The tech industry is still reeling from massive workforce reductions in 2025. According to a comprehensive report by TechCrunch, over 22,000 employees have already been laid off this year, with February alone seeing more than 16,000 cuts.
Major players across the sector including Microsoft, Google, Intel, Amazon, Apple, and Rivian have announced waves of layoffs, citing automation, AI adoption, and restructuring as key drivers. Startups haven’t been spared either, with companies like GupShup, Bumble, and Eigen Labs reducing staff by significant percentages.
The layoffs span all areas of tech, from software engineering and AI research to sales and marketing, illustrating a sweeping recalibration of the industry amid economic pressures and technological shifts.
TechCrunch continues to maintain a live tracker of layoffs, offering insight into which companies are shrinking and how these changes could shape the future of tech innovation.
For the full breakdown of tech layoffs in 2025, see the original TechCrunch report here.
This week, both Apple and Google released urgent security updates after discovering active zero-day vulnerabilities that targeted an unknown number of users. The incidents highlight how even the largest tech companies remain vulnerable to sophisticated attacks, often originating from government-backed actors.
On Wednesday, Google patched several security flaws in its Chrome browser. One of the vulnerabilities was actively exploited before the company could release a fix, a scenario that is increasingly common in high-profile hacking campaigns. Initially, Google provided limited details, but later updates confirmed the discovery came from Apple’s security engineering team and Google’s Threat Analysis Group. These teams focus on tracking government hackers and mercenary spyware operators, suggesting that this campaign may have been coordinated at the state level.
Apple simultaneously issued updates for its iPhones, iPads, Macs, Apple Watches, Apple TV, Vision Pro, and Safari browser. According to Apple’s advisory, two zero-day flaws were patched on iOS devices. The company acknowledged that these vulnerabilities had likely been used in “extremely sophisticated attacks against specific targeted individuals” before iOS 26 was released.
Zero-day vulnerabilities are particularly dangerous because they are unknown to the software makers at the time of exploitation. Historically, such flaws have been used by government actors and companies like NSO Group and Paragon Solutions to deploy spyware against journalists, activists, and dissidents. These attacks often go unnoticed until security researchers or the companies themselves discover them.
The public disclosure raises broader questions about digital safety, personal data protection, and the role of private companies in defending users against state-level hacking. While patches prevent future exploitation, the affected users may have already been compromised, emphasizing the importance of layered cybersecurity practices such as frequent updates, strong passwords, and multifactor authentication.
Apple and Google have not commented beyond their advisories, leaving the scale of the attacks and the number of affected users unclear. For consumers, the incident serves as a reminder that vigilance is critical even with devices from some of the most secure technology providers in the world.
Protective Measures for Users:
Update devices and applications immediately after security patches are released
Enable multifactor authentication wherever possible
Monitor accounts for suspicious activity and unusual logins
Use strong, unique passwords and consider password managers for security
Related Laterstack Cybersecurity Stories
Exposed AI Image Database Raises Serious Privacy and Security Concerns
Credit Check Company 700Credit Exposes Personal Data of Over 5 Million Americans
Home Depot Exposed Internal Systems for a Year After Employee Leaked GitHub Token
For inquiries, tips, or submissions: hello@laterstack.com
In a quiet reminder of how vulnerable personal information remains, 700Credit, a Michigan-based company providing credit checks and identity verification services to auto dealerships, disclosed a data breach affecting at least 5.6 million people. The breach, discovered in October, exposed names, addresses, dates of birth, and Social Security numbers collected from May through October 2025.
The breach came to light after an unidentified actor accessed the company’s systems. According to 700Credit, the intrusion was limited to the application layer, and there is currently no evidence of identity theft or fraud. Still, the company has notified affected individuals and is offering credit monitoring services.
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel emphasized the urgency for residents to protect their information. “If you get a letter from 700Credit, do not ignore it. A credit freeze or monitoring can prevent fraud,” she said, urging residents to take immediate steps to secure their personal data.
Consumers are advised to monitor their credit reports frequently, update passwords, enable multifactor authentication, and watch for phishing attempts. Nessel’s office also highlighted the Michigan Identity Theft Support System, which provides guidance for restoring compromised identities and filing complaints when necessary.
