Podcasts about Sequoia

SpaceX priced the biggest IPO ever at $135/share, raising $75B and debuting at $1.77T. ShinyHunters exploited an unpatched Oracle PeopleSoft flaw hitting 100+ organizations, Mistral seeks €3B at €20B, MrBeast hit 500M subscribers, and SBF lost his appeal. SpaceX raises $75B in the biggest-ever IPO, pricing 555.6M shares at $135 each, giving it a market value of $1.77T (Bloomberg) Founders Fund's ~3% SpaceX stake is worth $50B+, Sequoia's ~1.5% is worth $20B+, and a16z will see its biggest return ever at $10B+ (Bloomberg) Some investors question SpaceX's valuation, citing its $4.3B loss on $4.7B in revenue in Q1, as well as concerns over space data centers (NYT) Oracle warns customers of a critical PeopleSoft flaw after ShinyHunters claimed breaches of 100+ organizations using PeopleSoft; Oracle has not issued a patch (TechCrunch) Sources: French startup Mistral AI is in talks to raise ~€3B at a ~€20B valuation; it was last valued at €11.7B during a funding round in September 2025 (Bloomberg) MrBeast hits 500M subscribers on YouTube, a record for the platform (The Wrap) Sam Bankman-Fried loses his bid to overturn his fraud conviction and 25-year prison sentence over the collapse of FTX (Reuters) Longreads As companies are hit by rising AI costs, they are increasingly using tools that tap cheaper models, including some from China, putting price pressure on OpenAI and Anthropic (WSJ) Sixteen economists weigh in on what AI will mean for the US economy, workers, and workplaces; only two expect AI to actually create more jobs (WSJ) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Subscribe to This Week in Hospitality wherever you get you podcasts: Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/5oPExA0txHMjEI5Ye13IUy Apple Podcasts - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/this-week-in-hospitality/id1849637233 Youtube - https://www.youtube.com/@ThisWeekinHospitality   Two of the biggest casino operators in the world became takeover targets in the same week — and the squad has thoughts. Barry Diller's People Inc. just offered $18 billion to take MGM Resorts private, days after Fertitta agreed to buy Caesars. MGM's own CFO didn't argue the company was fairly valued — he argued investors aren't doing the work. Ben, Scott, and Edwin debate whether public markets are simply too lazy to underwrite experience-driven hospitality, and what the next-generation casino actually looks like. Then: the deal that almost rewrote the industry. On a recent podcast, Airbnb's former Chief Strategy Officer Chip Conley revealed that Marriott and Airbnb spent six months negotiating a major partnership in 2016 — including talk of earning and burning Bonvoy points on Airbnb stays — before Marriott's owners killed it. Was it the most expensive "no" in hospitality history? Plus: Zach got access to Odesia, the AI travel search platform from Sonder's co-founder that just landed $6M from Sequoia — and it's the best AI trip-planning experience he's seen, full stop. And a new survey of 2,000 travelers reveals what premium guests will actually pay more for: quiet rooms, verified sustainability, and tech that connects rather than dazzles. Spoiler — it's a home-field advantage for independents. Spice of the Week covers a sandwich shop that turned away revenue over a tiny dog, why full hotels fool owners into thinking their marketing works, the OTA-fee budget shell game, and Zach's big announcement: Journey's new strategic partnership with Cloudbeds. This Week in Hospitality is presented to you by Journey. Journey is a loyalty platform built specifically for independent boutique hotels and high-touch hospitality brands. Our mission is to give operators the same powerful rewards engine, data intelligence, and guest insights that major chains rely on — without asking them to give up the individuality, soul, or story that makes their property extraordinary. If you're an owner or operator of an extraordinary, independently owned and operated hotel or residence — and you want to see whether your property is a fit for the Journey Alliance — you can learn more and apply at https://www.journey.com/alliance   Key Topics & Timestamps 00:00 — Intro 05:08 — Story #1: MGM's Take-Private Bid and the Value of Live Experience 16:31 — Story #2: Marriott and Airbnb's Partnership That Never Happened 33:43 — Story #3: Travelers Will Pay More for Quiet, Calm, and Credibility 44:54 — Spice of the Week   Your Hosts: Zach Busekrus — Journey LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/zachbusekrus/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/behindthestays/   Scott Eddy — Global Travel & Hospitality Expert @MrScottEddy LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mrscotteddy/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mrscotteddy/   Ben Wolff — Founder of Onera & Oasi LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ben-wolff/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/iambenwolff/   Edwin Kramer — Luxury Hotelier Consultant & Former GM LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/edwinckramer/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/edwinkramer/

