Vast Space, the ambitious commercial space station developer founded by former SpaceX engineer Jed McCaleb, is pressing forward with its “leapfrog strategy” despite not securing a spot in NASA’s first round of commercial space station awards announced in late 2025.

CEO Max Haot told CNBC’s Morgan Brennan this week that the company is fully committed to launching its Haven-1 station in 2027, building a track record of reliable human-rated habitats, and proving its capabilities so NASA cannot ignore it when the agency selects partners to replace or augment the International Space Station (ISS) after its planned retirement around 2030.

“If we do all of that, or are on the way to do that, I think it will be impossible to ignore for NASA in terms of the hardware that we have,” Haot said during the interview.

Vast raised $500 million in a new funding round led by Balerion Space Ventures, with participation from Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund and other strategic investors. The capital will support Haven-1’s development, including critical subsystems, crew module fabrication, and launch preparations on a Falcon 9 rocket. The company also announced last month that it was selected for NASA’s sixth private astronaut mission to the ISS, providing both revenue and operational experience.

The funding comes at a pivotal moment for the commercial space sector. SpaceX is widely expected to pursue a mega initial public offering (IPO) in 2026 or 2027, potentially valuing the company at well over $200 billion. Rocket Lab (RKLB) conducted multiple successful launches this week, while Sierra Space closed a $550 million round to advance its Dream Chaser spaceplane and Orbital Reef station project.

Investor appetite remains strong, fueled by President Donald Trump’s renewed emphasis on returning humans to the moon under the Artemis program and the need for a viable ISS successor. NASA’s recent selection process awarded contracts to Blue Origin (Orbital Reef) and Voyager Space (Starlab), among others, but excluded Vast. The agency has since signaled openness to multiple providers, with Congress extending ISS operations potentially to 2032 to bridge the transition.

NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman — confirmed in late 2025 after a year-long nomination delay — has overseen a major overhaul of Artemis, including accelerated timelines and a push for more commercial partnerships. Isaacman told Brennan at the a16z American Dynamism summit that the current “giant leaps” approach, launching missions every three to four years, is unsustainable and must evolve toward more frequent, iterative progress.

Vast’s strategy centers on speed, cost efficiency, and iterative development. Haven-1 is designed as a single-launch, single-module station capable of hosting four crew members for up to 30 days. It will serve as a testbed for larger modular habitats that Vast plans to deploy in the 2030s. Haot emphasized partnerships with Europe (ESA) and Japan (JAXA) to secure international customers and technology, as well as a low-cost philosophy that avoids the massive capital burn of some competitors.

“We will be ready for the call to replace the ISS,” Haot said. “I believe we will be successful and maybe there’ll eventually be space for many more.”

He highlighted profitability as a core goal, noting Vast aims to achieve positive cash flow through private astronaut missions, research payloads, tourism, and sovereign station services before NASA’s next major award cycle.

The company’s approach contrasts with larger players like Blue Origin and Voyager Space, which have secured early NASA funding but face longer development timelines. Vast is betting that demonstrated hardware in orbit will carry more weight than paper proposals when NASA selects long-term partners for LEO commercialization. Haven-1’s 2027 launch target — ambitious but backed by the new funding — positions Vast as a potential dark horse in the race to fill the post-ISS void.

The broader commercial space landscape is heating up. While Trump’s administration has prioritized lunar return and private-sector involvement in Artemis, NASA under Isaacman is shifting toward more frequent, commercially enabled missions. Congress’s extension of ISS operations to 2032 provides breathing room, but experts note the need for a robust U.S.-led commercial LEO ecosystem remains urgent.

Thus, Vast’s $500 million round, one of the largest for a pure-play space station developer, reflects investor confidence in the post-ISS opportunity. With SpaceX’s Starship progress, Rocket Lab’s Neutron development, and Sierra Space’s Dream Chaser nearing operational status, the sector is entering a high-stakes phase of hardware demonstration and customer acquisition.

Haot’s vision is to prove the technology works, build trust with NASA and international partners, and secure a leading role in the next era of human spaceflight. If Vast delivers Haven-1 on schedule and demonstrates reliable operations, it could force NASA to reconsider its initial selections — potentially creating “space for many more” as Haot envisions.

