with your existing email instead. The app will check for this by domain (e.g. Uber), not by trying to match the email address associated with your Apple ID — which could be different from the email used to sign up for the account.

6) If I let Apple make up a random email address for me, does Apple now have the ability to read my email?

No. For those who want a randomized email address, Apple offers a private email relay service. That means it’s only routing emails to your personal inbox. It’s not hosting them.

Developers must register with Apple which email domains they’ll use to contact their customers and can only register up to 10 domains and communication emails.

7) How does Sign In with Apple offer two-factor authentication?

On Apple devices, users authenticate with either Touch ID or Face ID for a second layer of protection beyond the username/password combination.

On non-Apple devices, Apple sends a 6-digit code to a trusted device or phone number.

8) How does Sign In with Apple prove I’m not a bot?

App developers get access to Apple’s robust anti-fraud technology to identify which users are real and which may not be real. This is tech it has built up over the years for its own services, like iTunes.

The system uses on-device machine learning and other information to generate a signal for developers when a user is verified as being “real.” This is a simple bit that’s either set to yes or no, so to speak.

But a “no” doesn’t mean the user is a definitely a bot — they could just be a new user on a new device. However, the developer can take this signal into consideration when providing access to features in their apps or when running their own additional anti-fraud detection measures, for example.

9) When does an app have to offer Sign In with Apple?

Apple is requiring that its button is offered whenever another third-party sign-in option is offered, like Facebook’s login or Google. Note that Apple is not saying “social” login though. It’s saying “third-party” which is more encompassing.

This requirement is what’s shocking people as it seems heavy-handed.

But Apple believes customers deserve a private choice which is why it’s making its sign-in required when other third-party options are provided.

But developers don’t have to use Sign In with Apple. They can opt to just use their own direct login instead. (Or they can offer a direct login and Sign In with Apple, if they want.)

10) Do the apps only have to offer Sign In with Apple if they offer Google and/or Facebook login options, or does a Twitter, Instagram or Snapchat sign in button count, too?

Apple hasn’t specified this is only for apps with Facebook or Google logins, or even “social” logins. Just any third party sign-in system. Although Facebook and Google are obviously the biggest providers of third-party sign-in services to apps, other companies including Twitter, Instagram and Snapchat have been developing their own sign-in options, as well.

As third-party providers, they too would fall under this new developer requirement.

11) Does the app have to put the Sign In with Apple button on top of the other options or else get rejected from the App Store?

Apple is suggesting its button is prominent.

The company so far has only provided design guidelines to app developers. The App Store guidelines which dictate the rules around App Store rejections won’t be updated until this Fall.

And it’s the design guidelines that say the Apple button should be on the top of a stack of other third-party sign-in buttons, as recently reported.

The design guidelines also say that the button must be the same size or larger than competitors’ buttons, and users shouldn’t have to scroll to see the Apple button.

But to be clear, these are Apple’s suggested design patterns, not requirements. The company doesn’t make its design suggestions a law because it knows that developers do need a degree of flexibility when it comes to their own apps and how to provide their own users with the best experience.

12) If the app only has users signing up with their phone number or just their email, does it also have to offer the Apple button?

Not at this time, but developers can add the option if they want.

13) After you sign in using Apple, will the app still make you confirm your email address by clicking a link they send you?

Nope. Apple is verifying you, so you don’t have to do that anymore.

14) What if the app developer needs you to sign in with Google, because they’re providing some sort of app that works with Google’s services, like Google Drive or Docs, for example? 

This user experience would not be great. If you signed in with Apple’s login, you’d then have to do a second authentication with Google once in the app.

It’s unclear at this time how Apple will handle these situations, as the company hasn’t offered any sort of exception list to its requirement, nor any way for app developers to request exceptions. The company didn’t give us an answer when we asked directly.

It may be one of those cases where this is handled privately with specific developers, without announcing anything publicly. Or it may not make any exceptions at all, ever. And if regulators took issue with Apple’s requirement, things could change as well. Time will tell.

17) What if I currently sign in with Facebook, but want to switch to Sign In with Apple?

Apple isn’t providing a direct way for customers to switch for themselves from Facebook or another sign-in option to Apple ID. It instead leaves migration up to developers. The company’s stance is that developers can and should always offer a way for users to stop using their social login, if they choose.

In the past, developers could offer users a way to sign in only with their email instead of the third-party login. This is helpful particularly in those cases where users are deleting their Facebook accounts, for example, or removing apps’ ability to access their Facebook information.

Once Apple ID launches, developers will be able to offer customers a way to switch from a third-party login to Sign In with Apple ID in a similar way.