This Week In Startups is made possible by:NetSuite - Netsuite.com/TWiSTDeel - Deel.com/TWiSTSquarespace - Squarespace.com/TWiSTTwo days before SpaceX launches the largest IPO in history at a flat $135/share, our VC roundtable drops a scorcher: The top 1% of seed deals might actually be underpriced. Plus: the "Sequoia scam" dual-tranche controversy, tokens-for-equity deals, and whether Claude Fable 5 is a true step function.Tomasz Tunguz (Theory Ventures), Michael Downing (Castalia Capital), and Paige Doherty (Behind Genius Ventures) join Alex to go deep on Seed investing, startup economics, AI spend, and the impact of smarter AI on the founder journey.Guest Links:Tomasz Tunguz: https://x.com/ttunguzTheory Ventures: https://theoryvc.com/Michael Downing: https://www.linkedin.com/in/michaeldowning/Castalia Capital: https://castalia.capital/Paige Doherty: https://x.com/paigefinnnBehind Genius Ventures: https://www.behindgeniusventures.comShow Links:Anthropic's IPO announcement: https://www.anthropic.com/news/confidential-draft-s1-secOpenAI's IPO announcement: https://openai.com/index/openai-submits-confidential-s-1/Bending Spoons F-1 filing: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/2004711/000110465926071170/tm2613674-7_f1.htmSpaceX IPO filing: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1181412/000162828026040364/spaceexplorationtechnologib.htmBrendan Foody's post on Sequoia: https://x.com/BrendanFoody/status/2063470286515683759Claude Fable 5: https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude-fable-5-mythos-5OpenRouter data on Chinese models: https://openrouter.ai/rankings?view=daySaronic: https://www.saronic.com/MotherDuck: https://motherduck.com/Nox Metals: https://noxmetals.co/Timestamps:0:00 Tomasz Tunguz, Michael Downing & Paige Doherty join2:07 The SpaceX IPO and the IPO window4:22 Plaud: If your work depends on conversations — interviews, meetings, calls — you need a Plaud NotePin. You can check it out at https://Plaud.ai/twist and use code TWIST for 10% off!6:30 The new bar: 10x growth (not 3x) to raise a great Series A8:46 Net-new AI budgets9:46 Squarespace: Turn your idea into a beautiful website! Go to https://www.squarespace.com/twist for a free trial. When you're ready to launch, use offer code TWIST to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain.11:09 How some founders are outgrowing venture capital11:44 The power pendulum swings back to founders12:46 SpaceX vs. OpenAI vs. Anthropic: Which IPO is most enticing?19:53 Deel - Founders scale faster on Deel. Set up payroll for any country in minutes, hire anyone anywhere, get visas handled fast, and get back to building. Visit https://deel.com/twist to learn more.26:07 Tokens-for-equity, GPU-hours-for-equity & the financialization of compute28:35 Founders airing VC dirty laundry (napping VCs included)29:56 Netsuite - The business landscape is very chaotic right now. That's why you need NetSuite, by Oracle. Get the free business guide Demystifying AI at https://Netsuite.com/TWiST36:38 Claude Fable 5 first impressions: pricing, benchmarks & orchestration45:42 Where value accrues: application layer vs. models vs. private data1:00:06 Nationalization of AI labs: Bernie Sanders, Sam Altman & Trump agree?!1:01:25 Portfolio spotlights: Saronic, MotherDuck, and Nox MetalsSubscribe to the TWiST500 newsletter: https://ticker.thisweekinstartups.comCheck out the TWIST500: https://www.twist500.comSubscribe to This Week in Startups on Apple: https://rb.gy/v19fcpFollow Lon:X: https://x.com/lonsFollow Alex:X: https://x.com/alexLinkedIn: ⁠https://www.linkedin.com/in/alexwilhelmFollow Jason:X: https://twitter.com/JasonLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jasoncalacanisGreat TWIST interviews: Will Guidara, Eoghan McCabe, Steve Huffman, Brian Chesky, Bob Moesta, Aaron Levie, Sophia Amoruso, Reid Hoffman, Frank Slootman, Billy McFarlandCheck out Jason's suite of newsletters: https://substack.com/@calacanis

We discuss Apple's WWDC 2026 announcements. Some of them weren't even about AI. Dan rounded up a lot of the smaller features that Apple only showed briefly onscreen.If you want to help out the show and get some great bonus content, consider becoming a Rebound Prime member! Just go to prime.reboundcast.com to check it out!Were you aware that you could buy things from us?! That's right! Shirts, iPhone cases, mugs, hats and one other type of thing are all available from our Rebound Store!

