Category: UNCATEGORIZED

Four European apps which secure user data via end-to-end encryption, ProtonMail, Threema, Tresorit and Tutanota, have issued a joint-statement warning over recent moves by EU institutions that they say are setting lawmakers on a dangerous path to backdooring encryption.

End-to-end encryption refers to a form of encryption where the service provider does not hold keys to decrypt the data, thereby enhancing user privacy — as there’s no third party in the loop with the technical capability to access data in a decrypted form.

E2e encryption also boosts security by reducing the attack surface area around people’s data.

However growth in access to e2e encrypted services has, for some half decade or more, been flagged as an issue of concern for law enforcement. This is because it makes it harder for agencies to access decrypted data. Service providers served with a warrant for e2e encrypted user data will only be able to provided it in an unreadable form.

Last month the EU Council passed a resolution on encryption that’s riven with contradiction — calling for “security through encryption and security despite encryption” — which the four e2e app makers believe is a thinly veiled call to backdoor encryption.

The European Commission has also talked about seeking “improved access” to encrypted information, writing in a wide-ranging counter-terrorism agenda also published in December that it will “work with Member States to identify possible legal, operational, and technical solutions for lawful access” [emphasis its].

Simultaneously, the Commission has said it will “promote an approach which both maintains the effectiveness of encryption in protecting privacy and security of communications, while providing an effective response to crime and terrorism”. And it has made it clear there will be no ‘one silver bullet’ as regards the e2e encryption security ‘challenge’.

But such caveats are doing nothing to alleviate the concerns of e2e encrypted app makers — who are convinced proposals from the Council of the EU, which is involved in adopting the bloc’s laws (though the Commission usually drafts legislation), sums to an push toward backdoors.

“While it’s not explicitly stated in the resolution, it’s widely understood that the proposal seeks to allow law enforcement access to encrypted platforms via backdoors,” the four app makers write, going on to warn that such a move would fatally underline the security EU institutions also claim to want to maintain.

“The resolution makes a fundamental misunderstanding: Encryption is an absolute, data is either encrypted or it isn’t, users have privacy or they don’t,” they go on. “The desire to give law enforcement more tools to fight crime is obviously understandable. But the proposals are the digital equivalent of giving law enforcement a key to every citizen’s home and might begin a slippery slope towards greater violations of personal privacy.”

They point out that any move to break e2e encryption in Europe would run counter to the global rise in interest in robustly encrypted services — pointing to the recent surge in sign-ups for apps like Signal as a result of mainstream privacy concerns attached to Facebook-owned WhatsApp.

Europe has also been ahead of the curve globally in legislating to protect privacy and security. So it would be quite the U-turn for EU lawmakers to line up to poke holes in e2e encryption. (Which, for example, EU data protection regulators are simultaneously recommending be used in order to legally secure transfers of personal data out of the bloc to third countries where it might be at risk).

To say there are ideological contradictions in the EU pushing in an anti-encryption direction is a massive understatement. Even as the contents of current communiques coming out of Brussels on this topic read as if they’re inherently conflicted — which may in fact be a recognition that squaring this circle is no simple policy proposition.

The app makers also pick up on that. “People around the world are taking back control of their privacy, and often it’s European companies helping them do it. It seems illogical that policy makers in the EU would now push for laws that fly in the face of public opinion and undermine a growing European technology sector,” they write.

In an individual quotation from the joint-statement, Andy Yen, CEO and founder of ProtonMail, a Swiss end-to-end encrypted email service, warns against complacency in the face of the latest seeming push for a legal framework to perforate encryption.

“This is not the first time we’ve seen anti-encryption rhetoric emanating from some parts of Europe, and I doubt it will be the last. But that does not mean we should be complacent,” he said. “Put simply, the resolution is no different from the previous proposals which generated a wide backlash from privacy conscious companies, civil society members, experts and MEPs.

“The difference this time is that the Council has taken a more subtle approach and avoided explicitly using words like ‘ban’ or ‘backdoor’. But make no mistake, this is the intention. It’s important that steps are taken now to prevent these proposals going too far and keep European’s rights to privacy intact.”

