Felicis, Lux Capital and Upfront Ventures tackle TAM at Disrupt

Perception is everything — especially when it comes to the value of software startups and total addressable markets (TAM). During 2020 and 2021, as COVID bit into the economy, tech products turned out to be more recession-resistant than expected. What’s more, tech companies grew faster than previously anticipated.

Those conditions combined to make TAM feel huge last year, which, in turn, led investors to pay far more for startup shares, calculated against their existing revenues. However, the growth rates of companies that caught a demand tailwind from COVID have dropped sharply, meaning that some TAM expectations were, perhaps, misplaced.

Where does that leave startups trying to measure their TAM today? Exploring the answer to that question is just one reason we’re thrilled that Kara Nortman, managing partner at Upfront Ventures; Aydin Senkut, founder and managing partner of Felicis Ventures; and Deena Shakir, a partner at Lux Capital, will join us onstage at TechCrunch Disrupt on October 18–20.

In a conversation called “Taking the BS Out of Your TAM,” these three experts will discuss how founders and investors should think about TAM and readjust their perceptions to avoid deluding themselves or their colleagues.

Kara Nortman is a managing partner at Upfront Ventures. Her portfolio includes investments in Parachute Home, Time by Ping, Endgame, Writer, Open Raven, Britive and Fleetsmith (acquired by Apple in 2020).

Prior to joining Upfront, Nortman co-founded Moonfrye, a children’s e-commerce company. She also spent seven years at IAC, where she co-led the M&A group, oversaw the initial investment in Tinder, and served as SVP and GM of Urbanspoon and Citysearch.

Nortman, a founding member of All Raise — a VC-led group dedicated to increased diversity in funders and founders — is also a founder of LA’s professional women’s soccer team, Angel City Football Club.

Aydin Senkut, the founder and managing partner of Felicis Ventures, is a super-angel turned multistage investor. Senkut has appeared on Forbes’ Midas List nine times and on the New York Times’ Top 20 Venture Capitalists list four times.

Since founding Felicis in 2006, he has earned notoriety as an early backer of iconic companies, including Credit Karma (acquired by Intuit), Fitbit, Guardant Health, Guideline, Notion, Opendoor, Pluralsight, Rovio, Shopify and Soundhound. Currently, his areas of focus include infrastructure, security and the future of health.

Deena Shakir is a partner at Lux Capital, where she seeks out extraordinary, mission-driven founders and invests in transformative technologies that improve lives and livelihoods.

Her portfolio investment areas include women’s health (Maven Clinic, Alife, Gameto, Adyn), digital health infrastructure (SteadyMD, H1, AllStripes, Everly Health), health equity (Waymark, Galileo, Miga), food tech (Shiru) and fintech (Mos, Ramp, Neo.Tax).

Prior to Lux, Shakir was a partner at GV, where she led product partnerships at Google (for health, search and AI/ML) and directed social impact investments at Google.org. As a Presidential Management Fellow at the U.S. Department of State, Shakir helped launch President Barack Obama’s first Global Entrepreneurship Summit.

TechCrunch Disrupt takes place on October 18–20 in San Francisco. Buy your pass now and save up to $1,100. Student, government and nonprofit passes are available for just $295. Prices increase September 16.

Is your company interested in sponsoring or exhibiting at TechCrunch Disrupt 2022? Contact our sponsorship sales team by filling out this form.

Daily Crunch: B2B marketplace Sokowatch raises $125M Series B, rebrands as ‘Wasoko’

To get a roundup of TechCrunch’s biggest and most important stories delivered to your inbox every day at 3 p.m. PT, subscribe here.

Hello and welcome to Daily Crunch for Wednesday, March 16, 2022! Oh boy do we have a lot coming down the pike. Our Austin City Spotlight event just dropped its speaker lineup! We are going to have Cruise and Motional at our Mobility Session! And the very upcoming Early Stage event will feature Atomic’s Hadley Wilkins talking about building brands! – Alex

The TechCrunch Top 3

  • How quickly the startup valuations are changing: Sure, the 2021 venture capital market was richer than ever, but 2022 is turning out a little bit different. How much have things changed? Well, we have data on Series A, B, and C rounds in the United States – how big they are, and their valuation marks. Things are getting smaller, and cheaper, but not that much, it appears.
  • SentinelOne buys Attivo Networks: A $616.5 million deal will see the public SentinelOne snapping up Attivo. The smaller firm had raised north of $60 million while private, giving us a little context on the company’s exit price. Bring on startup deals, I say, as they always teach us something about the market.
  • Billion-dollar links: LinkTree is a company that you are familiar with. You’ve seen its links in Instagram profiles, Twitter accounts, and the like. But did you know that the company is now worth $1.3 billion after closing a $110 million round. Why? Because it’s growing like a weed and has a subscription product that is, we presume, doing numbers as well.