It is Ashe's golden age birthday (47, an even MAGA number) and the ladies open with the most on brand baroque dinosaur and clown birthday card from Archangel Michael, leaf photo challenge submissions that look professionally lit, and a coffee photo challenge fail that Ashe is fully embracing. Ashe then digs into the history of her own birthday: James Madison introducing the Bill of Rights in 1789 (the part she would never let them change), George Orwell's 1984 published in 1949 with a passage about lack of understanding keeping people sane, and the 1967 attack on the USS Liberty. Christy takes the professor chair for mad as a hatter, which turns out to come from actual mercury poisoning in seventeenth century French hat makers and not Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland. Ashe walks through CannCon's research on Smartmatic and how its Venezuelan code lives on inside Dominion and Sequoia, the LA Spencer Pratt election circus, and Trump walking off Kristen Welker's barn set after she demanded evidence the media already knows exists. Cristina from Rise Attire joins to debut The Crystal Veil, her first short film and the start of Dauntless Tales, a stylized AI fantasy series in the spirit of Dark Crystal and Legend, with a Guy Fawkes knight, an allegory for a different psyop in every episode, and a reminder that our kids need to see good guys win.

This week on our Vino Lingo segment we feature Jesse Fox, Winemaker, Sequoia Grove, Napa Valley, defining the term “Complexity”.  Learn more by visiting sequoiagrove.com.

A background in the culinary world is a huge plus for a winemaker, and Jesse Fox has just that. Jesse the Winemaker at Sequoia Grove Winery in Napa Valley and his time as a chef has certainly paid off. I caught up with Jesse when he visited Milwaukee just a few weeks ago while on [...]

Celebrate summer in California's Sequoia Country, where outdoor adventures, fresh local produce, community festivals, and iconic public lands come together in the heart of Tulare County. In this episode, learn about seasonal activities in Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks, family-friendly parks and trails, picnic destinations, and ways to enjoy the region responsibly through Leave No Trace principles and wildlife safety practices. The conversation also highlights Tulare County's agricultural bounty, from farmers markets and fruit stands to locally grown treats and summertime flavors. Along the way, discover community events, art, and cultural experiences in Visalia, Exeter, and beyond, along with practical travel tips for visiting Crystal Cave, navigating park shuttles, and making the most of summer in California's Sequoia Country. FEATURED GUESTS FROM THE SEQUOIA TOURISM COUNCIL: - Suzanne Bianco – Visit Visalia: https://www.visitvisalia.com/  - Holly Streit – Sequoia & Kings Canyon National Parks: https://nps.gov/seki/index.htm  - Shannon Schroth– Exeter Chamber of Commerce: https://www.exeterchamber.com/  PLAN YOUR VISIT: https://www.discoverthesequoias.com/ 

Mark Pincus is the creator behind Farmville and Words with Friends. He built Zynga into one of the biggest gaming companies in the world and helped shape the early era of social products on the internet. In this conversation, he breaks down how great founders spot winning ideas early, why most startups build the wrong thing, and how products become part of people's daily lives. He shares lessons from building Zynga, missing the opportunity behind social networking before Facebook took off, navigating platform risk during Zynga's explosive growth, and rebuilding his confidence after major failures. You'll learn how to test ideas faster, what separates products people try from products people love, how to avoid “death by compromise” as a founder, and why the best builders stay obsessed with what users actually want. + Members get the longer, extended version of this conversation, with additional content not included in the public release. Join Now. + +Pre-order Life at the Speed of Play: Launch Products People Love! ------ Timestamps: (00:00) The Principles of Great Products (01:34) How to Test if Your Idea Has "Heat" (04:02) Falling Out with His Father (06:14) Early Career Fails (09:27) The Presentation that Kicked him out of Bain (12:04) The Book of Life System for Making Strategic Decisions (17:56) Why Your Instincts are Good and Your Ideas are Bad (22:29) Copying is the Key to Great Product Design (23:22) System for Building Great Products (24:05) How to Use "Proven Better New" to Build Ideas (27:39) Why Deconstruction Leads to Better Products (29:33) All Founders Go Through This (35:14) How Zynga Changed Social Gaming (37:25) Pitching Zynga to Steve Jobs (40:36) The Fatal Mistake Founders Make (41:24) The Fight Between Peter Thiel and Sequoia (43:03) The Explosion of Farmville (45:45) Zynga's Near-Death Experience on Facebook (48:36) Why Failure Machines Reveal Your Best Ideas (49:28) The Thing that Almost Killed Words with Friends (53:05) Why the Minimum Viable Product Approach is Hurting You (54:03) Building Fast is More Important than Building Right (56:19) How Zynga Missed Their Instagram Moment (58:50) Your Company Should Be a Democratic Dictatorship (1:02:25) How to Build a Meritocracy in Your Company (1:03:44) Jeff Bezos' Invaluable Management Trick (1:05:25) Bezos Hack: Scaling Leadership with Tech Assistants ------ Newsletter: The Brain Food newsletter delivers actionable insights and thoughtful ideas every Sunday. It takes 5 minutes to read, and it's completely free. Learn more and sign up at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fs.blog/newsletter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ------ Follow Shane Parrish: X: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://x.com/shaneparrish⁠ Insta: ⁠https://www.instagram.com/farnamstreet/⁠ LinkedIn: ⁠https://www.linkedin.com/in/shane-parrish-050a2183/⁠ Follow Mark Pincus LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/markpincus/ X: https://x.com/markpinc ------ Thank you to the sponsors for this episode: +CoinShares: Delivering Reason to Digital Asset Investing. ⁠https://coinshares.com/⁠ +Granola AI, The AI notepad for people in back-to-back meetings: https://www.granola.ai/shane Check out the Granola Notes HeyGen is a message-first AI video platform that helps people and AI agents turn ideas into professional video in minutes. Try for free at https://www.heygen.com/ Join the salty rebellion: https://drinklmnt.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