700Credit has been coordinating with cybersecurity experts, the FBI, and the Federal Trade Commission to manage the situation. The company has also notified state attorneys general and continues to communicate directly with dealers. A dedicated hotline has been established for inquiries.
For those impacted, the steps to safeguard their identities include reviewing their financial accounts, freezing credit if necessary, and reporting suspicious activity. Experts say that even when breaches are contained, vigilance remains essential, as personal information can circulate in underground markets for months or years.
The incident serves as a reminder that as industries digitize, security protocols must keep pace with the scale of personal data being handled. Millions of Americans rely on credit verification services, yet these systems remain attractive targets for malicious actors, highlighting gaps in oversight and preparedness.
Related Laterstack Cybersecurity Stories
Home Depot Exposed Internal Systems for a Year After Employee Leaked GitHub Token
Exposed AI Image Database Raises Serious Privacy and Security Concerns
Google Confirms Hackers Stole Data From 200 Companies via Gainsight
For inquiries, tips, or submissions: hello@laterstack.com
President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Thursday, aiming to centralize AI regulation at the federal level and challenge state laws that impose varying rules on artificial intelligence. Titled “Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence,” the order directs federal agencies to set up task forces to identify and potentially contest state AI laws, with the Commerce Department given 90 days to evaluate rules considered “onerous.”
While the administration frames the order as a solution to the patchwork of state laws, legal experts warn it could leave startups in legal limbo. Companies navigating differing state and federal regulations may face extended court battles, creating uncertainty for small and mid-sized innovators who lack the resources to absorb legal risks.
The order instructs the Department of Justice to challenge state laws on the grounds that AI falls under interstate commerce. The Federal Trade Commission and Federal Communications Commission are tasked with exploring standards that could preempt state rules, while the administration encourages Congress to craft a uniform AI law.
Critics say the executive order may favor large tech firms, which have the funding to weather legal uncertainty, while startups and emerging AI companies face delays and compliance costs. Arul Nigam, co-founder of Circuit Breaker Labs, warned that smaller AI firms must navigate conflicting rules without clear guidance, slowing innovation.
“Big Tech and the big AI startups have the funds to hire lawyers or hedge their bets. The uncertainty hurts startups the most,” said Andrew Gamino-Cheong, CTO of AI governance company Trustible. He added that legal ambiguity could reduce adoption among risk-sensitive customers such as financial and healthcare institutions.
Supporters of a federal framework argue a single national standard could reduce complexity, but Gary Kibel, partner at Davis + Gilbert, cautioned that an executive order is not the proper vehicle to override state laws, potentially creating a regulatory “Wild West.” Meanwhile, organizations like The App Association urge Congress to act quickly to pass a comprehensive AI framework to avoid prolonged legal battles.
As state enforcement continues until courts intervene or Congress legislates, startups face a precarious balance between innovation and compliance, navigating a landscape where AI law remains uncertain.
Related Laterstack Tech Stories
For inquiries, tips, or submissions: hello@laterstack.com
A critical cybersecurity lapse at Home Depot allowed access to internal systems for roughly a year, after an employee mistakenly published a private GitHub access token online. Security researcher Ben Zimmermann discovered the exposure in early November 2025 and attempted to alert Home Depot privately, but the company initially did not respond.
The token, which had been exposed since early 2024, granted access to hundreds of private Home Depot repositories hosted on GitHub. According to Zimmermann, it provided full access to the company’s cloud infrastructure, including order fulfillment, inventory management, and code development pipelines.
Zimmermann noted that he reached out multiple times via email and even LinkedIn to Home Depot’s Chief Information Security Officer, Chris Lanzilotta, but received no response. The lack of a formal vulnerability disclosure or bug bounty program at Home Depot left the researcher with no official reporting channel. Ultimately, TechCrunch’s outreach prompted Home Depot to revoke the token and secure the exposed systems.
“Home Depot is the only company that ignored me,” Zimmermann told TechCrunch, contrasting the response from other firms who have thanked him for similar disclosures. The company has not commented on whether any unauthorized parties accessed internal systems during the exposure.
The incident highlights a growing issue in corporate cybersecurity: organizations increasingly rely on cloud-hosted development infrastructure, but many lack formal mechanisms to identify and remediate leaked credentials. Access tokens, if publicly available, can allow attackers to modify code, compromise operational systems, or disrupt critical workflows.
