Netflix invented binge-watching. Now it may have outgrown it. | TechCrunch
A buzzy Bloomberg report citing Netflix data suggests viewers are increasingly abandoning popular shows before the second season. The likely reasons aren’t hard to guess: Netflix frequently cancels shows, there’s too long a wait in between seasons, and much of Netflix’s content is designed for an algorithm instead of for the sake of art.
But the data also points to a shift in how people are consuming entertainment. Netflix’s defining innovation – the binge — was built for an era when streaming was competing with traditional TV. Today, Netflix is competing with TikTok, YouTube, Reels, and various microdrama apps. That shift makes Netflix’s binge model feel like a dated relic from another era.
Bingeing helped Netflix beat TV
When Netflix first dropped an entire season of “House of Cards” in February 2013, it was a revelation. Ad-free, internet-connected TV meant we could be unshackled from the traditional routine of once-per-week shows punctuated by commercials. Instead, bingeable shows meant viewers could be entertained for hours on end, quickly forming a bond with titles and their characters that would have otherwise taken years to develop. Plus, you could drop in on them at any time — not only the day the network decided to air them, as with linear television.
This way of viewing made sense in a world where Netflix was largely still competing with traditional TV like broadcast, cable, and satellite. But Netflix won that fight. Nielsen in June 2025 announced that the TV era reached a new milestone, when the Netflix-style streaming format for the first time eclipsed broadcast and cable viewing — a milestone that made clear Netflix’s original competition was no longer the threat.
Now Netflix’s competition isn’t the TV of old, but what has become the TV of today: video apps.
TikTok and YouTube are today’s threats
Thanks to the rise of TikTok, Reels, and other short-form video platforms, there’s no need for you to visit Netflix when you have a couple of hours to kill with mindless entertainment. There’s an endless, free supply of video you can turn to instead.
According to eMarketer analysts, TikTok was already nearing Netflix in terms of time spent back in 2024, when U.S. adults were spending an average of 62.1 minutes per day streaming from Netflix and 58.4 minutes per day on TikTok. In 2024, the Financial Times reported that, globally, TikTok users spent an average of 95 minutes per day on the app, the highest engagement rate among major social networks.
Image Credits:eMarketer
Then there is YouTube, which offers a combination of both short and longer-form content. Per a report released this year by Digital i, YouTube surpassed Netflix in average daily viewing for the first time, with 99.1 minutes daily in 2025 compared with Netflix’s 93.4 minutes.
These market reports use differing methodologies and demographics, so they should be taken with a grain of salt — but directionally, they point the same way. YouTube and apps like TikTok are Netflix’s real competition, not TV.
Where Netflix gets the feed wrong is that it’s still pitched as a way to help you find something to watch, rather than being the thing you watch. It’s understandable why Netflix went this route, given its library, but it’s not necessarily what the end user wants. Today, many people with dopamine-drained attention spans are instead seeking out microdrama apps in growing numbers when they want a serialized storyline they can consume in minutes.
Image Credits:ReelShort
According to data from the app intelligence firm Appfigures, one top microdrama app, ReelShort, saw roughly $1.2 billion in gross consumer spending in 2025, up 119% from 2024, TechCrunch’s Amanda Silberling previously reported. Meanwhile, another leading app, DramaBox, generated $276 million in gross consumer spending last year, more than doubling its 2024 numbers. Even TikTok acknowledged the competition, launching a microdrama app of its own to test the market appetite for this type of content.
Where does Netflix go from here?
Where does that leave Netflix, whose claim to fame has been full seasons dropped at once for rapid consumption?
Likely, it will have to rethink how it’s greenlighting, producing, and releasing what it considers a “TV show.”
That doesn’t mean that the Netflix model has to pivot entirely to short-form to keep up with the competition, but it may need to reconsider how people want to stream. Viewers may no longer want to commit the hours and weeks it takes to get through a show and all of its subsequent seasons, for instance. They want something that feels more “finishable,” the way you can easily get through a YouTube video or TikTok series from a creator.
A simple fix could see Netflix try prioritizing single-season shows, traditionally known as miniseries or limited series, allowing people to tune into a completed work without having to worry whether it would end on a cliffhanger and never be renewed.
Netflix could also experiment with breaking up shows into smaller chunks, like the before-its-time Quibi model.
The Jeffrey Katzenberg-backed startup, Quibi, had bet that people would eventually gravitate towards TV content designed to be consumed in shorter sessions. Unfortunately for Quibi, the pandemic hit, and people suddenly had a lot of time to watch TV, leading to its demise.
Many Netflix shows could be easily revamped for shorter viewing sessions, particularly lightweight competition shows like “Nailed It,” “Is It Cake?,” or “Squid Game: The Challenge.” Meanwhile, Netflix could surely produce better microdramas than the ones currently on the market with their awful acting and ridiculous storylines.
To generate interest in its higher-quality content, some Netflix shows could be shifted to the weekly release model. This is something Netflix has already proven works in specific cases. For instance, it drops new episodes of its reality show “Love Is Blind” in weekly dumps, making it great watercooler fodder as everyone is watching the new episodes around the same time. (Faster consumption models could work, too. For instance, Peacock’s “Love Island USA” is the reality hit of the summer, as there’s a new episode almost daily).