“I don't look to companies to be moral guides. I want them to be good companies. When you invest in the stock market, you want them to be growing fast and making profit. That's it. There's nothing more to it.” — Keith Teare If it's Saturday, it must be our weekly tech show. Before we went live, That Was the Week publisher Keith Teare told me it wasn't a big news week. He was wrong, of course (as he often is). The really BIG news this week, which Keith conveniently missed, is that Anthropic overtook OpenAI as the world's most valuable AI startup. Dario Amodei's AI startup raised $65 billion this week, putting its valuation at $900 billion, way ahead of OpenAI's last round at $730 billion. Keith says, without any proof, that they've cooked their numbers. Which makes this week's news even tastier. The more interesting story, for Keith at least, is Sam Altman's latest pivot: that humans need stakes in the AI platforms whose wealth they help create. Rather than Patagonia-style moral corporations (which Keith says would make him “throw up”), it should be the responsibility of the state or government to make capitalism more moral. But even slippery Sam got outpivoted this week by Anthropic, who sent a co-founder to Rome to do a deal with the Pope. Leo XIV's new encyclical, “Magnifica Humanitas,” is Anthropic's papal pivot. It's the smart model for value investing in the AI age. Five Takeaways •       Anthropic Tops OpenAI — But the Numbers May Be Wrong: Anthropic raised $65 billion this week at a $900 billion valuation, overtaking OpenAI's last round at $730 billion. The VCs backing it — Green Oaks, Sequoia, Altimeter, Dragoneer — are credible. Andrew's argument: they've seen the books. Keith's counter: the VCs are playing a different game. They expect two to three times their money at IPO and they'll probably get it — not because the revenue numbers are solid, but because the only way is up right now. The real test: the S-1, which requires audited accounts. Keith's prediction: the revenue numbers will look different when the SEC sees them. •       Dario's Credibility Problem — But Claude 4.8 Is Fantastic: Keith has consistently characterised Dario Amodei as “slightly juvenile” and has long been sceptical of Anthropic's public positioning. This week he cites Om Malik and the All In podcast in support of the revenue numbers critique. But he is careful to separate the man from the product: Claude 4.8, released two days ago, is “fantastic.” At SignalRank, Keith's firm, Claude rebuilt an entire agent valuation workflow in an hour that would have taken days manually. Andrew's observation: Andrew is now Anthropic's newest fan. He has replaced Spurs with Anthropic as his team. •       Altman's Pivot: From UBI to Ownership: Sam Altman has shifted his public narrative on AI and labour. Previously: UBI — universal basic income — as the answer to mass unemployment. Now: ownership. Humans need to own stakes in the AI platforms whose wealth they help generate. Not welfare. Not redistribution. Ownership. Keith's verdict: it's an interesting and significant move. More interesting than Amodei's continued fearmongering about AI devastation. Andrew notes that Altman seems to have genuinely grown up in the last two months. His tone is markedly different. •       Patagonia Capitalism Would Make Keith Throw Up: The week's interview of the week: Eric Ries on Incorruptible, arguing that great companies stay great by choosing a higher moral purpose — the Patagonia model. Keith's response: it would make him throw up. He doesn't want companies to be moral guides. He wants them to be profit machines. Moral guidance is the job of politics. And politics, he acknowledges, is massively disappointing. He does agree with Ries on one thing: Sundar Pichai, as an individual, should care about the future. But Google's job is to make money. That's it. •       Where Does Moral Guidance Come From? The Populists: Andrew's closing question: if not corporations, not politicians, not the pope — where does moral guidance come from? Keith's reluctant answer: the populists. Because the people care. They care about the future. And in the absence of politicians they can trust, they go elsewhere. Keith sees this as inevitable rather than desirable. Populism is the unintended consequence of political failure. The people filling the gap that broken institutions left. It's not a solution. It's a symptom. About the Guest Keith Teare is a British-American entrepreneur, investor, and publisher of the That Was the Week newsletter. He is a co-founder of TechCrunch and Andrew's regular TWTW co-host. References: •       That Was the Week by Keith Teare. •       Om Malik, “The Copy and the Guru” — the post on Anthropic's revenue numbers referenced in the conversation. •       All In Podcast — referenced for the Anthropic S-1 revenue discussion. •       Episode 2921: Eric Ries on Incorruptible — the interview of the week discussed in the show. •       Episode 2915: Keith Teare on capitalism and AI — the preceding TWTW, referenced at the opening. About Keen On America Nobody asks more awkward questions than the Anglo-American writer and filmmaker Andrew Keen. In Keen On America, Andrew brings his pointed Transatlantic wit to making sense of the United States — hosting daily interviews about the history and future of this now venerable Republic. With nearly 2,900 episodes since the show launched on TechCrunch in 2010, Keen On America is the most prolific intellectual interview show in the history of podcasting. WebsiteSubstackYouTubeApple PodcastsSpotify Chapters: (00:31) - Introduction: ten days since the last TWTW (01:01) - The big news: Anthropic tops OpenAI at $900 billion (01:53) - Keith's reaction: both true and BS (02:22) - OpenAI is further ahead on IPO filing (03:15) - Om Malik and the revenue numbers: what does misleading mean? (03:41) - The All In podcast and Dario's credibility (04:21) - Anthropic's $65 billion raise: the VCs' game (04:42) - But Claude 4.8 is fantastic: the SignalRank story (06:16) - Dario vs Sam: who's more grown up? (07:00) - Altman's pivot: from UBI to ownership (08:00) - Keith admits he was wrong about OpenAI's dominance (09:47) - What did Keith get wrong? (10:36) - Corporate vs consumer AI dominance (15:00) - Agentic AI: the big theme in Keith's newsletter (20:00) - The pope: Leo XIV and AI (25:00) - Moral cap...