Startups and VC

Tiger is investing in Africa, TechCrunch reports, digging into the hyper-active capital disburser’s 2021 results. The group made five investments in Africa last year out of more than 300. A good question is whether that ratio will rise in 2022, and, if so, how much? (And speaking of Tiger, the Equity podcast took a look at the group earlier this week!)

Yesterday, TechCrunch noted that Chinese tech stocks had taken a lengthy hammering, leading to their valuations falling sharply. What would the impact of those declines be on the country’s startup market? Well, we got a little hint of that in early Q1 2022 venture capital data from China. But today, the country looked to calm the market and bring back some investor trust. Is the move too late?

  • Here’s what it costs to not disclose a breach: Back in 2019, CafePress had a breach, and didn’t want to tell folks about it. That is going to cost the on-demand item printing company $500,000. Too low? That’s a value call, but it’s good to see penalties applied to such behavior.
  • A digest of legal startups that TechCrunch has its eyes on: Every startup sector is busy these days, it feels. One sector that we should probably spend more attention on is the world of legal tech, or tech products built to support the legal profession in one way or another. Christine Hall has great look at several in the market.
  • Video search is big business: Back when the internet was text, search looked for text. But as the internet – and digital content more generally – becomes increasingly video-first, search is a different challenge. Twelve Labs just raised $5 million for its work on the problem.
  • This robot makes tortilla chips, which is great because tortilla chips are freaking amazing.
  • Today in Tiger: Today’s round from Tiger Global is a $125 million Series B raised by Wasoko, previously known as Sokowatch. The company is working to make Africa’s informal retail market less fragmented. We’ve seen similar plays in Latin America, for example.
  • Multiplier multiplies its valuation: Building tech to help other companies manage and pay remote workers is a huge task, and one that appears to be set to not have a single winner. So, move over Deel — Multiplier just raised $60 million at a $400 million valuation just three months after it closed its Series A.

Dear Sophie: Is there an easier route to L-1As and STEM O-1As?

lone figure at entrance to maze hedge that has an American flag at the center

Dear Sophie,

I live in India and run a startup here, but most of my clients are based in the United States. I also have a Delaware C Corp we established before the pandemic. We have three full-time contractors doing business development and sales in the U.S., and I still have a valid B-1/B-2 visitor visa.

As my company continues to grow, I’m considering coming to the U.S. with my family and purchasing a home. What are my best options?

—Intrepid in India

(TechCrunch+ is our membership program, which helps founders and startup teams get ahead. You can sign up here.)

Big Tech Inc.

FourFront nabs funding to build an interconnected network of fictional TikTok stars

Every popular social media platform has opened up a new type of storytelling to a new generation of users, but TikTok’s impact has perhaps been the swiftest as the short-form video platform’s user base has quickly swelled past 1 billion users and transformed how social media stars are made.

FourFront is a media startup that’s looking to define a new type of storytelling on the platform, aiming to popularize a network of individual actors performing scripted short-form serialized stories that feel native to TikTok. Fictionalized storytelling in vlog form is clearly not a new development for social media, but FourFront is hoping that it can capitalize on the the discoverability opened up by TikTok’s For You Page (FYP) to steadily build new audiences.

The startup tells TechCrunch that they’ve raised $1.5 million in seed funding from Bam Ventures, Slow Ventures, BDMI, Alumni Ventures Group and HustleFund.

The startup has a couple dozen characters on TikTok, with a handful racking up several hundreds of thousands of followers. Not all of the characters have been hits, and FourFront’s team of writers and social media strategists have settled on nine characters who they’re looking to create an interconnected “universe” around where the actors organically cross paths with each other. While FourFront’s team plans out the character arcs, it’s on the actors to shoot the videos themselves.

The scripted content is often pretty soap opera-esque, but follows the format of popular videos on the platform; “watch us confront my sister’s cheating fiance LIVE” implores one video from FourFront’s most popular character “Sydney” who has nearly 500k followers after debuting in June. In addition to helping catch her sister’s cheating fiance, Sydney has also discussed the stresses of her roommate breaking her lease early and the lessons she has learned working in customer support for a dating app.