But instead of experimenting with different types of short-form content for quick entertainment, combined with slower releases for seasons, or focusing more heavily on miniseries worth watching, Netflix has been dabbling in other areas.
Bloomberg’s report framed the problem facing Netflix as a failure to create loyal TV viewers who tune into a Season 2, but the underlying issue facing the streamer is much bigger. Netflix may need to rethink whether it still needs to focus on competing with traditional TV and its long-running shows, or whether it should focus on entertainment projects whose storytelling arcs have less filler and wrap up more quickly.
To find the right balance between viewers ditching cable and those who just want something better than TikTok, Netflix is finding itself needing to reinvent TV all over again.
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.
A buzzy Bloomberg report citing Netflix data suggests viewers are increasingly abandoning popular shows before the second season. The likely reasons aren’t hard to guess: Netflix frequently cancels shows, there’s too long a wait in between seasons, and much of Netflix’s content is designed for an algorithm instead of for the sake of art.
But the data also points to a shift in how people are consuming entertainment. Netflix’s defining innovation – the binge — was built for an era when streaming was competing with traditional TV. Today, Netflix is competing with TikTok, YouTube, Reels, and various microdrama apps. That shift makes Netflix’s binge model feel like a dated relic from another era.
Bingeing helped Netflix beat TV
When Netflix first dropped an entire season of “House of Cards” in February 2013, it was a revelation. Ad-free, internet-connected TV meant we could be unshackled from the traditional routine of once-per-week shows punctuated by commercials. Instead, bingeable shows meant viewers could be entertained for hours on end, quickly forming a bond with titles and their characters that would have otherwise taken years to develop. Plus, you could drop in on them at any time — not only the day the network decided to air them, as with linear television.
This way of viewing made sense in a world where Netflix was largely still competing with traditional TV like broadcast, cable, and satellite. But Netflix won that fight. Nielsen in June 2025 announced that the TV era reached a new milestone, when the Netflix-style streaming format for the first time eclipsed broadcast and cable viewing — a milestone that made clear Netflix’s original competition was no longer the threat.
Now Netflix’s competition isn’t the TV of old, but what has become the TV of today: video apps.
TikTok and YouTube are today’s threats
Thanks to the rise of TikTok, Reels, and other short-form video platforms, there’s no need for you to visit Netflix when you have a couple of hours to kill with mindless entertainment. There’s an endless, free supply of video you can turn to instead.
According to eMarketer analysts, TikTok was already nearing Netflix in terms of time spent back in 2024, when U.S. adults were spending an average of 62.1 minutes per day streaming from Netflix and 58.4 minutes per day on TikTok. In 2024, the Financial Times reported that, globally, TikTok users spent an average of 95 minutes per day on the app, the highest engagement rate among major social networks.
Image Credits:eMarketer
Then there is YouTube, which offers a combination of both short and longer-form content. Per a report released this year by Digital i, YouTube surpassed Netflix in average daily viewing for the first time, with 99.1 minutes daily in 2025 compared with Netflix’s 93.4 minutes.
These market reports use differing methodologies and demographics, so they should be taken with a grain of salt — but directionally, they point the same way. YouTube and apps like TikTok are Netflix’s real competition, not TV.
Netflix has even acknowledged this existential threat by way of a product redesign in April that added a TikTok-like feed based on Netflix content.
Where Netflix gets the feed wrong is that it’s still pitched as a way to help you find something to watch, rather than being the thing you watch. It’s understandable why Netflix went this route, given its library, but it’s not necessarily what the end user wants. Today, many people with dopamine-drained attention spans are instead seeking out microdrama apps in growing numbers when they want a serialized storyline they can consume in minutes.
Image Credits:ReelShort
According to data from the app intelligence firm Appfigures, one top microdrama app, ReelShort, saw roughly $1.2 billion in gross consumer spending in 2025, up 119% from 2024, TechCrunch’s Amanda Silberling previously reported. Meanwhile, another leading app, DramaBox, generated $276 million in gross consumer spending last year, more than doubling its 2024 numbers. Even TikTok acknowledged the competition, launching a microdrama app of its own to test the market appetite for this type of content.
Where does Netflix go from here?
Where does that leave Netflix, whose claim to fame has been full seasons dropped at once for rapid consumption?
Likely, it will have to rethink how it’s greenlighting, producing, and releasing what it considers a “TV show.”
That doesn’t mean that the Netflix model has to pivot entirely to short-form to keep up with the competition, but it may need to reconsider how people want to stream. Viewers may no longer want to commit the hours and weeks it takes to get through a show and all of its subsequent seasons, for instance. They want something that feels more “finishable,” the way you can easily get through a YouTube video or TikTok series from a creator.
A simple fix could see Netflix try prioritizing single-season shows, traditionally known as miniseries or limited series, allowing people to tune into a completed work without having to worry whether it would end on a cliffhanger and never be renewed.
Netflix could also experiment with breaking up shows into smaller chunks, like the before-its-time Quibi model.
The Jeffrey Katzenberg-backed startup, Quibi, had bet that people would eventually gravitate towards TV content designed to be consumed in shorter sessions. Unfortunately for Quibi, the pandemic hit, and people suddenly had a lot of time to watch TV, leading to its demise.
Many Netflix shows could be easily revamped for shorter viewing sessions, particularly lightweight competition shows like “Nailed It,” “Is It Cake?,” or “Squid Game: The Challenge.” Meanwhile, Netflix could surely produce better microdramas than the ones currently on the market with their awful acting and ridiculous storylines.