Today, Ryann and Sequoia are losing it over JoJo's cancelled return to Broadway, Love Island USA's note to fans ahead of the S8 cast announcement, Sean Evan and KeKe Palmer's interview on Baby, This Is KeKe Palmer, and Cynthia Erivo's interview with Vanity Fair. JOIN OUR PATREON: https://patreon.com/FreshlyPopd Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

nFactorial Intelligence - еженедельный обзор новостей из мира стартапов и ИИ Cтратегия DeepSeek на $10 трлн против Nvidia, Марк Андриссен у Джо Рогана за 3:20:00 раздаёт AI-альфу, плагины Higgsfield внутри Adobe Premiere и After Effects, Гэвин Бэйкер объясняет почему AI-цикл избежит пузыря, а Джеффри Хинтон предупреждает что спать спокойно не стоит, AMD пробил $500; Миядзаки в 2016 назвал AI-анимацию оскорблением жизни, Гарри Тан из YC: «moat — это глагол», Андриссен про успешные компании из «product first», Пол Грэм рисует Пифагора 14-летнему сыну и спорит о бросании учёбы в 18, Безос объясняет почему никто не копирует «get-rich-slowly» Баффетта, Стэнфорд доказал что прогулка даёт +60% креатива, парадокс AI от Дэна Шиппера, Канат Байгарин про физику плазмы, почему Кристофер Нолан не пользуется email, Альфред Лин из Sequoia про конечные и бесконечные игры Упомянутые ссылки:  https://spotlight-panic.vercel.app/ - Spotlight Panic: вайб-кодинг игра для nFactorial AI Cup https://frog-pond4.vercel.app/ - Frog Pond Final: ещё одна работа с nFactorial AI Cup https://aldar-kose-aul-quest.vercel.app/ - Aldar Kose Aul Quest: казахский фольклор в вайб-кодинг игре https://nfactorial-school.kit.com/posts/nfactorial-weekly-20-3 - 3 эпизода Acquired про Costco, Nvidia и Berkshire Hathaway https://x.com/Hesamation/status/2059660001581441165 - Миядзаки в 2016 году увидел AI-анимацию и сказал: «оскорбление жизни, конец света близок» https://x.com/ramit/status/2059754959516873149 - Рамит Сэти ушёл в 3,5-месячный саббатикал: Барселона, Париж, Марракеш, Япония https://x.com/levelsio/status/2059351181516816409 - AMD пробил $500: levelsio поздравляет всех, кто зашёл в позицию https://x.com/higgsfield/status/2059690191187824681 - Higgsfield запускает плагины для Adobe Premiere Pro и After Effects https://x.com/paulg/status/2059618578211438884 - Пол Грэм нарисовал 14-летнему сыну доказательство теоремы Пифагора https://x.com/Giuliano_Mana/status/2059634348597330326 - Джулиано Мана: «Я думаю об этом каждый божий день» https://x.com/StartupArchive_/status/2059301030278595016 - Гарри Тан из YC: «Moat — это не существительное, это глагол» https://x.com/ihtesham2005/status/2058920173491695764 - Стэнфорд доказал: прогулка повышает креативность на 60% https://x.com/paulg/status/2059011859953410286 - Пол Грэм: идея стартапа невалидна, если работает только при толпе пользователей https://x.com/gdb/status/1621333381836570627 - Грег Брокман вспоминает как стартовал OpenAI https://x.com/Scobleizer/status/2058720543780786413 - Скобл: пришло время фаундерам подавать заявки на YC и аналоги https://x.com/StartupArchive_/status/2058878244901052849 - Марк Андриссен: успешные компании всегда стартовали «product first» https://x.com/CAronitpereira/status/2058596815679983909 - Кейс Gillette: 100 лет доминирования в бритвах как тезис для инвестиций https://x.com/paulg/status/2058492772726804943 - Пол Грэм против бросания учёбы в 18 ради стартапа https://x.com/nikunj/status/2059772109480718814 - Никундж Котхари: «Покажите миру свою одержимость» https://x.com/MilkRoadMacro/status/2058162358242140326 - Гэвин Бэйкер объясняет, почему этот AI-цикл может избежать пузыря https://x.com/ayushjaiswal/status/2058272419106951345 - Аюш Джайсвал об интервью с Илоном: «лучший опыт собеседования в жизни» https://x.com/SJosephBurns/status/2058108196787499495 - Безос про Баффетта: «Get-rich-slowly — поэтому никто не