As companies continue to digitize operations and rely on GitHub and other developer platforms, establishing clear vulnerability reporting channels and proactive monitoring becomes essential. Home Depot’s delayed response underscores the risk when such protocols are absent.
Related Laterstack Cybersecurity Stories
For inquiries, tips, or submissions: hello@laterstack.com
id Software, the studio behind Doom, has voted in favor of forming a “wall-to-wall” union, a structure that covers every employee across the company. While not unanimous, a majority supported the unionization effort, signaling a notable shift in the video game industry’s labor landscape.
The new union will partner with the Communications Workers of America (CWA), which has previously worked with parent company ZeniMax on union initiatives. Microsoft, ZeniMax’s owner, has already recognized the effort, following a labor neutrality agreement made last year with CWA and ZeniMax employees.
“The wall-to-wall organizing effort at id Software was much needed; it’s incredibly important that developers across the industry unite to push back on all the unilateral workplace changes that are being handed down from industry executives,” said Andrew Willis, id Software producer and CWA committee member.
Key priorities for the union include protecting remote work policies. “Remote work isn’t a perk. It’s a necessity for our health, our families, and our access needs,” said Chris Hays, Lead Services Programmer at id Software. Hays also emphasized the importance of worker protections regarding the “responsible use of AI” in game development.
Workers began organizing roughly 18 months ago, a process accelerated by the mid-year closure of several Bethesda studios by Microsoft. CWA Local 6215 President Ron Swaggerty expressed optimism about negotiations, stating, “We look forward to sitting across the table from Microsoft to negotiate a contract that reflects the skill, creativity, and dedication these workers bring to every project.”
id Software’s latest title, Doom: The Dark Ages, recently won an accessibility award at The Game Awards, highlighting the studio’s commitment to inclusive gaming. The unionization marks a significant moment for the gaming industry, signaling growing momentum for labor rights in a sector historically resistant to organized labor.
This move is part of a broader trend in tech and gaming, where employees increasingly challenge top-down executive decisions and advocate for transparency, inclusion, and worker protections.
Related Laterstack Tech Stories
Reddit Challenges Australia’s Under-16 Social Media Ban in High Court
Louisiana Targets Sports Prediction Markets Amid Gambling Boom
Inside the Quiet Rise of Crypto Casinos and the New Gambling Wild West
For inquiries, tips, or submissions: hello@laterstack.com
Reddit has launched a legal challenge against Australia’s groundbreaking under-16 social media ban, filing suit in the nation’s High Court. The forum platform argues the law intrudes on constitutional protections for free political discourse and that Reddit itself should not fall under the definition of a “social media platform.”
The law, which took effect on December 10, 2025, requires ten major platforms to block underage users or face fines of up to A$49.5 million ($33 million). Platforms have been using measures such as activity-based age inference and selfies to enforce the rule. Reddit, however, claims the legislation raises serious privacy concerns and limits the ability of young citizens to engage with political communication before they reach voting age.
“Australian citizens under the age of 16 will, within years if not months, become electors,” Reddit noted in court filings. “The choices to be made by those citizens will be informed by political communication in which they engage prior to the age of 18.”
Government officials, including Health Minister Mark Butler, have dismissed the arguments, framing Reddit’s lawsuit as a corporate effort to protect profits rather than a defense of free speech. “It is action we saw time and time again by Big Tobacco against tobacco control and we are seeing it now by some social media or big tech giants,” Butler said.
With a market capitalization of $44 billion, Reddit has the resources to pursue a lengthy legal battle. Australia represents the company’s fourth-largest market after the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada, making the stakes particularly high.
The case could set a significant precedent for global tech regulation and the balance between protecting minors and ensuring political expression. While social media companies adapt to new age verification requirements, the legal system will have to navigate the nuanced intersection of technology, law, and civic engagement.
Related Laterstack Tech Stories
For inquiries, tips, or submissions: hello@laterstack.com
Louisiana is the latest state to push back against the rise of sports prediction markets, highlighting the regulatory tension between innovation and established gambling law. The Louisiana Gaming Control Board (LGCB) recently released a statement clarifying that sporting event contracts—and “certain other event contracts”—may be considered illegal under state law. This follows similar warnings from Washington State earlier this month.