Martin Blatter, CEO of end-to-end encrypted instant messaging app Threema, also argues that EU lawmakers risk kneecapping homegrown startups if they seek to push ahead with legislation to force European vendors to bypass or deliberately weaken e2e encryption.

“[It] would not only destroy the European IT startup economy, it would also fail to provide even one bit of additional security,” he warned. “Joining the ranks of the most notorious surveillance states in this world, Europe would recklessly abandon its unique competitive advantage and become a privacy wasteland.”

Also chipping in, Istvan Lam, co-founder and CEO of Tresorit, an e2e encrypted file sync & sharing service, argues that any moves to weaken encryption would seriously undermine trust in services — as well as being “irreconcilable with the EU’s current stance on data privacy”.

“We find this resolution especially alarming given the EU’s previously progressive views on data protection. The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the EU’s globally recognized model for data protection legislation, explicitly advocates for strong encryption as a fundamental technology to ensure citizens’ privacy,” he said, adding: “The current and proposed approaches are at complete odds with each other, as it is impossible to guarantee the integrity of encryption while providing any kind of targeted access to the encrypted data.”

While Arne Möhle, co-founder of Tutanota, a German e2e encrypted email provider, says any push to backdoor encryption would be a disaster for security — which actually risks helping criminals.

“Every EU citizen needs encryption to keep their data safe on the web and to protect themselves from malicious attackers,” he said. “With the latest attempt to backdoor encryption, politicians want an easier way to prevent crimes such as terrorist attacks while disregarding an entire range of other crimes that encryption protects us from: End-to-end encryption protects our data and communication against eavesdroppers such as hackers, (foreign) governments, and terrorists.”

“By demanding encryption backdoors, politicians are not asking us to choose between security and privacy. They are asking us to choose no security,” he added.

A fight looks to be brewing in Europe over what exactly the Council’s contradictory edict on ensuring “security through encryption and security despite encryption” will shake out to. But it seems clear that any push toward backdoors would mobilize major regional opposition — as well as being an unattractive option for EU policymakers because it would face legal challenge under the region’s jurisprudence.

The Commission recognizes this complexity. Its counter-terrorism agenda is also notably wide-ranging. There’s certainly no suggestion that it believes e2e encryption is a sole nut that must be cracked. EU institutions are pushing across a number of fronts here, not least because a bunch of fundamental red lines limit wiggle room for non-targeted interventions.

What comes out of the Council’s resolution may therefore be a concerted push to upskill police in areas relevant to investigations (such as digital forensics and metadata analysis). And perhaps create structures for local or state level forces across the bloc to access more powerful security service technical competences for furthering targeted investigations (e.g. device hacking). Rather than an EU-level order blasted at e2e encryption vendors to mandate a universal key escrow ‘solution’ (or similar) — indiscriminately risking everyone’s security and privacy.

But it’s certainly one to watch.

Four European apps which secure user data via end-to-end encryption, ProtonMail, Threema, Tresorit and Tutanota, have issued a joint-statement warning over recent moves by EU institutions that they say are setting lawmakers on a dangerous path to backdooring encryption.

End-to-end encryption refers to a form of encryption where the service provider does not hold keys to decrypt the data, thereby enhancing user privacy — as there’s no third party in the loop with the technical capability to access data in a decrypted form.

E2e encryption also boosts security by reducing the attack surface area around people’s data.

However growth in access to e2e encrypted services has, for some half decade or more, been flagged as an issue of concern for law enforcement. This is because it makes it harder for agencies to access decrypted data. Service providers served with a warrant for e2e encrypted user data will only be able to provided it in an unreadable form.

Last month the EU Council passed a resolution on encryption that’s riven with contradiction — calling for “security through encryption and security despite encryption” — which the four e2e app makers believe is a thinly veiled call to backdoor encryption.