копирует» https://x.com/MidnightMuse___/status/2058208882636607854 - Почему у японских пар самые стабильные браки: одно правило, которое игнорируют западные терапевты https://x.com/bookwormengr/status/2057909493250539891 - Стратегия DeepSeek на $10 трлн: Китай строит свою AI-индустрию железа https://x.com/itsolelehmann/status/2057909733491937555 - Марк Андриссен у Рогана: 3 часа 20 минут чистой AI-альфы https://x.com/aakashgupta/status/2057744283256696989 - Почему Кристофер Нолан не пользуется e-mail https://x.com/sairahul1/status/2057808907553431946 - Крёстный отец AI: «Если ты спокойно спишь — ты невнимательно следишь» https://x.com/Alfred_Lin/status/2057870289783156835 - Альфред Лин из Sequoia: в бизнесе есть конечные и бесконечные игры — играть надо в обе https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gn0i2AUXik - Канат Байгарин про физику плазмы и термоядерный синтез https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQVDi79A4JI - Эпизод 1: как строится компания на миллиард долларов https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4D3hDmGhFhA&list=WL&index=6&t=3365s - Парадокс AI от Дэна Шиппера: больше автоматизации — больше людей и больше работы https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqOCyhXnKYA&list=WL&index=2&t=8721s - Бердыев как мыслитель: выше Де Дзерби — только Анчелотти https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLagAm1sWIE&list=WL&index=3 - Саша Барон Коэн больше не вернёт Али Джи и снимется в «Ladies First» https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOINLHcqvYw&t=2s - TigerBelly 460: Бобби Ли встречает своего «питательного близнеца» Сон Канга https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ou_DYLKzekk - MADtv: классический скетч «Корейская мыльная опера», все 5 эпизодов https://www.netflix.com/title/80244853 - Кен Чонг: «You Complete Me, Ho» — стенд-ап про Голливуд и «Похмелье» https://www.netflix.com/title/81728168 - The Bus: A French Football Mutiny 

Ignacio Vacchiano, country manager en Iberia de Leverage Shares, analiza los índices en Wall Street, que marcan triple récord, la tecnología, que también está en máximos gracias a las grandes subidas de Snowflake y Dell y como Anthropic ha superado por primera vez en valoración a Open AI. “El mercado está mirando al lado geopolítico y está ignorando el dato de PCE”, afirma el invitado. La jornada de ayer estuvo marcada también por el dato de inflación de abril, que se dispara hasta el 3,8%. Es el mayor aumento desde mayo de 2023. “Yo creo que es un dato negativo, aunque fuera un poco en lo estimado y como que el mercado prevé o piensa que se va a parar en estos niveles y se soluciona el conflicto”, afirma el invitado. También destaca en after hours la subida del 40% en el after hours de Dell, después de publicar cuentas al cierre. Sus resultados superan las expectativas, sobre todo sus ingresos vinculados a la IA, que superan los 16.000 millones y suponen un crecimiento del 757% interanual. Además, supera previsiones con sus ingresos de 44.000 millones y su beneficio por acción de 4,86 dólares. El country manager en Iberia de Leverage Shares señala que “para todo el año ingresos daba un 16% más que los estimados medios, pero eso ha subido a un 40%” y que la subida “es exagerada cuando ya el valor había venido subiendo un 180% en los últimos 12 meses”. El foco también ha ido para Anthropic, que ha superado por primera vez en valoración a Open AI. Ha cerrado una ronda de financiación de 65.000 millones de dólares liderada por grandes fondos como Sequoia, Altimeter o Dragoneer. La operación eleva la valoración de Anthropic hasta los 965.000 millones de dólares. Sobre las salidas a Bolsa de estas tecnológicas señala que “puede hacer explotar el globo como pasó en el año 2000”.