Sports betting is legal in Louisiana, but oversight remains strict. Companies like Kalshi and Polymarket, which operate under federal guidance from the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), now face increased scrutiny at the state level. Regulators are concerned that these prediction markets could circumvent local gambling restrictions while operating within the federal framework.
Kalshi and Polymarket have benefited from expanding into sports contracts. In its first week of NFL-related betting, Kalshi reportedly earned more than the platform made during the entire previous presidential election betting season. That growth, however, has put state regulators on alert.
The LGCB’s advisory notice warns that any direct or indirect involvement in sporting event contracts could affect a licensee’s suitability for operation in Louisiana. In the statement, LGCB Chairman emphasized that the board considers such contracts—including those on federally regulated exchanges—as falling under Louisiana’s definition of illegal gambling.
“Event contracts based on the outcome or partial outcome of sporting or athletic events, or other selected events, are treated as illegal wagering,” the notice reads. “This applies regardless of whether the contract is listed on a CFTC-regulated exchange or elsewhere.”
The rapid rise of prediction markets highlights a broader tension in American culture: technology and innovation move faster than regulatory frameworks. While these markets offer new ways to engage with sports and financial speculation, they also challenge assumptions about legality, oversight, and responsibility. In the space between federal permission and state enforcement, players, investors, and companies are left to navigate gray areas with real financial consequences.
For Louisiana, the message is clear: state law remains a gatekeeper, even when technology suggests the rules could be bent. For the public, the story is a subtle reminder that regulatory innovation often lags behind technological ambition—and that skepticism, curiosity, and critical thinking are as valuable as any market prediction.
Related Laterstack Stories
For inquiries, tips, or submissions: hello@laterstack.com
The world’s most influential index provider is reconsidering what qualifies as a legitimate business in the age of digital assets—and the crypto industry is pushing back.
MSCI, whose indexes quietly guide trillions of dollars in institutional capital, is weighing whether to exclude companies that hold 50 percent or more of their assets in bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies. The proposal, first disclosed in October, could take effect as early as January.
At issue is whether so-called crypto treasury companies should be treated as operating businesses or as de facto investment funds. MSCI has suggested the latter. Many in crypto see something else entirely.
When exposure becomes exclusion
Companies that accumulate bitcoin on their balance sheets have become a distinct feature of the post-2020 market. Some frame the strategy as long-term conviction. Others treat it as a hedge against inflation or fiat risk. Either way, inclusion in major indexes has allowed traditional investors to gain indirect exposure to crypto without holding the assets themselves.
MSCI’s proposed rule would sever that link.
Executives at firms tied to digital assets warn that exclusion would force institutional investors to rebalance portfolios automatically, cutting off capital flows not because of business fundamentals, but because of classification.
Adam Levine, CEO of digital asset infrastructure firm Fireblocks Trust Company, compared the move to ignoring early internet companies because their balance sheets looked unfamiliar at the time. In his view, index providers risk sidelining innovation just as it begins to integrate with the broader economy.
The quiet power of index committees
Index decisions rarely make headlines, yet they shape markets more decisively than earnings calls or press releases. Pension funds, ETFs, and asset managers often follow indexes mechanically, without discretion.
That is what unsettles crypto advocates most.
If MSCI redraws the boundary around what qualifies as a “real” company, it effectively decides which technologies deserve institutional legitimacy and which remain speculative sidelines. The process is administrative, but the consequences are philosophical.
Crypto treasury firms argue they are not passive vehicles. Many operate software platforms, infrastructure services, or financial products. Bitcoin, they say, is not the business—it is the balance sheet strategy.
Volatility, risk, and narrative control
MSCI has defended its position by pointing to volatility. Crypto-heavy companies, it argues, behave more like funds than operating businesses, making index exposure potentially misleading for investors seeking diversified equity risk.
That argument resonates in a market still recovering from the aftershocks of 2022, when crypto collapses triggered cascading failures across the industry.
Yet critics note that volatility has never disqualified companies in other emerging sectors. Early biotech firms, dot-com startups, and commodity-linked businesses all carried outsized risk at various moments—and still earned index inclusion.
What makes crypto different, they argue, is not volatility but narrative discomfort.
Has the market already moved on?
Some market participants believe the debate is largely symbolic. The possibility of exclusion has circulated for months, giving investors time to adjust expectations.
Spencer Hallarn, head of OTC trading at crypto market maker GSR, said the potential decision has likely already been priced in. From that perspective, MSCI’s move would formalize a shift the market has already anticipated rather than shock it.