To generate interest in its higher-quality content, some Netflix shows could be shifted to the weekly release model. This is something Netflix has already proven works in specific cases. For instance, it drops new episodes of its reality show “Love Is Blind” in weekly dumps, making it great watercooler fodder as everyone is watching the new episodes around the same time. (Faster consumption models could work, too. For instance, Peacock’s “Love Island USA” is the reality hit of the summer, as there’s a new episode almost daily).
But instead of experimenting with different types of short-form content for quick entertainment, combined with slower releases for seasons, or focusing more heavily on miniseries worth watching, Netflix has been dabbling in other areas.
As of late, it’s expanded its lineup with podcasts, which reportedly no one is watching, and live content, which can be hit or miss. In terms of the latter, Netflix investments in live sports have generally done well, but its recent entry into live reality competition shows, “Star Search,” has already been canceled despite a clever real-time voting feature. More work here is still needed.
Bloomberg’s report framed the problem facing Netflix as a failure to create loyal TV viewers who tune into a Season 2, but the underlying issue facing the streamer is much bigger. Netflix may need to rethink whether it still needs to focus on competing with traditional TV and its long-running shows, or whether it should focus on entertainment projects whose storytelling arcs have less filler and wrap up more quickly.
To find the right balance between viewers ditching cable and those who just want something better than TikTok, Netflix is finding itself needing to reinvent TV all over again.
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.
Source link
#Netflix #invented #bingewatching #outgrown #TechCrunch
#49ers #coach #Tesla #Autopilot #crashedElectric Cars,Entertainment,News,Sports,Tesla,Transportation">49ers coach says his Tesla was on Autopilot when he crashed
“I’ve had Autopilot for nine years, so I’m pretty comfortable with it and, you know, who knows what happened when I turned around? Whether it malfunctioned or whether I knocked it off? That’s something I don’t know yet. But regardless, that’s… it is always your fault, whether you’re on Autopilot or not. You can’t take your eyes off the road. It’s a partnership driving, you don’t just turn it over to a computer.”
Mixed in with the new developments are trendy food spots like Hoppers and BAO. Hop a train from King’s Cross, and founders can be in Cambridge in 45 minutes to source talent or can be in Paris in two hours to strike a deal.
Who would have guessed that a little more than 20 years ago, this was one of the seediest areas in London?
“In the ’80s, crack and heroin made the area a major narcotics market,” Hussein Kanji, an investor at Hoxton Ventures, said, recalling syringes in tree trunks and gangs patrolling the streets. “In 1982, the local church was occupied by the English Collective of Prostitutes for 12 straight days.” Then, in the early 2000s, a real estate developer had a dream and, well, “now it is the AI hotbed of the United Kingdom,” Kanji said. “What a change.”
Around 18 months ago, his portfolio company BioCorteX moved from the neighborhood Holborn to the Jellicoe building in King’s Cross, hoping to be near the action. “Lots going on in London right now,” Nik Sharma, co-founder of BioCorteX, told me. “Lots of hyperscalers moving in.” That includes, reportedly, Jeff Bezos’ AI company Prometheus, which is also said to be in talks to move into the Jellicoe.
There are around 3,600 AI startups in London, which, together, have raised around $12.1 billion out of the $14.8 billion raised in the city since late July, according to Dealroom. Since the start of June, AI-related startups have leased more than 1 million square feet of office space in London, according to the real estate firm Knight Frank. With that, prime rents in King’s Cross have risen 18% over the past three years, Chris Dunn, a commercial insight associate at the firm, told me.
That percentage represents only the largest leases encompassing at least 10,000 square feet, like the ones OpenAI and Prometheus are signing. The shorter deals go for even more, he said, and now the vacancy rate for conventional office space is just 0.9%. “Demand has outstripped supply,” he continued.
Today, one of the big topics of the area is sovereignty. It was a wake-up call for many when Anthropic shut off access to Mythos and Fable this summer, leaving some in the ecosystem to conclude: “We’d better look after ourselves,” Saul Klein, co-founder of the VC firm Phoenix Court, told me.
Phoenix Court is located in the King’s Cross area and has three portfolio companies in the vicinity, including Olix (which just announced a $3.3 billion valuation), Early Health and CoMind. Robin Klein, co-founder of the firm, said the shutdown of Fable and Mythos access was a “small but sharp reminder that Europe can’t simply rent its AI capabilities and capacity; it needs to build and hold some of its own.” King’s Cross, he said, is where much of this building is actually happening.
“The bigger question,” he continued, “is whether the U.K. builds the infrastructure, compute, energy, capital, to make this self-reliance durable, rather than just hosting outposts of U.S. labs.”
Image Credits:Phoenix Court
Top founders want to stay
Simon Kohl, founder of Latent Labs, has offices in King’s Cross and San Francisco. The London office, at the moment, is growing faster, and he’s more bullish than ever on the ecosystem, he said. “The mood right now feels less like London trying to catch up and more like London becoming one of the default places to start a serious AI company,” he said.
Look around and you are likely to see Wayve testing its autonomous cars. Founded in 2017 by co-founder Alex Kendall, the unicorn is one of London’s biggest success stories.