FourFront co-founder Ilan Benjamin tells TechCrunch that his startup isn’t trying to mislead anyone into thinking that their network of characters are real, noting that their profile bios highlight the fictional nature of the stories and that each of the videos include the #fictional tag. “We don’t want to confuse audiences or trick them, we want them to be entertained,” Benjamin says.

FourFront’s character “Tia”

Building content for TikTok means catering to the whims of the FYP which means plenty of viewers are catching characters like Sydney in the middle of their storylines, something that can create storytelling challenges when it comes to balancing the patience of existing fans while capturing the curiosity of new viewers.

“The plot mechanics might be repetitive,” Benjamin says. “It’s a constant balancing act, every video has to stand on its own and every single video has to be evergreen.”

For now, the company is largely focused on building out its network of stars and their audiences while looking to push boundaries in how audiences interact with characters using tech products like conversational AI chatbots and polls to help direct the stories themselves.

Brave’s non-tracking search engine is now in beta

Pro-privacy browser Brave, which has been testing its own brand search engine for several months — operating a waitlist where brave (ha!) early adopters could kick the tyres of an upstart alternative in Internet search — has now launched the tool, Brave Search, in global beta.

Users interested in checking out Brave’s non-tracking search engine, which is built on top of an independent index and touted as a privacy-safe alternative to surveillance tech products like Google search, will find it via Brave’s desktop and mobile browsers. It can also be reached from other browsers via search.brave.com — so doesn’t require switching to Brave’s browser to use.

Brave Search is being offered as one of multiple search options that users of the company’s eponymous browser can pick from (including Google’s search engine). But Brave says it will make it the default search in its browser later this year.

As we reported back in March, the company acquired technology and developers who had previously worked on Cliqz, a European anti-tracking search-browser combo which closed down in May 2020 — building on a technology they’d started to develop, called Tailcat, to form the basis of the Brave-branded search engine.

The (now beta) search engine has been tested by more than 100,000 “early access users” at this point, per Brave. It’s made this video ad to tout its “all in one” alternative to Google search + Chrome.

The company recently passed 32M monthly active users (up from 25M back in March) for its wider suite of products — which, as well as its flagship pro-privacy browser, includes a news reader (Brave News), and a Firewall+VPN service.

Brave also offers privacy-preserving Brave Ads for businesses wanting to reach its community of privacy-preferring users.

Growing public awareness of surveillance based business models has been building momentum for pro-privacy consumer tech for a number of years. And several players which started out with a strong focus on one particular pro-privacy product (such as a browser, search engine or email) have been expanding into a full suite of products — all under the same non-tracking umbrella.

As well as Brave, there’s the likes of DuckDuckGo — which offers non-tracking search but also a tracker blocker and an email inbox protector tool, among other products, and reckons it now has between 70M-100M users overall; and Proton, the maker of e2e-encrypted email service ProtonMail but also a cloud calendar and file storage as well as a VPN. The latter recently confirmed passing 50M users globally.

There is also Apple itself too, of course — a Big Tech giant that competes with Google and the adtech complex by promising users a privacy premium to drive sales of its hardware and services. (At the start of this year Apple said there are now over 1BN iOS users globally — and over 1.65BN Apple devices.)

Tl;dr: The market for privacy consumer tech is growing.

Still, even Apple doesn’t try to compete against Google search which perhaps underlines the scale of the challenge involved in trying to poach users from the search behemoth. (Albeit, Apple extracts massive payments from Google to preload the latter’s search engine onto iOS devices — which does conflict with (and complicate) its wider, pro-privacy, pro-user promises while also adding a nice revenue boost for Apple… ).

DuckDuckGo has, by contrast, been at the non-tracking search coalface for years — and turning a profit since 2014. Though clearly not in the same profit league as Apple. But, more recently, it’s also taken in rare tranches of external funding as its investors spy growing opportunity for private search.

Other signs of expanding public appetite to protect people’s information from commercial snoopers include the surge of usage for e2e encrypted alternatives to Facebook-owned WhatsApp — such as Signal — which saw a download spike earlier this year, after the advertising giant announced unilateral changes to WhatsApp’s terms of service.