Do you have more questions you wish Apple would answer? Email me at sarahp@techcrunch.com

Exercise tech company Peloton filed confidentially for IPO this week, and already the big question is whether their last private valuation at $4 billion might be too rich for the appetites of public market investors. Here’s a breakdown of the pros and cons leading up to the as-yet revealed market debut date.

Risk factors

The biggest thing to pay attention to when it comes time for Peloton to actually pull back the curtains and provide some more detailed info about its customers in its S-1. To date, all we really know is that Peloton has “more than 1 million users,” and that’s including both users of its hardware and subscribers to its software.

The mix is important – how many of these are actually generating recurring revenue (vs. one-time hardware sales) will be a key gauge. MRR is probably going to be more important to prospective investors when compared with single-purchases of Peloton’s hardware, even with its premium pricing of around $2,000 for the bike and about $4,000 for the treadmill. Peloton CEO John Foley even said last year that bike sales went up when the startup increased prices.

Hardware numbers are not entirely distinct from subscriber revenue, however: Per month pricing is actually higher with Peloton’s hardware than without, at $39 per month with either the treadmill or the bike, and $19.49 per month for just the digital subscription for iOS, Android and web on its own.

That makes sense when you consider that its classes are mostly tailored to this, and that it can create new content from its live classes which occur in person in New York, and then are recast on-demand to its users (which is a low-cost production and distribution model for content that always feels fresh to users).

Using less than $8 and thirteen hours of training time, researchers from the United Nations were able to develop a program that could craft realistic seeming speeches for the United Nations’ General Assembly.

The study, first reported by MIT’s Technology Review, is another indication that the age of deepfakes is here and that faked texts could be just as much of a threat as fake videos. Perhaps more, given how cheap they are to produce.

For their experiment, Joseph Bullock and Miguel Luengo-Oroz created a taxonomy for the machine learning algorithms using English language transcripts of speeches given by politicians at the UN General Assembly between 1970 and 2015.

The goal was to train a language model that can generate text in the style of the speeches on topics ranging from climate change to terrorism.

According to the researchers, their software was able to generate 50 to 100 words per topic simply based off of one or two sentences of input with a given headline topic.

The goal was to show how realistically the software could reproduce a realistic sounding speech on either a general topic, or a specific statement from a Secretary General of the UN, and finally if the software could include digressions on politically sensitive topics.

Somewhat reassuringly, the wonkier or drier the subjects were, the better the algorithms performed. In roughly 90% of cases the program was able to generate text that could believably have come from a speaker at the General Assembly on a general political topic or related to a specific issue addressed by the Secretary General. The software had a harder time dealing with digressions on sensitive topics like immigration or racism, because the data couldn’t mimic effectively that kind of speechifying.

And all that this software took to create was $7.80 and thirteen hours of programming time.

The authors themselves note the profound implications textual deepfakes can have in politics.

They write:

The increasing convergence and ubiquity of AI technologies magnify the complexity of the challenges they present, and too often these complexities create a sense of detachment from their potentially negative implications. We must, however, ensure on a human level that these risks are assessed. Laws and regulations aimed at the AI space are urgently required and should be designed to limit the likelihood of those risks (and harms). With this in mind, the intent of this work is to raise awareness about the dangers of AI text generation to peace and political stability, and to suggest recommendations relevant to those in both the scientific and policy spheres that aim to address these challenges.

Synapse, a San Francisco-based startup that operates a platform enabling banks and fintech companies to easily develop financial services, has closed a $33 million Series B to develop new products and go after international expansion.

The investment was led by Andreessen Horowitz with participation from existing backers Trinity Ventures and Core Innovation Capital . Synapse — which recently rebranded (slightly) from ‘SynapseFi’ — announced a $17 million Series A back in September 2018 so this deal takes it to $50 million raised to date.

The startup was founded in 2014 by Bryan Keltner and India-born CEO Sankaet Pathak, who came to the U.S. to study but grew frustrating at the difficulty of opening a bank account without U.S. social security history. Inspired by his struggles, Synapse, which operated under the radar prior to that Series A deal, is focused on democratizing financial services.

Its approach to doing that is a platform-based one that makes it easy for banks and other financial companies to work with developers. The current system for working with financial institutions is frankly a mess; it involves a myriad of different standards, interfaces, code bases and other compatibility issues that cause confusion and consume time. Through developer- and bank-facing APIs, Synapse aims to make it easier for companies to connect with banks, and, in turn, for banks to automate and extend their back-end operations.

Pathak previously told us the philosophy is a “Lego brick” approach to building services. Its modules and services include payment, deposit, lending, ID verification/KYC, card issuance and investment services.