The European Commission has also talked about seeking “improved access” to encrypted information, writing in a wide-ranging counter-terrorism agenda also published in December that it will “work with Member States to identify possible legal, operational, and technical solutions for lawful access” [emphasis its].

Simultaneously, the Commission has said it will “promote an approach which both maintains the effectiveness of encryption in protecting privacy and security of communications, while providing an effective response to crime and terrorism”. And it has made it clear there will be no ‘one silver bullet’ as regards the e2e encryption security ‘challenge’.

But such caveats are doing nothing to alleviate the concerns of e2e encrypted app makers — who are convinced proposals from the Council of the EU, which is involved in adopting the bloc’s laws (though the Commission usually drafts legislation), sums to an push toward backdoors.

“While it’s not explicitly stated in the resolution, it’s widely understood that the proposal seeks to allow law enforcement access to encrypted platforms via backdoors,” the four app makers write, going on to warn that such a move would fatally underline the security EU institutions also claim to want to maintain.

“The resolution makes a fundamental misunderstanding: Encryption is an absolute, data is either encrypted or it isn’t, users have privacy or they don’t,” they go on. “The desire to give law enforcement more tools to fight crime is obviously understandable. But the proposals are the digital equivalent of giving law enforcement a key to every citizen’s home and might begin a slippery slope towards greater violations of personal privacy.”

They point out that any move to break e2e encryption in Europe would run counter to the global rise in interest in robustly encrypted services — pointing to the recent surge in sign-ups for apps like Signal as a result of mainstream privacy concerns attached to Facebook-owned WhatsApp.

Europe has also been ahead of the curve globally in legislating to protect privacy and security. So it would be quite the U-turn for EU lawmakers to line up to poke holes in e2e encryption. (Which, for example, EU data protection regulators are simultaneously recommending be used in order to legally secure transfers of personal data out of the bloc to third countries where it might be at risk).

To say there are ideological contradictions in the EU pushing in an anti-encryption direction is a massive understatement. Even as the contents of current communiques coming out of Brussels on this topic read as if they’re inherently conflicted — which may in fact be a recognition that squaring this circle is no simple policy proposition.

The app makers also pick up on that. “People around the world are taking back control of their privacy, and often it’s European companies helping them do it. It seems illogical that policy makers in the EU would now push for laws that fly in the face of public opinion and undermine a growing European technology sector,” they write.

In an individual quotation from the joint-statement, Andy Yen, CEO and founder of ProtonMail, a Swiss end-to-end encrypted email service, warns against complacency in the face of the latest seeming push for a legal framework to perforate encryption.

“This is not the first time we’ve seen anti-encryption rhetoric emanating from some parts of Europe, and I doubt it will be the last. But that does not mean we should be complacent,” he said. “Put simply, the resolution is no different from the previous proposals which generated a wide backlash from privacy conscious companies, civil society members, experts and MEPs.

“The difference this time is that the Council has taken a more subtle approach and avoided explicitly using words like ‘ban’ or ‘backdoor’. But make no mistake, this is the intention. It’s important that steps are taken now to prevent these proposals going too far and keep European’s rights to privacy intact.”

Martin Blatter, CEO of end-to-end encrypted instant messaging app Threema, also argues that EU lawmakers risk kneecapping homegrown startups if they seek to push ahead with legislation to force European vendors to bypass or deliberately weaken e2e encryption.

“[It] would not only destroy the European IT startup economy, it would also fail to provide even one bit of additional security,” he warned. “Joining the ranks of the most notorious surveillance states in this world, Europe would recklessly abandon its unique competitive advantage and become a privacy wasteland.”

Also chipping in, Istvan Lam, co-founder and CEO of Tresorit, an e2e encrypted file sync & sharing service, argues that any moves to weaken encryption would seriously undermine trust in services — as well as being “irreconcilable with the EU’s current stance on data privacy”.

“We find this resolution especially alarming given the EU’s previously progressive views on data protection. The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the EU’s globally recognized model for data protection legislation, explicitly advocates for strong encryption as a fundamental technology to ensure citizens’ privacy,” he said, adding: “The current and proposed approaches are at complete odds with each other, as it is impossible to guarantee the integrity of encryption while providing any kind of targeted access to the encrypted data.”