Today, Sequoia and Ryann are losing it over The Summer House reunion part 1 with Morena Renee. JOIN OUR PATREON: https://patreon.com/FreshlyPopd Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Sequoia Holmes & Ryann Graham join the show to take stunning calls about kicking your ex out of your shared bed, and a hot firefighter holding your panties hostage.Do you drink coffee? - https://perfectpersoncoffee.com/Join The Patreon: https://bit.ly/PPPTRN -Weekly Bonus episodes every Friday & ad-free extended version of this episode)Buy the Coffee!! perfectpersoncoffee.comWatch on Youtube: https://bit.ly/PerfectPodYTWatch Miles' Main Channel Videos: https://bit.ly/MilesbonYTFollow On Insta To Call-In!: https://bit.ly/PPPodGramTell a friend about the show! Tweet it! Story it! Scream it!Advertise on Perfect Person via Gumball.fmSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

- TrueFoundry, founded by Nikunj Bajaj, is an AI infrastructure company building an "AI Gateway" that helps enterprises build, ship, and govern agentic AI applications, focusing on observability and governance for AI agents. - The company has raised over $22 million, with pre-seed investment from Sequoia and India Capital, and Series A led by Intel Capital; notable angel investors include Naval Ravikant, Anthony Goldblum, Gokul Rajaram, Sian Banister, and Lenny Rachitsky. - The founding team leveraged their experience at Meta and WorldQuant to identify a gap in the market: the need for a vertically integrated stack for machine learning and AI, similar to what large tech companies use internally. - TrueFoundry's go-to-market strategy focused on serving large enterprises from the start, building robust infrastructure before launching, and validating their approach through extensive primary market research and early customer conversations. - The company's north star metric is the proportion of an organization's compute running on TrueFoundry, and their key advice for founders is to balance short-term market needs with a clear long-term vision, maintaining transparency and adaptability within the team. Sponsored by Auth0 for Startups → 1-year free https://auth0.com/startups/vip Auth0 is an adaptable authentication and authorization platform that helps you secure your apps and AI agents. It delivers convenience, privacy, and security so you can focus on building a great UX. FOUNDER PROFILE: Nikunj Bajaj, Founder of TrueFoundry https://www.linkedin.com/in/nikunj-bajaj-10476824

Jake Stauch is the co-founder and CEO of Serval, the AI-native enterprise service management platform. Serval was founded in 2024 and has already raised over $125M across rounds led by Redpoint and Sequoia at a $1B+ valuation. Before Serval, Jake spent five years on the product team at Verkada and earlier founded NeuroPlus, a brain-sensing hardware company that made video games for kids with ADHD.In this episode of Summation, Jake and Auren discuss:Why Anthropic has added more ARR in the past few months than ServiceNow has in the past 20 yearsThe "forward deployed engineer" hire and why he recruits future founders instead of solutions engineersWhy talent density is the only remaining moat in the age of AIThe Silicon Valley collusion around not poaching each other's employeesYou can find Auren Hoffman on X at @auren and Jake Stauch on X at @jakeserval