“Ten years ago, building a frontier AI company from London felt like an unusual choice,” Kendall told me. “Now it feels like an obvious one.” Wayve moved into King’s Cross in 2018 looking for a space that could double as a garage — “a rare combination in Central London,” Kendall said. He has watched the ecosystem mature around him — and it’s now evident that a startup can stay in London, raise serious capital, hire world-class AI talent, and remain globally competitive, he said.
Down the street from Anthropic’s new 158,000-square-foot office is the AI agent builder Sierra and the AI video platform Synthesia.
Laura Gonzalez Florez, Synthesia’s chief of staff and head of people, says the company moved into its glossy new office building a year ago to accommodate its growing team. They were drawn to the area for the same reason as everyone else: “It’s very close to the airport … very close to where a lot of investors are,” she said.
Image Credits:Synthesia
Around two-thirds of Synthesia’s engineers are remote, Gonzalez Florez said, letting the company tap into an affordable, international, and diverse talent pool and helping it scale faster. “From London, we can hire and work, without any problem, people from anywhere, from Slovenia to Portugal,” she said.
Unsurprisingly, London’s AI boom is also causing a talent war.
U.K. AI job postings have skyrocketed in the past few years, per data from PwC. When Anthropic announced it moved into town earlier this year, it listed, for example, a salary range of £260,000 to £630,000 for a machine learning research engineer when the average salary in London for the same role is around £102,000. Some founders in the U.K., like those in Silicon Valley, are being forced to raise more and bigger rounds to keep up.
“The real test is whether more globally significant AI companies are founded, funded, and scaled from the U.K., while continuing to attract the world’s best talent to build them here,” Zain Ali, founder of the King’s Cross-based AI legal firm Centuro, told me. “If that continues to happen, King’s Cross won’t just be an AI hub. It’ll become one of the U.K.’s most important strategic assets.”
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.
Mixed in with the new developments are trendy food spots like Hoppers and BAO. Hop a train from King’s Cross, and founders can be in Cambridge in 45 minutes to source talent or can be in Paris in two hours to strike a deal.
Who would have guessed that a little more than 20 years ago, this was one of the seediest areas in London?
“In the ’80s, crack and heroin made the area a major narcotics market,” Hussein Kanji, an investor at Hoxton Ventures, said, recalling syringes in tree trunks and gangs patrolling the streets. “In 1982, the local church was occupied by the English Collective of Prostitutes for 12 straight days.” Then, in the early 2000s, a real estate developer had a dream and, well, “now it is the AI hotbed of the United Kingdom,” Kanji said. “What a change.”
Around 18 months ago, his portfolio company BioCorteX moved from the neighborhood Holborn to the Jellicoe building in King’s Cross, hoping to be near the action. “Lots going on in London right now,” Nik Sharma, co-founder of BioCorteX, told me. “Lots of hyperscalers moving in.” That includes, reportedly, Jeff Bezos’ AI company Prometheus, which is also said to be in talks to move into the Jellicoe.
There are around 3,600 AI startups in London, which, together, have raised around $12.1 billion out of the $14.8 billion raised in the city since late July, according to Dealroom. Since the start of June, AI-related startups have leased more than 1 million square feet of office space in London, according to the real estate firm Knight Frank. With that, prime rents in King’s Cross have risen 18% over the past three years, Chris Dunn, a commercial insight associate at the firm, told me.
That percentage represents only the largest leases encompassing at least 10,000 square feet, like the ones OpenAI and Prometheus are signing. The shorter deals go for even more, he said, and now the vacancy rate for conventional office space is just 0.9%. “Demand has outstripped supply,” he continued.
Today, one of the big topics of the area is sovereignty. It was a wake-up call for many when Anthropic shut off access to Mythos and Fable this summer, leaving some in the ecosystem to conclude: “We’d better look after ourselves,” Saul Klein, co-founder of the VC firm Phoenix Court, told me.
Phoenix Court is located in the King’s Cross area and has three portfolio companies in the vicinity, including Olix (which just announced a $3.3 billion valuation), Early Health and CoMind. Robin Klein, co-founder of the firm, said the shutdown of Fable and Mythos access was a “small but sharp reminder that Europe can’t simply rent its AI capabilities and capacity; it needs to build and hold some of its own.” King’s Cross, he said, is where much of this building is actually happening.
“The bigger question,” he continued, “is whether the U.K. builds the infrastructure, compute, energy, capital, to make this self-reliance durable, rather than just hosting outposts of U.S. labs.”
Image Credits:Phoenix Court
Top founders want to stay
Simon Kohl, founder of Latent Labs, has offices in King’s Cross and San Francisco. The London office, at the moment, is growing faster, and he’s more bullish than ever on the ecosystem, he said. “The mood right now feels less like London trying to catch up and more like London becoming one of the default places to start a serious AI company,” he said.
Look around and you are likely to see Wayve testing its autonomous cars. Founded in 2017 by co-founder Alex Kendall, the unicorn is one of London’s biggest success stories.
“Ten years ago, building a frontier AI company from London felt like an unusual choice,” Kendall told me. “Now it feels like an obvious one.” Wayve moved into King’s Cross in 2018 looking for a space that could double as a garage — “a rare combination in Central London,” Kendall said. He has watched the ecosystem mature around him — and it’s now evident that a startup can stay in London, raise serious capital, hire world-class AI talent, and remain globally competitive, he said.