While Arne Möhle, co-founder of Tutanota, a German e2e encrypted email provider, says any push to backdoor encryption would be a disaster for security — which actually risks helping criminals.

“Every EU citizen needs encryption to keep their data safe on the web and to protect themselves from malicious attackers,” he said. “With the latest attempt to backdoor encryption, politicians want an easier way to prevent crimes such as terrorist attacks while disregarding an entire range of other crimes that encryption protects us from: End-to-end encryption protects our data and communication against eavesdroppers such as hackers, (foreign) governments, and terrorists.”

“By demanding encryption backdoors, politicians are not asking us to choose between security and privacy. They are asking us to choose no security,” he added.

A fight looks to be brewing in Europe over what exactly the Council’s contradictory edict on ensuring “security through encryption and security despite encryption” will shake out to. But it seems clear that any push toward backdoors would mobilize major regional opposition — as well as being an unattractive option for EU policymakers because it would face legal challenge under the region’s jurisprudence.

The Commission recognizes this complexity. Its counter-terrorism agenda is also notably wide-ranging. There’s certainly no suggestion that it believes e2e encryption is a sole nut that must be cracked. EU institutions are pushing across a number of fronts here, not least because a bunch of fundamental red lines limit wiggle room for non-targeted interventions.

What comes out of the Council’s resolution may therefore be a concerted push to upskill police in areas relevant to investigations (such as digital forensics and metadata analysis). And perhaps create structures for local or state level forces across the bloc to access more powerful security service technical competences for furthering targeted investigations (e.g. device hacking). Rather than an EU-level order blasted at e2e encryption vendors to mandate a universal key escrow ‘solution’ (or similar) — indiscriminately risking everyone’s security and privacy.

But it’s certainly one to watch.

The Model S will see some significant changes to its interior this year. After months of rumors, Tesla confirmed the revisions in a few images released just ahead of its quarterly earnings call scheduled for later this afternoon.

Some of the changes — like the shift to a widescreen display — are things that have made their way over from the Model 3. Others are entirely new.

(Update: Tesla has updated its website with refreshed ordering pages that indicate the Model X SUV will be getting the below revisions as well!)

Here’s what we’ve spotted so far:

An airplane-style steering “yoke” (similar to the one spotted in prototypes of Tesla’s new Roadster) instead of a standard round wheel.

Image Credits: Tesla

The front center screen is now a 17″ widescreen display, instead of a 17″ tall/portrait display. The resolution, meanwhile, is shifting from 1900×1200 to 2200×1300.

Image Credits: Tesla

In addition to the 12.3″ driver display above the steering yoke, there’s also now an 8″ display in the rear (presumably so passengers can more easily play the car’s built-in games in the back, as displayed.)

Image Credits: Tesla

Tesla’s earnings call is scheduled to start at 3:30pm Pacific. If they mention anything else changing about the interior, we’ll update this post.

IAC has acquired Confide, the encrypted mobile messaging that once made headlines for its use by White House staffers during the Trump administration. The deal, which closed on Dec. 1, 2020 but was not publicly announced, sees Confide joining Teltech, the makers of spam call-busting app Robokiller, which itself had joined IAC’s Mosaic Group by way of a 2018 acquisition.

Teltech confirmed the Confide acquisition, but declined to share the deal terms. The confidential mobile messaging app had raised just $3.5 million in funding, according to Crunchbase data, and had been valued between $10 to $50 million, as a result. (Pitchbook put the valuation at ~$14 million around the same time.)

According to Teltech, the deal was for the Confide IP and technology, but not the team.

The company believes Confide makes for a good fit among its growing group of mobile communication apps, including Robokiller and its latest app, SwitchUp, which offers users a second phone number for additional privacy and spam blocking purposes. Other Teletech apps include phone call recorder TapeACall and blocked call unmasker TrapCall.