Credible players that have amassed a community of engaged users around a core user privacy promise are well positioned to ride each new wave of privacy interest — and cross sell a suite of consumer products where they’ve been able to expand their utility. Hence Brave believing the time is right for it to dabble in search.

Commenting in a statement, Brendan Eich, CEO and co-founder of Brave, said: “Brave Search is the industry’s most private search engine, as well as the only independent search engine, giving users the control and confidence they seek in alternatives to big tech. Unlike older search engines that track and profile users, and newer search engines that are mostly a skin on older engines and don’t have their own indexes, Brave Search offers a new way to get relevant results with a community-powered index, while guaranteeing privacy. Brave Search fills a clear void in the market today as millions of people have lost trust in the surveillance economy and actively seek solutions to be in control of their data.”

Brave touts its eponymous search offering as having a number of differentiating features vs rivals (including smaller rivals) — such as its own index which it also says gives it independence from other search providers.

Why is having an independent index important? We put that question to Josep M. Pujol, chief of search at Brave, who told us: “There are plenty of incentives for censorship and biases, either by design, or what is even more difficult to combat, unintentional. The problem of search, and how people access the web, is that it is a mono-culture, and everybody knows that while it’s very efficient, it’s also very dangerous. A single disease can kill all the crops. The current landscape is not fail-tolerant, and this is something that even users are becoming aware of. We need more choices, not to replace Google or Bing, but to offer alternatives. More choices will entail more freedom and also get back to real competition, with checks and balances.

“Choice can only be achieved by being independent, as if we do not have our own index, then we are just a layer of paint on top of Google and Bing, unable to change much or anything in the results for users’ queries. Not having your own index, as with certain search engines, gives the impression of choice, but in reality such engine ‘skins’ are the same players as the big-two. Only by building our own index, which is a costly proposition, will we be in a position to offer true choice to the users for the benefit of all, whether they are Brave Search users or not.”

Although, for now, it’s worth noting that Brave is relying on some provision from other search providers — for specific queries and in areas like image search (where, for example, it says it’s currently fetching results from Microsoft-owned Bing) — to ensure its results achieve adequate relevancy.

Elsewhere it also says it’s relying upon anonymized contributions from the community to improve and refine results — and is seeking to live up to wider transparency claims vis-a-vis the search index (which it also claims has “no secret methods or algorithms to bias results”; and for which it will “soon” be offering “community-curated open ranking models to ensure diversity and prevent algorithmic biases and outright censorship”).

In another transparency step Brave is reporting the percentage of users’ queries that are independent by showing what it bills as “the industry’s first search independence metric” — meaning it displays the ratio of results coming exclusively from its own index.

“It is derived privately using the user’s browser as we do not build user profiles,” Brave notes in a press release. “Users can check this aggregate metric to verify the independence of their results and see how results are powered by our own index, or if third-parties are being used for long tail results while we are still in the process of building our index.”

It adds that Brave Search will “typically be answering most queries, reflected by a high independence metric”. Although if you’re performing an image search, for example, you’ll see the the independence metric take a hit (but Brave confirms this will not result in any tracking of users).

“[Transparency] is a key principle at Brave, and there will also be a global independence metric for Brave Search across all searches, which we will make publicly available to show how we are progressing towards complete independence,” it adds.

Example of Brave’s ‘independence metric’ for search results (Image credits: Brave)

On the monetization side, Brave says it will “soon” be offering both a paid ad-free version of search in the future and an ad-supported free version — while still pledging “fully anonymous” search. Though it specifies that it won’t be flipping the ad switch during the early beta phase.

“We will offer options for both ad-free paid search and ad-supported free search later,” it notes. “When we are ready, we will explore bringing private ads with BAT revenue share to search, as we’ve done for Brave user ads.”

Users of the search engine who do not also use Brave’s own browser will be served contextual ads.

“In Brave Search via the browser, strong privacy guarantees for opt-in ads are a norm and a brand value that we uphold,” adds Pujol, confirming that users of its search and browser are likely to get the same type of ad targeting.

Asked about pricing of the forthcoming ad-free version of the search engine he says: “Although we have not finalized the launch date or the price yet, our ad-free paid search will be affordable because we believe search, and access to information, should be available on fair terms for everyone.”

In an interesting recent development in Europe, Google — under pressure from antitrust regulators — has agreed to ditch a pay-to-play auction model for the choice screen it offers regional users of its Android platform, letting them pick a default search engine from list with a number of rivals and its own brand Google search. The move should expand the number of alternative search engines Android users in Europe are exposed to — and could help chip away at some of Google’s search marketshare.