Down the street from Anthropic’s new 158,000-square-foot office is the AI agent builder Sierra and the AI video platform Synthesia.
Laura Gonzalez Florez, Synthesia’s chief of staff and head of people, says the company moved into its glossy new office building a year ago to accommodate its growing team. They were drawn to the area for the same reason as everyone else: “It’s very close to the airport … very close to where a lot of investors are,” she said.
Image Credits:Synthesia
Around two-thirds of Synthesia’s engineers are remote, Gonzalez Florez said, letting the company tap into an affordable, international, and diverse talent pool and helping it scale faster. “From London, we can hire and work, without any problem, people from anywhere, from Slovenia to Portugal,” she said.
Unsurprisingly, London’s AI boom is also causing a talent war.
U.K. AI job postings have skyrocketed in the past few years, per data from PwC. When Anthropic announced it moved into town earlier this year, it listed, for example, a salary range of £260,000 to £630,000 for a machine learning research engineer when the average salary in London for the same role is around £102,000. Some founders in the U.K., like those in Silicon Valley, are being forced to raise more and bigger rounds to keep up.
“The real test is whether more globally significant AI companies are founded, funded, and scaled from the U.K., while continuing to attract the world’s best talent to build them here,” Zain Ali, founder of the King’s Cross-based AI legal firm Centuro, told me. “If that continues to happen, King’s Cross won’t just be an AI hub. It’ll become one of the U.K.’s most important strategic assets.”
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.
#Thisformernotorious #redlight #districtis #nowone #worlds #top #hubs #TechCrunchUK">This former notorious red-light district is now one of the world’s top AI hubs | TechCrunch
What every U.K. AI startup wants to know these days is, how can I get office space in King’s Cross?
The area is so hot that a VC firm allegedly recently won a deal by promising a founder office space in the neighborhood. “We stop at nothing to win deals [for] and to support” founders, “including helping them source office space when needed,” the firm told me when asked about the rumor, declining to confirm or deny any details.
The neighborhood’s popularity began back in 2016 when DeepMind — then newly acquired by Google — moved in. Soon after, a flood of AI startups followed, wanting to be around the Google DeepMind magic. Today, they hope to take advantage of the cluster of AI talent there.
This has transformed King’s Cross into one of the world’s top AI hubs, rivaled only by San Francisco and Beijing. Around London, it’s known by the sobriquet “Knowledge Quarter,” as it’s home to names like OpenAI, Meta, Isomorphic Labs, Cusp AI, Wayne, Recursive, and, a little farther down the road, Synthesia and Anthropic. The European Technology Network (ETN) just moved into a glossy new office nearby, while University College London sits around the corner.
Mixed in with the new developments are trendy food spots like Hoppers and BAO. Hop a train from King’s Cross, and founders can be in Cambridge in 45 minutes to source talent or can be in Paris in two hours to strike a deal.
Who would have guessed that a little more than 20 years ago, this was one of the seediest areas in London?
“In the ’80s, crack and heroin made the area a major narcotics market,” Hussein Kanji, an investor at Hoxton Ventures, said, recalling syringes in tree trunks and gangs patrolling the streets. “In 1982, the local church was occupied by the English Collective of Prostitutes for 12 straight days.” Then, in the early 2000s, a real estate developer had a dream and, well, “now it is the AI hotbed of the United Kingdom,” Kanji said. “What a change.”
Around 18 months ago, his portfolio company BioCorteX moved from the neighborhood Holborn to the Jellicoe building in King’s Cross, hoping to be near the action. “Lots going on in London right now,” Nik Sharma, co-founder of BioCorteX, told me. “Lots of hyperscalers moving in.” That includes, reportedly, Jeff Bezos’ AI company Prometheus, which is also said to be in talks to move into the Jellicoe.
There are around 3,600 AI startups in London, which, together, have raised around $12.1 billion out of the $14.8 billion raised in the city since late July, according to Dealroom. Since the start of June, AI-related startups have leased more than 1 million square feet of office space in London, according to the real estate firm Knight Frank. With that, prime rents in King’s Cross have risen 18% over the past three years, Chris Dunn, a commercial insight associate at the firm, told me.
That percentage represents only the largest leases encompassing at least 10,000 square feet, like the ones OpenAI and Prometheus are signing. The shorter deals go for even more, he said, and now the vacancy rate for conventional office space is just 0.9%. “Demand has outstripped supply,” he continued.
Today, one of the big topics of the area is sovereignty. It was a wake-up call for many when Anthropic shut off access to Mythos and Fable this summer, leaving some in the ecosystem to conclude: “We’d better look after ourselves,” Saul Klein, co-founder of the VC firm Phoenix Court, told me.
Phoenix Court is located in the King’s Cross area and has three portfolio companies in the vicinity, including Olix (which just announced a $3.3 billion valuation), Early Health and CoMind. Robin Klein, co-founder of the firm, said the shutdown of Fable and Mythos access was a “small but sharp reminder that Europe can’t simply rent its AI capabilities and capacity; it needs to build and hold some of its own.” King’s Cross, he said, is where much of this building is actually happening.
“The bigger question,” he continued, “is whether the U.K. builds the infrastructure, compute, energy, capital, to make this self-reliance durable, rather than just hosting outposts of U.S. labs.”