Confide, however, may end up being one of the better-known additions among that group, thanks to being remembered as a favored tool of choice among frustrated Washington Republicans during the Trump years.

But despite the user growth that news had driven, things slowed in the months that followed, when researchers published a report that claimed Confide wasn’t as secure as it had promised. Confide quickly fixed its vulnerabilities but then a month later was facing a class action lawsuit (later dismissed by the plaintiff) over the security issues.

Teltech says it was aware of the security concerns, but it had conversations with the prior Confide team and understands that the earlier issues had been “quickly and effectively remediated.”

While IAC won’t speak to its specific plans for Confide’s future, the app will continue to offer users a safe and secure way to communicate. What it won’t do, though, is try to directly compete with Telegram or other private apps that offer large channels or group chats that support tens of thousands of people at once.

“I think one kind of key differentiators is that Confide is definitely more for one-on-one and smaller group communication, rather than with Signal and Telegram where there’s some larger chat dynamics,” notes Giulia Porter, Teltech’s VP of Marketing. “One thing that makes us a little bit different is just that we’re more personal,” she says.

Despite having hit some bumps in the road over the years, Confide as of the time of the acquisition, still had around 100,000 monthly active users. There’s now a team of around 10 assigned to work on the app, adding needed resources to its further development, and soon, an updated logo and branding.

Confide’s existing desktop and mobile apps will also continue to be available, but later updated with new features as part of Teltech’s efforts.

Investors and IAC alike have declined to talk about deal price, but that may speak for itself.

“With the absolute explosion in privacy over the past several years, Confide, which started as a side project, has become a mission-critical platform for sensitive communication throughout the world,” said Confide co-founder and President Jon Brod, in a statement shared with TechCrunch about Confide’s exit.

“We’re thrilled that IAC shares our passion for secure communication and recognizes the unique business we have built. IAC has a proven track record of providing fast-growing companies with the support to reach their full potential and we are excited to see IAC take Confide to the next level,” he said.

Squarespace announced this afternoon that it is going public. The online website creation and hosting service is a venture-backed entity, having raised Series A and B rounds in 2010 and 2014, respectively. Those deals were worth a combined $78.5 million, according to Crunchbase data.

But Squarespace is perhaps best known for its epic 2017-era $200 million secondary round that General Atlantic financed. A secondary round is a transaction in which an external party buys share from existing shareholders, instead of the company issuing new equity. Some private companies execute secondary transactions when they do not need additional capital, but are also not near a liquidity event.

The 2017 transaction fits well with the company’s now-impending 2021 IPO.

At the time TechCrunch reported that the company had revenues of around $300 million and that it was profitable.

By filing, Squarespace joins a growing list of companies pursuing the public markets in recent months. At the end of 2020 C3.ai, DoorDash and Airbnb listed. To kick off 2021, Affirm and Poshmark listed to great effect. Coinbase has filed, Robinhood is a hot IPO prospect, and now Squarespace is throwing its hat into the ring.

The Squarespace filing is private, which means that we are waiting for a future public S-1 from the company. Here’s its own words on the current state of affairs:

Squarespace, Inc. today announced that it has confidentially submitted a draft registration statement on Form S-1 with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). The registration statement is expected to become effective after the SEC completes its review process, subject to market and other conditions.

As Squarespace is a software company, a cloud company and a company with a hand in the e-commerce space, we can only presume that it will suffer from a stultifying lack of investor interest when it does file, price and list.¹ After all, we’ve not seen a hot software IPO for weeks.

Hat’s off to Squarespace for freeing us from the news doldrums. We’re going back to our nap now.

¹This is sarcasm.

On Wednesday, Apple announces that it had banked $111.4 billion of revenue in a single quarter, beating investor expectations and blowing past its previous all-time revenue record. Investors yawned with the stock down slightly in after-hours trading.

It’s a big number but it also bested analyst’s forecasts for Apple’s first quarter. Apple beat investor expectations on both earnings per share and revenues, delivering much more than the expected $103.3 billion in revenues and $1.68 EPS versus the $1.41 the Street had expected.