Brave previously told us it would not participate in Google’s paid auction — but Pujol says that if the new model is “truly free to participate” it will likely take part in future.

“Google and free-to-participate seem difficult to believe, given plenty of precedents but if this model is indeed truly free to participate, without contracts or non-disclosure agreements, then we would likely participate,” he says. “After all, Brave Search is open to everyone who would like to use it, and we are open and happy to put Brave Search on any platform.”

“We have localized browsers throughout the European market, so in addition to growth via the Brave browser growing, we intend to grow Brave Search’s usage by marketing our best-in-class privacy on all media that reach prospective users,” he adds.

Tech stocks tumble as China retaliates in latest salvo of the trade war

Shares of technology companies were hit hard as China retaliated against the U.S. in the latest salvo of the ongoing trade war between the two countries.

The S&P 500 Index shed roughly $1.1 trillion of value while the Dow Jones Industrial Average and the Nasdaq Composite Index fell 2.38 percent and 3.41percent, respectively.

On Monday, China responded in equal measure to the U.S. raising tariffs on imports to 25%, by imposing 25% duties on some $60 billion of U.S. exports to the country.

On June 1, Beijing will impose 25% tariffs on more than 5,000 products. Several more exports to the country will see their duties rise to 20%. That’s up from 10% and 5% previously. The highest tariffs seem to be on products designed to cause pain among President Donald Trump’s political base of support — animal products, fruits and vegetables that come from the Midwest.

But tech companies are particularly expose in the trade war. Indeed, the news sent technology shares spiraling in what venture capitalist (and former TechCrunch co-editor-in-chief) Alexia Bonatsos called the “Tech Red Wedding”.

Rising tariffs will make the tech products from Apple and other American tech companies more expensive to manufacture, which will likely cause hardware manufacturers to raise prices at home, while duties on the finished goods coming to China could make them prohibitively expensive for local buyers in the country.

More expensive consumer products also mean less money to spend on non-essential items, which could mean more frugal behavior from consumers and less spending in the on-demand economy. It could also cause a pull-back in advertising as companies retrench and cut spending in areas that are considered to be non-core.

All of that could leave tech stocks exposed — beyond algorithms just dumping holdings and taking profits in what looks to be a prolonged market downturn.

The trade war, which already took a toll on Uber’s initial public offering, took another bite out of the company’s (short term) stock market performance today.

Uber was far from the only tech stock seeing red. Shares of Amazon were down 3.56 percent, Alphabet was down 2.66 percent, and Apple fell 5.81 percent. Meanwhile Facebook shares fell 3.61 percent; Netflix tumbled over 4 percent on the day.

Things may look up for some tech companies again, but they’re unlikely to receive the kind of bailouts or subsidies that the President is offering to American farmers hit by the economic battle with China. Unless Congress can get stalled negotiations around an infrastructure package back on track (something that seems less and less likely as the 2020 elections start to cast their shadow over the business of governing), there’s little hope for any government assistance that could cushion the blow.

“Our view is this could escalate for at least a matter of weeks, if not months, and it’s really to get the two back to the negotiating table and finish the deal, is probably going to require more pain in the markets…Really the only question is if we need a 5%, 10% or bigger market correction,” Ethan Harris, head of global economics at Bank of America Merrill Lynch, told CNBC.

Tech stocks tumble as China retaliates in latest salvo of the trade war

Shares of technology companies were hit hard as China retaliated against the U.S. in the latest salvo of the ongoing trade war between the two countries.

The S&P 500 Index shed roughly $1.1 trillion of value while the Dow Jones Industrial Average and the Nasdaq Composite Index fell 2.38 percent and 3.41percent, respectively.

On Monday, China responded in equal measure to the U.S. raising tariffs on imports to 25%, by imposing 25% duties on some $60 billion of U.S. exports to the country.

On June 1, Beijing will impose 25% tariffs on more than 5,000 products. Several more exports to the country will see their duties rise to 20%. That’s up from 10% and 5% previously. The highest tariffs seem to be on products designed to cause pain among President Donald Trump’s political base of support — animal products, fruits and vegetables that come from the Midwest.

But tech companies are particularly expose in the trade war. Indeed, the news sent technology shares spiraling in what venture capitalist (and former TechCrunch co-editor-in-chief) Alexia Bonatsos called the “Tech Red Wedding”.