Image Credits:Phoenix Court
Top founders want to stay
Simon Kohl, founder of Latent Labs, has offices in King’s Cross and San Francisco. The London office, at the moment, is growing faster, and he’s more bullish than ever on the ecosystem, he said. “The mood right now feels less like London trying to catch up and more like London becoming one of the default places to start a serious AI company,” he said.
Look around and you are likely to see Wayve testing its autonomous cars. Founded in 2017 by co-founder Alex Kendall, the unicorn is one of London’s biggest success stories.
“Ten years ago, building a frontier AI company from London felt like an unusual choice,” Kendall told me. “Now it feels like an obvious one.” Wayve moved into King’s Cross in 2018 looking for a space that could double as a garage — “a rare combination in Central London,” Kendall said. He has watched the ecosystem mature around him — and it’s now evident that a startup can stay in London, raise serious capital, hire world-class AI talent, and remain globally competitive, he said.
Down the street from Anthropic’s new 158,000-square-foot office is the AI agent builder Sierra and the AI video platform Synthesia.
Laura Gonzalez Florez, Synthesia’s chief of staff and head of people, says the company moved into its glossy new office building a year ago to accommodate its growing team. They were drawn to the area for the same reason as everyone else: “It’s very close to the airport … very close to where a lot of investors are,” she said.
Image Credits:Synthesia
Around two-thirds of Synthesia’s engineers are remote, Gonzalez Florez said, letting the company tap into an affordable, international, and diverse talent pool and helping it scale faster. “From London, we can hire and work, without any problem, people from anywhere, from Slovenia to Portugal,” she said.
Unsurprisingly, London’s AI boom is also causing a talent war.
U.K. AI job postings have skyrocketed in the past few years, per data from PwC. When Anthropic announced it moved into town earlier this year, it listed, for example, a salary range of £260,000 to £630,000 for a machine learning research engineer when the average salary in London for the same role is around £102,000. Some founders in the U.K., like those in Silicon Valley, are being forced to raise more and bigger rounds to keep up.
“The real test is whether more globally significant AI companies are founded, funded, and scaled from the U.K., while continuing to attract the world’s best talent to build them here,” Zain Ali, founder of the King’s Cross-based AI legal firm Centuro, told me. “If that continues to happen, King’s Cross won’t just be an AI hub. It’ll become one of the U.K.’s most important strategic assets.”
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.
Every step you take closes the doors that the attacker may open slightly, and when you combine everything, you would have a door to a series of locked gates.
Why Do I Need a Bastion Host?
When it comes to teams working with many servers, deploying a bastion host (jump box) may be a clean and effective way to solve the long-term problem. With this method, you only expose SSH to the bastion, and the other servers accept it only when it’s from the bastion’s internal IP. This centralizes logging and makes auditing access far simpler.
Using a virtual private network (VPN) and a bastion host together is perfectly fine – and many solutions use both: a safe way to access the private network via a VPN, followed by use of a bastion host to restrict which servers can be accessed. Some teams may decide to forgo the bastion because they don’t have the manpower to manage one, and so use a combination of a VPN and a set of firewall rules that still quite a bit lowers the exposure, but without the extra effort.
Mistakes Leading to Leaving Cloud Servers Open
The Mistakes That Cause Leaving Cloud Servers Open: Even the safest development teams may have slip-ups from time to time. One of the most frequent is leaving staged, or test servers with relaxed firewall rules equivalent to those of the production environment – hackers don’t concern themselves with which environment they first land on. Another frequent error is reusing the same SSH key on several servers and clients, causing one hacked laptop to compromise all servers that key has access to.
Another common human error is not removing or changing access when someone leaves the team, so stale credentials remain valid and accessible. At last, putting trust in the strategy of “security through obscurity” – meaning one thinks that setting up the unusual port or hiding the hostname from the public is actually sufficient security – creates a wrong impression of security. This is mostly true; in reality, modern-day attackers scan all ports anyway, and there is no way to hide from them.
System Administrators Guide to Secure Remote Access
Prohibit SSH password logins totally and depend exclusively on key-based authentication
Surely no one wants to type in the password every time; because of this, use only key-based authentication
Deter the user from logging in as root by default and instead use the sudo command to do root tasks
A firewall or security group rule can provide great help with IP address-based restrictions on SSH logins
For access that comes from untrusted sources or external networks, use a secure tunnel like a vpn or bastion host
Periodically change SSH keys and inspect access lists
Maintain records of login attempts and detect brute-force attacks as quickly as possible
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the principal means by which cloud servers suffer break-ins through remote access?
By far the biggest reason why this can happen is unauthorized password-based SSH logins that have been cracked by brute force. The scenario is most likely to develop where the administrator allows root login via password and leaves the default port open.
Sufficient security measures for the server via SSH keys: Do you think it is safe to rely only on key authentication?
It is true that SSH keys drastically decrease the danger of a successful brute-force attack. However, if there is only key authentication on the server, there are still risks – the server administrator can always enable root login or disable the IP-based login restrictions. So it is recommended to always have these three in the server configuration: disabled root login, restricted access to known IPs, and rotating the keys regularly as the main components of meaningful protection.
Is it really necessary to set up a separate VPN network while I am able to connect via SSH keys?
A VPN gives extra security by first encrypting your computer traffic before it reaches your network, where the SSH connection will be used. This is mostly important when working on untrusted networks – like public wi-fi – where there is a threat of a potential hacker in your local network looking at your data.