The confrontation between the administration of Donald Trump and artificial intelligence firm Anthropic intensified on Thursday after the Pentagon formally designated the company a supply-chain risk — an extraordinary step that could force defense contractors to stop using its flagship AI system, Claude, in military projects.

Anthropic chief executive Dario Amodei said the company would challenge the decision in court, describing the move as legally flawed and leaving the firm with little choice but to pursue litigation.

The lawsuit marks what Amodei framed as a last resort after days of negotiations with the U.S. Department of Defense failed to produce a compromise over how the military can deploy advanced AI systems. But the legal challenge is also expected to escalate the already bitter standoff between the Pentagon and one of the fastest-growing companies in the U.S. AI industry.

“This action is not legally sound,” Amodei said in a statement. “We see no choice but to challenge it in court.”

The Pentagon said it had formally informed Anthropic that its technology presents a supply-chain risk to military systems, an assessment that took effect immediately and appeared to close the door on further negotiations. The designation has major implications because Claude is already embedded in a range of national security software tools used by contractors and government agencies.

A dispute over who controls AI in warfare

At the heart of the dispute is a clash over how much influence private technology companies should have over the use of their systems in military operations.

Anthropic had insisted on retaining safeguards limiting the use of its AI in two areas: mass domestic surveillance and fully autonomous weapons. The company argues that those restrictions are consistent with widely discussed global AI safety principles. The Pentagon rejected that position, arguing that a contractor cannot impose policy constraints on how the military conducts lawful operations.

In its statement, the Defense Department said the issue boiled down to a single principle: the armed forces must be able to deploy technology across all lawful missions without interference from vendors.

“The military will not allow a vendor to insert itself into the chain of command by restricting the lawful use of a critical capability and put our warfighters at risk,” the Pentagon said.

Amodei countered that the limits Anthropic sought were not operational constraints on battlefield decisions but high-level safeguards designed to prevent the technology from being used in controversial or ethically fraught applications.

He also said the company had been in “productive conversations” with defense officials about ways to continue supporting military users while addressing those concerns.

Trump, however, ordered the Defense Department to phase out Anthropic technology within six months, signaling that the administration had already moved toward a confrontation rather than compromise.

Legal battle could redefine procurement rules

Anthropic’s lawsuit is expected to test how far the government can stretch supply-chain risk authorities — a set of rules originally designed to block technology tied to foreign adversaries.

Federal law typically defines such risks as the possibility that companies controlled by hostile governments could sabotage or infiltrate U.S. systems.

Critics say applying those authorities to a domestic company represents a significant reinterpretation of the rules.

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand warned the move could undermine the U.S. technology sector.

“This reckless action is shortsighted, self-destructive, and a gift to our adversaries,” she said.

A coalition of former national security officials echoed that concern in a letter to lawmakers, arguing that the authority was intended to protect the United States from companies tied to governments such as China or Russia — not American firms operating under U.S. law.

Among the signatories was Michael Hayden, who warned that using the designation in this way could set a precedent that deters private companies from cooperating with the government on advanced technologies.

Policy analysts say the case could become a landmark legal fight over the balance of power between government procurement authorities and private developers of powerful AI systems.

Contractors begin adjusting

Defense contractors have already started preparing for the possibility that Anthropic technology may be removed from some military programs.

Lockheed Martin said it will comply with the administration’s directive and look for alternative providers of large language models, although it emphasized that its programs are not dependent on a single AI vendor.

Meanwhile, Microsoft said its lawyers believe the Pentagon’s designation applies only to Anthropic technology used directly within defense contracts. That interpretation would allow continued collaboration with Anthropic on commercial projects.

The uncertainty surrounding the scope of the rule could create confusion across the defense technology ecosystem, where large language models are increasingly embedded in analytics platforms, cybersecurity tools, and decision-support systems.

The dispute has also sharpened competition between Anthropic and its main rival, OpenAI.

Anthropic was founded in 2021 by former OpenAI leaders, including Amodei, after internal disagreements about the pace and safety of AI development.

Hours after the Pentagon first threatened punitive measures last week, OpenAI announced an agreement to deploy ChatGPT in classified military environments. OpenAI chief executive Sam Altman later acknowledged that the timing of the announcement created the impression that the company was capitalizing on its rival’s troubles.

He said the agreement had been rushed and “looked opportunistic and sloppy.”

Public support grows for Anthropic

While the Pentagon’s decision threatens a major stream of government revenue, Anthropic has seen a surge of interest from consumers and developers who support its stance on AI safety.