Rising tariffs will make the tech products from Apple and other American tech companies more expensive to manufacture, which will likely cause hardware manufacturers to raise prices at home, while duties on the finished goods coming to China could make them prohibitively expensive for local buyers in the country.

More expensive consumer products also mean less money to spend on non-essential items, which could mean more frugal behavior from consumers and less spending in the on-demand economy. It could also cause a pull-back in advertising as companies retrench and cut spending in areas that are considered to be non-core.

All of that could leave tech stocks exposed — beyond algorithms just dumping holdings and taking profits in what looks to be a prolonged market downturn.

The trade war, which already took a toll on Uber’s initial public offering, took another bite out of the company’s (short term) stock market performance today.

Uber was far from the only tech stock seeing red. Shares of Amazon were down 3.56 percent, Alphabet was down 2.66 percent, and Apple fell 5.81 percent. Meanwhile Facebook shares fell 3.61 percent; Netflix tumbled over 4 percent on the day.

Things may look up for some tech companies again, but they’re unlikely to receive the kind of bailouts or subsidies that the President is offering to American farmers hit by the economic battle with China. Unless Congress can get stalled negotiations around an infrastructure package back on track (something that seems less and less likely as the 2020 elections start to cast their shadow over the business of governing), there’s little hope for any government assistance that could cushion the blow.

“Our view is this could escalate for at least a matter of weeks, if not months, and it’s really to get the two back to the negotiating table and finish the deal, is probably going to require more pain in the markets…Really the only question is if we need a 5%, 10% or bigger market correction,” Ethan Harris, head of global economics at Bank of America Merrill Lynch, told CNBC.

Is ethical tech a farce?

In the past year, we’ve seen tech platforms called out for stoking hate and not doing enough to instill ethics from the top down. There is a bigger problem at hand, and to borrow Silicon Valley parlance, it’s a feature, not a bug. When profits trump impact, ethics lose out.

Tech companies become profitable or lose their shirts on engagement rates. Cute cats gets clicks. So do incendiary comments from world leaders. Engagement rates drive top line growth. Social media platforms are designed to advance voices that drive engagement, regardless of the impact of that engagement. The problem is not just fueling hate; it’s a singular focus on a specific kind of value creation – profits. We have yet to see a tech sector leader optimize for profit and ethics with the same fervor. One always wins.

If profits beat ethics, is ethical tech possible? Simply put, yes. There is a different genre of tech startup that values impact over profits. They are tech nonprofits. Rather than building products that satisfy animalistic behavior, from screen addiction to fear mongering, tech nonprofits are building technology to fill gaps in basic human needs – education, human rights, health care. Or as an early tech nonprofit Mozilla stated in its manifesto, technology that, “must enrich the lives of human beings.” Tech nonprofits are building tech products that serve customers where markets have failed.

Their primary goal is not a profit-proxy like engagement rates. Contrarily, they are designed to make the lives of human beings better – not just the ones whose clicks have market value. As the profit-focused tech community grapples with how to reverse its impact, and how to take a step back and consider building products with ethics in mind, tech nonprofits are the one clear example of ethical tech.

Take Khan Academy. Khan’s mission is to provide a free, world class education to anyone, anywhere. Khan has many for-profit competitors with new competitors launching everyday. Those tech companies are laser focused on educating those with perceived market value whereas Khan is designed with the rest of the population in mind, and not just those who can afford it.

Crisis Text Line, born out of a recognized need for text-based crisis support for youth, is so impatient to solve the problems their users face that the organization open sources its data to inform journalists, school systems, and citizens, encouraging collaborative support in reducing and preventing these crises.

There are hundreds more tech nonprofits that value impact over profit and improve the lives of human beings. Platforms created to teach anyone to write well like Quill, or prevent teen pregnancy like RealTalk, or end veteran suicide like Objective Zero. These tech nonprofits will never measure success based on revenue or engagement. They exist to serve humanity. Tech nonprofits function as a social safety net. Engagement and profits couldn’t be further from the goal.

All of these companies started with the problem and leveraged the tech we use everyday to solve it. In this moment, the tech community is reckoning with what it’s built. It may take a generation or two to fix what we broke. It will certainly take an emerging breed of technologists, those who measure value in more than money, to model ethical tech.

So is ethical tech a farce? It doesn’t have to be. Tech nonprofits prove that.