Bastion host vs VPN as methods of accessing the server?
The bastion host works by funneling SSH sessions from many users through a single, carefully monitored server point while the rest of the network (and mostly the servers) remains protected from the internet. At the same time, a vpn will fully encrypt the communication between the user and the corporate network or servers. The combination is very common among larger security teams as a part of the defense-in-depth principle.
How often should SSH keys be rotated?
The ideal period to change your SSH keys depends on the security practices of your organization, but generally a good practice is to change SSH keys between 90 and 180 days, or in the case that the user who had access with the key leaves or is no longer able to be contacted, such as when a team member leaves.
Why is only changing the port number for SSH enough to secure that port?
Changing the port reduces automated scanning noise in your logs but isn’t a real security control on its own — port scanners check all ports, so it should never replace key-based auth and firewall rules.
Every step you take closes the doors that the attacker may open slightly, and when you combine everything, you would have a door to a series of locked gates.
Why Do I Need a Bastion Host?
When it comes to teams working with many servers, deploying a bastion host (jump box) may be a clean and effective way to solve the long-term problem. With this method, you only expose SSH to the bastion, and the other servers accept it only when it’s from the bastion’s internal IP. This centralizes logging and makes auditing access far simpler.
Using a virtual private network (VPN) and a bastion host together is perfectly fine – and many solutions use both: a safe way to access the private network via a VPN, followed by use of a bastion host to restrict which servers can be accessed. Some teams may decide to forgo the bastion because they don’t have the manpower to manage one, and so use a combination of a VPN and a set of firewall rules that still quite a bit lowers the exposure, but without the extra effort.
Mistakes Leading to Leaving Cloud Servers Open
The Mistakes That Cause Leaving Cloud Servers Open: Even the safest development teams may have slip-ups from time to time. One of the most frequent is leaving staged, or test servers with relaxed firewall rules equivalent to those of the production environment – hackers don’t concern themselves with which environment they first land on. Another frequent error is reusing the same SSH key on several servers and clients, causing one hacked laptop to compromise all servers that key has access to.
Another common human error is not removing or changing access when someone leaves the team, so stale credentials remain valid and accessible. At last, putting trust in the strategy of “security through obscurity” – meaning one thinks that setting up the unusual port or hiding the hostname from the public is actually sufficient security – creates a wrong impression of security. This is mostly true; in reality, modern-day attackers scan all ports anyway, and there is no way to hide from them.
System Administrators Guide to Secure Remote Access
Prohibit SSH password logins totally and depend exclusively on key-based authentication
Surely no one wants to type in the password every time; because of this, use only key-based authentication
Deter the user from logging in as root by default and instead use the sudo command to do root tasks
A firewall or security group rule can provide great help with IP address-based restrictions on SSH logins
For access that comes from untrusted sources or external networks, use a secure tunnel like a vpn or bastion host
Periodically change SSH keys and inspect access lists
Maintain records of login attempts and detect brute-force attacks as quickly as possible
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the principal means by which cloud servers suffer break-ins through remote access?
By far the biggest reason why this can happen is unauthorized password-based SSH logins that have been cracked by brute force. The scenario is most likely to develop where the administrator allows root login via password and leaves the default port open.
Sufficient security measures for the server via SSH keys: Do you think it is safe to rely only on key authentication?
It is true that SSH keys drastically decrease the danger of a successful brute-force attack. However, if there is only key authentication on the server, there are still risks – the server administrator can always enable root login or disable the IP-based login restrictions. So it is recommended to always have these three in the server configuration: disabled root login, restricted access to known IPs, and rotating the keys regularly as the main components of meaningful protection.
Is it really necessary to set up a separate VPN network while I am able to connect via SSH keys?
A VPN gives extra security by first encrypting your computer traffic before it reaches your network, where the SSH connection will be used. This is mostly important when working on untrusted networks – like public wi-fi – where there is a threat of a potential hacker in your local network looking at your data.
Bastion host vs VPN as methods of accessing the server?
The bastion host works by funneling SSH sessions from many users through a single, carefully monitored server point while the rest of the network (and mostly the servers) remains protected from the internet. At the same time, a vpn will fully encrypt the communication between the user and the corporate network or servers. The combination is very common among larger security teams as a part of the defense-in-depth principle.
How often should SSH keys be rotated?
The ideal period to change your SSH keys depends on the security practices of your organization, but generally a good practice is to change SSH keys between 90 and 180 days, or in the case that the user who had access with the key leaves or is no longer able to be contacted, such as when a team member leaves.
Why is only changing the port number for SSH enough to secure that port?
Changing the port reduces automated scanning noise in your logs but isn’t a real security control on its own — port scanners check all ports, so it should never replace key-based auth and firewall rules.
#Secure #Remote #Access #Cloud #ServerCloud,remote access">How to Secure Remote Access to Your Cloud Server in 2026
Protection against unauthorized remote logins to your cloud server is a matter of SSH key-based authentication, a strict security policy on the firewall, two-factor authentication, and a secure communication channel – no individual component will give adequate protection by itself. The major risk point in breaches is not the server but the open door to remote login. To patch that vulnerability, you need a series of countermeasures, not a magical setting.