“We want to make it super easy for developers to build and scale financial products and we want to do that across the spectrum of financial products,” he told TechCrunch in an interview this week.

“We don’t think Bank Of America, Chase and Wells Fargo will be front and center” of new fintech, he added. “We want to make it really easy for internet companies to distribute financial services.”

The product development strategy is to add “pretty much anything that we think would be an accelerant to democratizing financial services for everyone,” he explained. “We want to make these tools and features available for developers.”

Interestingly, the company has a public product roadmap — the newest version is here.

The concept of an ‘operating system for banking’ is one that resonates with the kind of investment thesis associated with A16z, and Pathak said the firm was “number one” on his list of target VCs.

With more than half of that Series A round still in the bank, Pathak explained that the Series B is less about money and more around finding “a partner who can help us on the next phase, which is very focused on expansion.”

As part of the deal, Angela Strange — A16z’s fintech and enterprise-focused general partner — has joined the startup’s board. Strange, whose portfolio includes Branch, described Synapse as “the AWS of banking” for its potential to let anyone build a fintech company, paralleling the way Amazon’s cloud services let anyone, anywhere develop and deploy a web service.

Having already found a product market fit in the U.S. — where its tech reaches nearly three million end users, with five million API requests daily — Synapse is looking overseas. The first focuses are Canada and Europe, which it plans to launch in before the end of the year with initial services including payments and deposits/debit card issuance. Subsequently, the plan is to add lending and investment products next year.

Further down the line, Pathak said he is eager to break into Asia and, potentially, markets in Latin America and Africa, although expansions aren’t likely until 2020 at the earliest. Once things pick up, though, the startup is aiming to enter two “key” markets per year alongside one “underserved” one.

“We’ve been preparing for [global expansion] for a while,” he said, pointing out that the startup has built key tech in-house, including computer vision capabilities.

“Our goal is to be in every country that’s not at war or under sanction from the U.S,” Pathak added.

At home, the company is looking to add a raft of new services for customers. That includes improvements and new features for card issuance, brokerage accounts, new areas for its loans product, more detailed KYC and identification and a chatbot platform.

Outside of product, the company is pushing to make its platform a self-service one to remove friction for developers who want to use Synapse services, and there are plans to launch a seed investment program that’ll help Synapse developer partners connect with investors. Interesting, the latter platform could see Synapse join investment rounds by offering credit for its services.

More generally on financial matters, the Synapse CEO said the company reached $12 million ARR last year. This year, he is aiming to double that number through growth that, he maintains, is sustainable.

“If we stop hiring, we could break even and be profitable in three to four months,” said Pathak. “I like to keep the burn like that… it stabilizes us as a company.”

Walmart on Friday announced plans for a new, in-home grocery delivery service which would allow the retailer to deliver items directly to a customer’s fridge or freezer, even when the customer isn’t home. The service, called InHome Delivery, works by way of smart entry technology combined with proprietary cameras worn by the delivery associates that let the customer closely watch the delivery take place.

As Walmart explains, the goal is to make it easier to shop for groceries online. Unlike packages, fresh, cold and frozen groceries can’t be left on the doorstep for hours.

That means customers have to take care to schedule grocery delivery for times they are home — and that’s not always convenient, because they may get home late at night, or have a sleeping baby they don’t want to wake, or don’t know their upcoming schedule, among other reasons. Or perhaps they just don’t want to or have time to deal with having to shop and put groceries away.

Walmart’s service would give them an alternative.

To use the InHome service when it becomes available, Walmart customers will shop online for groceries as they would normally, and then select the “InHome Delivery” at checkout and a day they want their order to arrive. At the time of delivery, the Walmart associate will use a smart entry device and will wear a camera device that Walmart describes only as proprietary technology.

This means customers don’t have to buy their own security camera system to take advantage of the service, as they would with Amazon’s keyless entry system, Key by Amazon, which requires customers have an Amazon Cloud Cam and a smart lock.

Walmart has not yet disclosed what sort of “smart entry” technology will be required — only that customers will be able to purchase a supported lock from Walmart. The smart lock function will work by way of a mobile app.

Customers can also watch the video of the delivery on their phone.

Above: Customer watching a delivery (mockup)

The service will initially launch this fall for over 1 million customers across three cities: Kansas City, Missouri; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; and Vero Beach, Florida, says Walmart. It’s not detailing plans for a wider rollout at this time because — like many of Walmart’s new efforts — the company tests the technology and learns from feedback before deciding to make a service more broadly available.