As meme stocks like GameStop and AMC see 100%+ stock gains, it’s a sober reminder that for the rest of the broader public market it’s business as usual and investors have big expectations for massive tech stocks that have seen their market caps and stock prices reach new heights in recent months.

Apple’s revenue gains represented 20 percent year-over-year revenue growth, but a big chunk of that growth came from a single region: China. Quarterly revenues in the region were up nearly 57% eclipsing $21.3 billion compared to $13.6 billion last year.

In terms of revenues via product vertical, iPhone of course reigned supreme with $65.6 billion in sales compared to $56 billion in sales during the same quarter last year. iPad sales growth exceeded that of Mac, nearly pushing the category above the other with $8.7 billion in Mac sales and $8.4 billion in iPad sales. Wearables, Home and Accessories grew to $13 billion and Services reached new heights at $15.8 billion.

While Facebook’s fourth quarter earnings report included solid user and revenue numbers, the company sounded a note of caution for 2021.

In the “CFO outlook” section of the earnings release, Facebook said it anticipates facing “more significant advertising headwinds” this year.

“This includes the impact of platform changes, notably iOS 14, as well as the evolving regulatory landscape,” the company wrote. “While the timing of the iOS 14 changes remains uncertain, we would expect to see an impact beginning late in the first quarter.”

Facebook has already been waging a bit of a campaign against Apple’s upcoming privacy changes, which will require app developers to ask users for permission in order to use their IDFA identifiers for ad targeting — although the PR focus has been the impact on small businesses, not Facebook.

Facecbook also highlighted two broad economic trends that it says has benefited from during the pandemic: The “ongoing shift towards online commerce” and “the shift in consumer demand towards products and away from services.” But again, it took a cautious stance, writing that “a moderation or reversal in one or both of these trends could serve as a headwind to our advertising revenue growth.”

As for those fourth quarter earnings earnings, Facebook reported $28.1 billion in revenue, of which $27.2 billion came from ads, with earnings per share of $3.88. Wall Street analysts had predicted EPS of $3.22 and revenue of $26.4 billon.

Facebook also reported an average of 1.84 billion daily active users and 2.80 billion monthly active users for the quarter, up 11% and 12% year-over-year, respectively.

“We had a strong end to the year as people and businesses continued to use our services during these challenging times,” said CEO Mark Zuckerberg in a statement. “I’m excited about our product roadmap for 2021 as we build new and meaningful ways to create economic opportunity, build community and help people just have fun.”

As of 4:45pm Eastern, Facebook shares were up 0.7% in after-hours trading.

The furor surrounding GameStop and its stock price has consumed social media, business television, and the hopes and dreams a many retail investors. It has even convinced some folks that causing short-term economic damage to a few hedge funds is similar to shaking up the global financial market.

It isn’t, but a lot of folks are doing some downright risky things with their personal capital all the same. And some of them are making those investments — bets, let’s be honest — on platforms that have lowered barriers to buying and selling stocks by cutting trading fees to zero. Apps and services like Robinhood, Public, M1 Finance, and Freetrade.

After noting reports that some traditional brokers were limiting access to GameStop and other so-called meme stocks, TechCrunch was curious what the newer, app-based investing services were doing for their own users.

A spokesperson for M1 Finance, a Midwest-based consumer fintech player that offers a basket of banking and investing services — more on its growth here and here — told TechCrunch via email that it wasn’t taking “specific” steps regarding individual stocks.

But the company also provided a statement from its CEO, Brian Barnes. In his comment, Barnes drew a delineation between investing, and trading, which he likened to a casino, adding that his firm “question[s] whether short-term trading is predictable, sustainable, or repeatable.”

It isn’t for nearly anyone, of course. Barnes went on to say that his company thinks that “ownership of great companies and assets at reasonable prices that compound for long periods of time is the most straightforward and repeatable way to build wealth,” and that they have focused their company more around that ethos, “forego[ing] the mania of the moment.”

Turning to the well-known Robinhood, an impressive 2020 growth story, TechCrunch asked the same question regarding warnings or other guardrails for users concerning certain equities.