Why Remote Server Access Is a Common Attack Vector
Every cloud server exposes at least one remote access point – usually SSH on port 22 – and that port is scanned constantly by bots looking for weak credentials. Password-based login is the most common way a system can be attacked by brute force, and it is quite common with a standard setup that the system is left in a state where an admin/user of that system – “root user” – can log in directly by guessing the user ID and the password combination. Add in shared team credentials, forgotten firewall rules from old projects, and staging servers left publicly reachable, and it’s clear why misconfigured remote access – not zero-day exploits – is behind most cloud server compromises. The fix is simple, though you’ll need to do some setup yourself instead of trusting the default setting.
How to lock down SSH access in the right way
The best way to secure remote access is through a series of small improvements rather than one major overhaul. The following is a real working method:
Switch to SSH key authentication, then turn off password login completely in the same location: sshd_config. Keys are far harder to brute-force than passwords.
Disable root login over SSH and require a non-root user with sudo privileges instead; this is a security advantage that even without any change, one key compromising would limit the impact.
Change the default SSH port away from 22 to cut down on automated scanning noise (not a security measure on its own, but it reduces log clutter).
Restrict access by IP using your firewall or security group, allowing SSH only from known office or VPN IP ranges rather than the entire internet.
Add a VPN as a connection layer for anyone accessing servers from outside a trusted network – a VPN like Planet VPN’s free VPN service can encrypt the connection between a remote worker’s laptop and the server before SSH traffic ever leaves their device, which matters especially on public wi-fi or shared networks.
Every step you take closes the doors that the attacker may open slightly, and when you combine everything, you would have a door to a series of locked gates.
Why Do I Need a Bastion Host?
When it comes to teams working with many servers, deploying a bastion host (jump box) may be a clean and effective way to solve the long-term problem. With this method, you only expose SSH to the bastion, and the other servers accept it only when it’s from the bastion’s internal IP. This centralizes logging and makes auditing access far simpler.
Using a virtual private network (VPN) and a bastion host together is perfectly fine – and many solutions use both: a safe way to access the private network via a VPN, followed by use of a bastion host to restrict which servers can be accessed. Some teams may decide to forgo the bastion because they don’t have the manpower to manage one, and so use a combination of a VPN and a set of firewall rules that still quite a bit lowers the exposure, but without the extra effort.
Mistakes Leading to Leaving Cloud Servers Open
The Mistakes That Cause Leaving Cloud Servers Open: Even the safest development teams may have slip-ups from time to time. One of the most frequent is leaving staged, or test servers with relaxed firewall rules equivalent to those of the production environment – hackers don’t concern themselves with which environment they first land on. Another frequent error is reusing the same SSH key on several servers and clients, causing one hacked laptop to compromise all servers that key has access to.
Another common human error is not removing or changing access when someone leaves the team, so stale credentials remain valid and accessible. At last, putting trust in the strategy of “security through obscurity” – meaning one thinks that setting up the unusual port or hiding the hostname from the public is actually sufficient security – creates a wrong impression of security. This is mostly true; in reality, modern-day attackers scan all ports anyway, and there is no way to hide from them.
System Administrators Guide to Secure Remote Access
Prohibit SSH password logins totally and depend exclusively on key-based authentication
Surely no one wants to type in the password every time; because of this, use only key-based authentication
Deter the user from logging in as root by default and instead use the sudo command to do root tasks
A firewall or security group rule can provide great help with IP address-based restrictions on SSH logins
For access that comes from untrusted sources or external networks, use a secure tunnel like a vpn or bastion host
Periodically change SSH keys and inspect access lists
Maintain records of login attempts and detect brute-force attacks as quickly as possible
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the principal means by which cloud servers suffer break-ins through remote access?
By far the biggest reason why this can happen is unauthorized password-based SSH logins that have been cracked by brute force. The scenario is most likely to develop where the administrator allows root login via password and leaves the default port open.
Sufficient security measures for the server via SSH keys: Do you think it is safe to rely only on key authentication?
It is true that SSH keys drastically decrease the danger of a successful brute-force attack. However, if there is only key authentication on the server, there are still risks – the server administrator can always enable root login or disable the IP-based login restrictions. So it is recommended to always have these three in the server configuration: disabled root login, restricted access to known IPs, and rotating the keys regularly as the main components of meaningful protection.
Is it really necessary to set up a separate VPN network while I am able to connect via SSH keys?
A VPN gives extra security by first encrypting your computer traffic before it reaches your network, where the SSH connection will be used. This is mostly important when working on untrusted networks – like public wi-fi – where there is a threat of a potential hacker in your local network looking at your data.
Bastion host vs VPN as methods of accessing the server?
The bastion host works by funneling SSH sessions from many users through a single, carefully monitored server point while the rest of the network (and mostly the servers) remains protected from the internet. At the same time, a vpn will fully encrypt the communication between the user and the corporate network or servers. The combination is very common among larger security teams as a part of the defense-in-depth principle.
How often should SSH keys be rotated?
The ideal period to change your SSH keys depends on the security practices of your organization, but generally a good practice is to change SSH keys between 90 and 180 days, or in the case that the user who had access with the key leaves or is no longer able to be contacted, such as when a team member leaves.
Why is only changing the port number for SSH enough to secure that port?
Changing the port reduces automated scanning noise in your logs but isn’t a real security control on its own — port scanners check all ports, so it should never replace key-based auth and firewall rules.
Post Comment