This isn’t the first time that Walmart has tested keyless entry systems, however. The company in 2017 teamed up with smart lock maker August on a similar effort, where delivery pros could enter the home to drop off packages or put away cold groceries. Earlier this year, Walmart said the partnership with August had ended, related to Walmart’s ending of its work with delivery partner Deliv.

However, it’s likely the retailer also learned from these earlier efforts that customers are undeniably anxious about allowing people into their homes when they’re not around. On this point, Walmart notes that the delivery personnel will be Walmart-trained associates — not delivery pros from a third-party, like Deliv. These associates will learn how to organize food in the refrigerator as well as how to “enter customers’ homes with the same care and respect with which they would treat a friend’s or family’s home,” says Walmart U.S. eCommerce CEO Marc Lore.

They’ll also have worked with a Walmart store for at least a year before being allowed to take a grocery delivery job.

Walmart is on track to offer grocery pickup in 3,100 stores and same-day grocery delivery from 1,600 stores by year-end, it says.

Its move to leverage its brick-and-mortar footprint with an early focus on grocery pickup, has allowed the retailer to familiarize customers with the process of shopping online for groceries from Walmart.

Amazon, by comparison, doesn’t have a unified grocery solution. Instead, it offers AmazonFresh in some markets; Whole Foods pickup and delivery in others (but not all); and in some metros, customers can order from local grocers through Prime Now. The lack of cohesion could end up being an issue for Amazon, as it’s not directing customers to a single place for everything grocery, as Walmart does with grocery.walmart.com and its dedicated app.

If you ask Eugenio Pace to describe himself, “engineer” would be fairly high on the list.

“Being a CEO is pretty busy,” he told TechCrunch in a call last week. “But I’m an engineer in my heart — I am a problem solver,” he said.

Pace, an Argentinan immigrant to the U.S., founded identity management company Auth0 in 2013 after more than a decade at Microsoft. Auth0, pronounced “auth-zero,” has been described as like Stripe for payments or Twilio for messaging. App developers can add a few lines of code and it immediately gives their users access to the company’s identity management service.

That means the user can securely log in to the app without building a homebrew username and password system that’s invariably going to break. Any enterprise paying for Auth0 can also use its service to securely logon to the company’s internal network.

“Nobody cares about authentication, but everybody needs it,” he said.

Pace said Auth0 works to answer two simple questions. “Who are you, and what can you do?” he said.

“Those two questions are the same regardless of the device, the app, or whether if I’m an employee of somebody or if I am an individual using an app, or if I am using a device where there’s no human attached to it,” he said.

Whoever the users are, the app needs to know if the person using the app or service is allowed to, and what level of access or functionality they can get. “Can you transfer these funds?,” he said. “Can you approve these expense reports? Can you open the door of my house?” he explained.

Pace left Microsoft in 2012 and founded Auth0 during the emergence of Azure, which transformed Microsoft from a software giant into a cloud company. It was at Microsoft where he found identity management was one of the biggest headaches for developers moving their apps to the cloud. He wrote book after book, and edition after edition. “I felt like I could keep writing books about the problem — or I can just solve the problem,” he said.

So he did.

Instead of teaching developers how to become experts in identity management, he wanted to give them the tools to employ a sign-on solution without ever having to read a book.

At an event on Friday, NASA laid out its plans for making the International Space Station a hub for commercial activity in low-Earth orbit. The agency has long planned to make the ISS a key anchor point for helping private business operate in space.

“We’re hear because the International Space Station is now open for business,” said NASA Lead Spokesperson Stephanie Schierholz at the conference outset. 20 companies joined NASA officials on stage to launch this new commercial ability to discuss the opportunities and plan.

Part of the plan includes allowing private astronauts to visit and stay on the ISS, travelling on US vehicles. It also includes allowing private business activities to take place on the ISS, including “in-space manufacturing,” marketing activities, healthcare research “and more,” NASA says.

NASA articulated a five-part plan that it says “doesn’t conflict” with government and public sector use of the ISS, but that stands to allow creative and varied revenue-generating opportunities for private actors. NASA’s goal overall is to become “one of many” users of the ISS and low-Earth orbit facilities, they agency said, and this should lead to benefits for tax payers, too.