In an email a Robinhood spokesperson directed TechCrunch to a comment that its CEO, Vlad Tenev, made on CNBC earlier today:

Like other brokerages do, we monitor volatility and we take steps as appropriate like raising the margin requirements. I do think it’s wrong to assume though that most of our activity is characterized by trading of volatile stocks. As I’ve said before, most of our customers are what’s called buy and hold. They deposit and buy over the long term.

Robinhood changed margin requirements for GameStop and AMC Entertainment to 100%, TechCrunch understands. And like M1, Robinhood doesn’t allow users to short equities. So, there’s that.

Something notable about the companies we are discussing is that not a one of them wants to be labeled as the place where folks like to trade a lot. Which amuses me as cutting fees to zero, which they have largely done, is at once a great way to democratize investing, and, also, a great way to encourage folks to trade more frequently. And as the apps and services that offer free trading often make money when users trade (read this), their chatter about their users being focused on buying and holding always rings slightly thin.

Anyhoo, some apps are going as far as adding warnings. Public, a company that TechCrunch recently covered, a spokesperson told TechCrunch that the company has added “‘High Risk’ safety labels” to the meme stocks that are causing so much ruckus.

As Public has long had a stated focus on building community over trading — which led to us having a question or two about when it is going to kickstart its monetization plans; the company did just hire a CFO, so more to come there we presume — which makes this move appear in concert with its general ethos.

And, finally, UK-based Freetrade. TechCrunch has covered the service before, making it a good company to rope into this group. Per the company, Freetrade restricts small-cap stocks to the subscription tier of its service, which should limit access amongst its user base to GameStop and other memetic equities.

The company also stressed that it does not offer options or “any other form of leveraged derivatives” and has made “huge investment in investor education and financial literacy.”

So there’s a general bent towards either building products that are not tuned for day-trading in silly stocks, or providing some protection against users’ worst instincts amongst the cohort of companies that have also made it inexpensive to trade. There’s tension there, akin to this.

But they can only do so much. People are dumb, and it’s not looking like that’s going to get much better anytime soon.

You’d be forgiven for being underwhelmed by the output from SoftBank Robotics thus far. The firm’s best-known product to date is almost certainly Pepper, a humanoid robot designed for greeting and signage that grew out of it 2015 acquisition of French robotics company, Aldebaran.

There’s also the matter of the investment firm’s acquisition and eventual sale of Boston Dynamics. The deal certainly went a ways toward accelerating the company’s go-to-market approach, but Boston Dynamics changed hands fairly quickly, when it was sold to Hyundai late last year (SoftBank maintains 20%).

The latest wrinkle in SoftBank’s robotic ambitions is nothing if not interesting. The firm announced today that it is joining forces with Iris Ohyama. The Japanese brand, which will hold a 51% stake in the venture (with SoftBank controlling the remainder), is best known for its home goods. The company makes a broad range of products, that includes, as Reuters put it, “everything from rice to rice cookers.”

You’ll be able to add robotics to that list, soon enough. The newly formed Iris Robotics has set an extremely aggressive goal of $965 million in sales by 2025. In a joint press release, the company noted Covid-19-related concerns as a major catalyst in the launch of the division. Certainly that makes strategic sense. There’s little question that the past year has kickstarted serious interest in robotics and automation.

The first couple of products from the venture don’t appear especially ambitious out of the gate, however. To start, it seems they’ll be rolling out “Iris Editions” of a pair of existing devices: Bear Robotics’ restaurant robot Servi and cleaning robot, Whiz.

Here’s a quote from SoftBank Robotics CEO (forgive the Google translate),

With the urgent need to realize the new normal in the corona virus, various new expectations are being placed on robots. This strong partnership with Iris Ohyama is a huge step forward for the expansion and penetration of robot solutions. Taking full advantage of the strengths of both companies, we will respond quickly to the challenges facing society.