Others see the issue as bigger than price action.
Bitcoin itself may recover, rebound, or stagnate independent of index methodology. But the precedent matters. Once index providers begin filtering companies based on asset composition rather than operations, the definition of corporate legitimacy narrows.
What the fight is really about
The dispute is not just about bitcoin or MSCI. It is about who gets to decide how new economic models fit into old frameworks.
Crypto’s promise was never simply higher returns. It was an alternative way of organizing value, risk, and trust. As those ideas collide with legacy financial systems, friction is inevitable.
Index providers present themselves as neutral referees. In reality, they shape the boundaries of acceptable finance. Their decisions do not merely reflect markets—they train them.
Whether MSCI proceeds or retreats, the episode exposes a deeper tension. Innovation rarely asks permission. Institutions, by design, demand it.
And somewhere between those impulses, capital follows the path of least resistance.
Related Laterstack Stories
Do Kwon Sentenced to 15 Years as Terra Collapse Becomes Crypto’s Defining Fraud Case
A Hollywood Crypto Scam Shows How Speculation Slipped Into the Mainstream
Inside the Quiet Rise of Crypto Casinos and the New Gambling Wild West
For inquiries, tips, or submissions: hello@laterstack.com
For years, the collapse of TerraUSD sat at the center of crypto’s reckoning. On Thursday, a federal judge put a sentence to it.
Do Kwon, the founder of Terraform Labs and creator of the TerraUSD and Luna tokens, was sentenced to 15 years in U.S. prison for his role in a scheme that wiped out an estimated $40 billion in market value and destabilized the global crypto industry.
U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer described the case as an “epic fraud,” rebuking Kwon for repeatedly misleading everyday investors who believed TerraUSD was engineered to remain stable during periods of volatility.
A stablecoin built on deception
Kwon, 34, previously pleaded guilty to conspiracy to defraud and wire fraud, admitting that he lied to investors about how TerraUSD maintained its dollar peg.
Prosecutors said Kwon falsely claimed that an algorithm known as the Terra Protocol restored TerraUSD’s value after it slipped below $1 in 2021. In reality, he secretly arranged for a high-frequency trading firm to purchase millions of dollars’ worth of the token to artificially support its price.
When TerraUSD and its sister token Luna collapsed in 2022, the failure triggered a chain reaction across crypto markets, accelerating the downfall of multiple firms and marking the end of the industry’s speculative boom.
Investors left with nothing
During the sentencing hearing in Manhattan, victims described life-altering losses.
One investor told the court he lost between $400,000 and $500,000, wiping out years of savings and forcing him into financial instability. Hundreds of similar accounts were submitted to the court, underscoring the scale of the damage.
Dressed in prison clothing, Kwon apologized to investors, saying he recognized the harm his actions caused. His lawyers said he expressed genuine remorse and intends to make amends.
A landmark crypto prosecution
Prosecutors originally sought a sentence of at least 12 years, arguing that the Terra collapse represented one of the most destructive frauds in financial history. The court ultimately imposed a longer sentence, citing the breadth of losses and Kwon’s repeated misrepresentations.
Kwon also agreed to pay $80 million in civil penalties and accepted a permanent ban from crypto transactions as part of a $4.55 billion settlement with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. He still faces criminal charges in South Korea, where authorities have pursued him since Terra’s collapse.
As part of his plea deal, U.S. prosecutors will not oppose a request for transfer abroad after he serves half of his sentence.
The end of crypto’s illusion of immunity
The Terra collapse marked a turning point for digital assets. It exposed how quickly technical complexity and marketing narratives could be used to obscure basic financial risks.
Kwon’s sentencing reinforces a message that regulators and prosecutors have delivered repeatedly since 2022: crypto fraud will be treated like any other large-scale financial crime.
Terra was not just a failed experiment. It became a case study in how speculative systems collapse when trust replaces transparency, and how the consequences extend far beyond trading screens.
For inquiries, tips, or submissions: hello@laterstack.com
Related Laterstack Stories
A Hollywood Crypto Scam Shows How Speculation Slipped Into the Mainstream
Inside the Quiet Rise of Crypto Casinos and the New Gambling Wild West
Coinbase Reopens in India, Plans Fiat On-Ramp for 2026