The company said more than one million people signed up daily for Claude during the past week, pushing the chatbot to the top of the Apple App Store rankings in more than 20 countries.

That surge suggests the dispute is resonating far beyond Washington, highlighting a growing public debate about whether the creators of advanced AI systems should be able to set ethical boundaries for how their technology is used.

The digital currency space is never short on massive claims. Every single week, a different project appears, calling itself a game-changer and promising to fix every old problem. Most of this noise eventually leads to nothing. However, there are rare times when actual market data cuts through all the talk to tell a story that even the biggest doubters must respect. The official launch of BlockDAG (BDAG) on March 5, 2026, is creating that exact type of evidence, and the first numbers are very clear.

The current market environment has created a perfect setting for this event. Bitcoin’s jump from $63,000 back to $74,000 after global tensions proves that big professional players are not losing interest; they are actually getting more involved. With over $700 million moving into ETFs this month, Ethereum staying above $2,100, and many altcoins seeing fast gains, money is actively looking for a new place to grow. BlockDAG has arrived right at this moment to provide a fresh opportunity. For those tracking the next big crypto, the way this project has started its journey is a major signal.

What Makes This Market Entry Historically Important

Putting a coin on one exchange is a normal task. Getting on two at the same time gets people talking. But launching on five global sites at the exact same second, Coinstore, BitMart, and LBank, along with its own direct swap, is something the Layer 1 world has never seen before. Bundle buyers got their coins at 8:00 AM PST, which was two hours before the general public started trading at 10:00 AM PST. This gave the project a strong group of holders before the very first market order was even placed.

The size of this launch matters because it shows how strong the foundation really is. A launch on just one site makes a project weak. A five-platform launch spreads the demand across the whole world and many different types of traders all at once. When the $0.05 price stayed steady on every single site, it proved the floor was real. It was the result of more people wanting to buy than there were coins available. No other Layer 1 project has started with this much immediate access to the market. This fact alone makes the event historic, and it is a key reason why experts call it the next big crypto.

Early Trading Numbers That Change the Standards

The amount of trading on the first day is the first real test of whether the hype is actually real. The first sessions for BDAG did not just hit the marks; they went way past the early trading numbers of both Kaspa and Solana. Those are two of the most successful Layer 1 starts in history. This comparison is a big deal because those projects did more than just survive; they went on to make people very wealthy.

BlockDAG beating those old records does not guarantee the same path, but it puts the project in a very small group of top performers. Data from staking also supports this story of growth. More people are locking up their coins to earn rewards than was seen with Solana at this same stage. This means the available supply is being taken away much faster than normal. When you have record-breaking trading volume and a shrinking supply, it creates pressure that usually pushes the price in one direction, up. This mechanical setup is what people look for in the next big crypto.

The Price Forecast From This Point

Those responsible for keeping the trading smooth have shared a very clear path for the near future. The $0.20 level is the first short-term goal, which would be a 300% jump from the $0.05 starting floor. After that, they are looking at $0.40 and $0.50 as the next big steps. The long-term goal for this cycle is a $1.2 billion market cap. Reaching that would put BDAG in the global Top 50. This is a very important rank because it makes big institutional funds and ETFs start buying the coin automatically.

Every price level reached acts as both a win and a reason for more growth. Getting past $0.20 proves the experts were right and brings in even more money. Getting close to the Top 50 rank turns on the big professional buying machines. The plan is made so that each win makes the move to the next level happen even faster. This is why the project is being positioned as the next big crypto for the coming years. Major Tier 1 exchanges in the US are also expected to list the coin soon, which would bring in even more liquidity.

Final Say

The next big crypto is never found by following the crowd after everyone is already talking about it. It was founded by a small group of people who look at the facts before the main story hits the news. Solana was not a sure thing when everyone finally agreed it was great; it was a sure thing when its early trading and staking data showed it months before the crowd arrived.

The start of BDAG has shown all those same early signs. Five different exchanges. Record-breaking opening numbers. Staking speed that is faster than Solana’s early days. A $0.05 price floor that stayed strong under global pressure. Plus, there is a list of big events coming up, like major US exchange listings, that have not even started yet. While history does not always repeat exactly, it often follows the same patterns. The data from the first sessions of BlockDAG is telling a very loud story about its future.