Certainly the technical ambitions seem more modest than what the folks at companies like Boston Dynamics are currently working on, but Iris Ohyama seems well positioned to make some headway in the home robotics category to start.

In 2020, nearly $24 billion in venture capital poured into companies creating new technology products or innovative business models for the real estate market.

While things like smart home apps and digital mortgage financing services make life easier for upmarket renters and homeowners, none of these technologies help improve the day-to-day struggles of the vast majority of low-income families.

Many of these emergent technologies could be adapted to become “housing tech” solutions — focused on financial resilience, fresh food access, healthcare access and workforce development — which have the potential to transform the lives of our most at-risk populations.

Consider this: Nearly eight million Americans have slipped into poverty since May, according to a study released by Columbia University. Before the COVID-19 crisis hit, approximately half of all American households struggled to pay rent; a problem that is growing larger by the day as pandemic job losses continue to mount.

About 23.5 million people — half of whom are low income — live in food deserts where access to affordable, healthy food is limited or nonexistent. And good health care is almost impossible to access, let alone pay for, if you are poor.

As the global crisis continues to lay bare the deep inequities in our society, it’s clear that we need new ways of thinking to address these systemic issues. Investment in technology innovation in the affordable housing area could help solve these problems.

Local governments and nonprofits are doing what they can. In 2015, New York launched Urbantech NYC to uncover new technology solutions to urbanization problems faced by government, businesses and urban residents, tackling issues related to food, water, medicine, waste management and other problems.

In 2019, Enterprise Community Partners, a national nonprofit, partnered with MetaProp, a leading proptech venture capital firm, to invest in housing tech companies that are developing technology innovations to help families find an affordable place to live.

These efforts are commendable, but it is not enough. The housing tech movement needs more champions.

First, we need a more patient venture capital source, with a better understanding of underserved communities. Most venture capital firms fund what they know, and unfortunately few understand the affordable housing community, which is largely minority with female heads of household. But pay attention: There are lucrative opportunities here.

Affordable housing property managers tend to invest far more in social services for their tenant population than market rate property managers considering the coolest new piece of technology. You can make money while serving the public good.

Second, housing tech is in desperate need of an accelerator. The tech is out there, but most entrepreneurs don’t know how to “sell” to this specific customer base, which they must do if they want to create viable businesses that will attract venture capital. There are numerous existing technologies ready for an accelerator to take to the next level. These are a few of our favorites:

• Financial Resilience. Low-income people who live in affordable housing are often burdened with confiscatory payday loans and check-cashing services. Many don’t have banking relationships and pay rent in cash. The Lifesaver app helps households, especially those without banking relationships, navigate financial services and become more financially resilient. Earnin allows people to access their pay, with no fees, as soon as they work the hours without waiting for the payday to arrive. Research shows that people who take these short-term loans from nonpredatory lenders actually find themselves more financially stable in following months.
• Fresh Food Access. Cheetah, a wholesale grocery delivery app, has placed community fridges as fresh-food pantries. Via, a transit-on-demand provider, partnered with LA Metro and First 5 LA to subsidize food delivery during the pandemic, especially to women-led households with little children.
• Healthcare Access. Roundtrip provides booking for affordable nonemergency hailed rides, wheelchair vans and other specialized medical transports. Healthify offers a database of vetted and curated community resources, as well as information about the social determinants of health. Emerging software apps that facilitate telemedicine could also expand access to necessary health care.
• Workforce Development. Skilling America is a new workforce platform from Goodwill that improves placement, retention and promotion rates, and most people using the platform are doing so on their smartphones.

An accelerator could also connect housing tech to affordable housing owners and property managers looking for ways to magnify the impact of the social services available on site. The top 50 owners of affordable housing developments have the reach to connect tech developers with almost a million households.

These owners and property managers could act as leadership ambassadors of collaborative efforts among tech developers, venture capital investors and potential housing tech users.

We work every day with the inspiring stakeholders in the affordable housing community, as well as local governments and tech entrepreneurs looking to bridge this digital divide. This isn’t a pie- in-the-sky vision. The future is here and the call to action is now.