Here’s NASA’s five-part plan as described at a high level today:

• Part one – NASA created an International Space Station Commercial Use pPolicy. It provides an initial supply or quota of resources including crew time, and cargo launch and return capabilities for purchase by private companies.
• Part two – Private astronauts can visit for up to two short duration per year, beginning early as 2020). Missions will be privately funded, dedicated commercial space flight and will have to use US spacecraft (including those being certified by the NASA crew space travel program like SpaceX’s Crew Dragon). NASA will lay out pricing for use of life support, crew supply, storage and data.
• Part three – The forward part of ISS Node 2 Harmony module available for first element of commercial destination. They characterized this as an initial step towards future commercial habitable modules in space. There’s a request for proposals coming on June 14 and NASA will select a first customer to award the port’s development by end of this fiscal year.
• Part four – NASA is developing plan to stimulate long-term commercial demand, and it’s starting by studying space manufacturing and regenerative medicine in particular. The agency is asking for white papers by June 15 and proposals by July 28.
• Part five – NASA has new white paper that articulates the minimum viable needs for long-term commercial operations in long-term orbit.

Lowering price for commercial transit is incredibly important to this plan overall and that came up repeatedly, and it seems like this is mostly a call to private entities to help solve these and other problems to make sure that commercialization is not only available, but also viable. Another piece of the plan is that long-term, over the next decade or so, private entities investing in the ISS can potentially replace it with a privately run space station, which would help address its eventual end-of-life replacement plans.

 

Hello and welcome back to Equity, TechCrunch’s venture capital-focused podcast, where we unpack the numbers behind the headlines.

Good news! Kate and Alex were both back in the studio this week. And even better news, the new TechCrunch studio is big and soundproof and pretty nice, really.

But enough about all of that, let’s get into the news. First, a rapid-fire look at some recent items:

• Thumbtack is raising a Series H at a flat valuation.
• Bird is acquiring Scoot, which is unsurprising and probably smart.
• Google is buying Looker and we don’t really have much to say about it other than its linear funding history is picture-perfect.
• And Mirror, the bike-free Peloton cognate, is raising money at a higher valuation.

From there we turned to four material topics. First up, the Peloton IPO news.

Everyone’s favorite fitness tech company is going public. We were expecting this, still, we’re excited. For now, all we have is a lousy press release announcing the IPO. Sit tight, the S-1 will come soon enough.

Next, we turned to a topic near and dear to the heart of this show: SoftBank’s Vision Fund. The second Vision Fund, to be precise. Rumors indicate the folks behind the first Vision Fund are having a harder time than expected nailing down new money for a sophomore vehicle.

If the second Vision Fund doesn’t come to be, what happens to late-stage startups? Those folks are dependent on huge chunks of cash and had gotten used to a new normal: large, late-stage funds doling out IPO-sized rounds to companies still too immature to go public. Without the promise of SoftBank’s money, might we see an uptick in IPOs? Or an increasing number of late-stage companies floundering for capital? Will everything fall apart?

Speaking of messes, the folks behind Social Capital that got left behind when their venture firm became a family office are back with something new. Tribe Capital is raising $150 million fund. Kate detailed the firm here but here’s the TL;DR, Tribe has hired a bunch of former Social Capital partners and they are essentially rebuilding Social Capital sans Chamath Palihapitiya.

Finally, the pace at which female-founded startups are reaching unicorn status is accelerating, big time. That’s good news. If the speed of new, female-founded unicorn creation continues at this pace, we’re in for some record results.

Oh and lastly, if you have a suggestion regarding who should come on Equity as a guest this summer, we’re taking tips at equitypod@techcrunch.com. Let us know.

NASA’s Mars Helicopter will be a key experimental craft when it comes to shaping what humanity’s future exploring the Red Planet looks like – when it launches aboard NASA’s Mars 2020 mission, it’ll head to Mars with the aim of testing the viability of flying heavier-than-air vehicles through another world’s atmosphere. After passing its most recent volley of tests, it’s now moving into the final stages of preparation ahead of the target July 2020 Mars launch.

The 4-pound, autonomous test helicopter will be carried above the Mars 2020 rover during the flight to the planet, before being deployed once the rover sets down in Mars’ Jezero Crater, on the target date of February 18, 2021, after its multi-month trip from Earth. The helicopter has a camera on board, as well as a solar panel to provide power. This version doesn’t have any other kinds of sensors or scientific instruments on board, but that’s because its entire reason for being is to determine whether or not a Mars drone is even a viable proposition. Future iterations could gain sensors to help gather data that hasn’t been possible with purely ground-based rovers.

So far, the Mars Helicopter has been tested in high-vibration environments that simulate launch and landing conditions, extreme temperatures like those found on the surface of Mars, and electrical and mechanical system integrity testing. Now, it’s had its solar panel installed and the rotors are being spun up, so there’s another round of stress and integrity testing to be done to ensure it’s ready for the real thing.

NASA’s Mars 2020 mission will span at minimum one Mars year, which lasts 687 Earth days, and includes a newly designed rover that is around the size of compact car, but features upgraded wheels and also a new core sampling drill for harvesting rock and soil samples not on the surface of the planet.