Scott from Portal Pros is back, and this time the conversation is all about Toyotas — because Portal Pros has been busy expanding well beyond Jeeps. Jimmy and Tyler catch up with Scott on everything that’s happened since his last appearance: Portal Pros installed their first set of portals on a Lexus GX470 (basically a bougie 4Runner with a DVD player and leather seats), stress-tested it at Holister Hills, broke a ring gear in Moab, got bailed out by the FJ Cruiser Facebook community the same night, and somehow drove the thing home. If you’re wondering how capable a portal-equipped Toyota can be on trails it has no business being on — this episode answers that question pretty thoroughly. From there, Scott digs into the numbers most people actually want to know: what does a portal build cost compared to a traditional suspension build on a Toyota? They run two comparisons — a mild build and an extreme build — and the results are more interesting than you’d expect. On the mild side, portals run about $3,000 more than a traditional lift kit setup, but you’re getting ground clearance, gear reduction, and the ability to transfer them to your next vehicle. On the extreme side — when you’re comparing portals to a full Marlin Crawler long travel kit plus a Dana 60 rear axle swap — portals actually come out around $6,000 cheaper. They also cover what Toyota applications are available now (4th and 5th gen 4Runner, 2nd and 3rd gen Tacoma, GX470, GX460), what’s coming soon (200 series Land Cruiser, Sequoia, 2nd gen Tundra), why Portal Pros is probably not making a Super Duty version anytime soon, and why Scott designed these things to be installed in your driveway and rebuilt on the trail. A good one if you’ve ever thought about portals and talked yourself out of it over the price. Portal Pros:Website – https://portalprosoffroad.com/Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/portal_pros/?hl=enYouTube – https://www.youtube.com/@portal_pros– Monthly newsletter (hand-written by Scott, no AI) — sign up at their site We have a massive discount this month with Rusoh Fire Extinguishers. You can get 25% off this month only with the discount code Rusohcrawlers. Go grab yours today! SnailTrail4x4 Discord: https://discord.gg/yFyFFkQbuyCome hang out with us on the SnailTrail4x4 Discord — it’s the easiest way to connect with Tyler and Jimmy directly, chat with fellow offroad enthusiasts, and get first access to Group Buys and Treasure Hunt token drops. MORRFlate Giveaway at 900 Reviews on Apple Podcast. But our next giveaway is when we reach 800 reviews; we are giving away an OnX Elite Membership. We will also give away an OnX Elite membership when we get to 850. However, when we reach 900 Reviews, we are teaming up with MORRFlate for a $1000 MF Product Giveaway. Go over to Apple Podcasts to leave your review now and become eligible to win. Congratulations to A13XMONT, who won a set of tires from Yokohama Tire! Call us and leave us a VOICEMAIL!!! We want to hear from you even more!!! You can call and say whatever you like! Ask a question, leave feedback, correct some information about welding, say how much you hate your Jeep, and wish you had a Toyota! We will air them all, live, on the podcast! +01-916-345-4744. If you have any negative feedback, you can call our negative feedback hotline, 408-800-5169. 4Wheel Underground has all the suspension parts you need to take your off-road rig from leaf springs to a performance suspension system. We just ordered our kits for Kermit and Samantha and are looking forward to getting them. The ordering process was quite simple, and after answering the questionnaire, we ensured we got the correct and best-fitting kits for our vehicles. If you want to level up your suspension game, check out 4Wheel Underground. SnailTrail4x4 Podcast is brought to you by all of our peeps over at irate4x4! Make sure to stop by and see all of the great perks you get for supporting SnailTrail4x4! Discount Codes, Monthly Give-Always, Gift Boxes, the SnailTrail4x4 Community, and the ST4x4 Treasure Hunt! Thank you to all of those who support us! We couldn’t do it without you guys (and gals!)! SnailSquad Monthly Giveaway Massive thanks to this month’s giveaway with Rusoh Fire Extinguishers. We have one of their 2.5-pound extinguishers to give away to a lucky winner. This extinguisher has an 18-year shelf life and is the best fire extinguisher for any off-road vehicle. To learn more, check out Rusoh.com. If you want a chance to win, sign up for the Giveaway Tier on Irate4x4 For the Month of April, we are giving away Gift Boxes. It’s Gift Box month, and two lucky individuals will win one of our gift boxes. These are jam-packed with goodies from tools to whiskey smokers. They are always different and always random. If you want a chance to win, sign up for the Giveaway Tier on Irate4x4 Listener Discount Codes: SnailTrail4x4 –SnailTrail15 for 15% off SnailTrail4x4 MerchMORRFlate – snailtraill4x4 to get 10% off MORRFlate Multi Tire Inflation Deflation™ Kits4WheelUnderground – snailtrail 10% offIronman 4×4 – snailtrail20 to get 20% off all Ironman 4×4 branded equipment!Sidetracked Offroad – snailtrail4x4 (lowercase) to get 15% off lights and recovery gearSpartan Rope – snailtrail4x4 to get 10% off sitewideShock Surplus – SNAILTRAIL4x4 to get $25 off any order!Mob Armor – SNAILTRAIL4X4 for 15% offSummerShine Supply – ST4x4 for 10% offBackpacker’s Pantry – Affiliate LinkLaminx Protective Films – Use the Link to get 20% off all products (Affiliate Link) Show Music: Midroll Music – ComaStudio Outroll Music – Meizong Kumbang

And the owner wants you to “steal” his template. This week, rapid custom manufacturer SendCutSend reached a valuation of $1.01 billion after a $110 million investment from Sequoia, Paradigm, and Patrick and John Collison—the guys who co-founded Stripe.The Reno, Nevada-based company is using the funds to launch a five-year plan to strengthen its American industrial base, which includes a $1 billion commitment to creating new U.S. manufacturing jobs and to domestically produced materials.The company also earmarked more than $250 million to expand existing facilities and establish new manufacturing hubs throughout the country. By merging software-first logic with high-speed domestic production, SendCutSend provides laser cutting, CNC machining, and finishing services with instant-buy access. The company wants to be America's "anything factory," delivering parts in as little as 24 hours.SendCutSend has spent the last eight years working on developing a model that allows users to get an instant quote and quickly begin production.The company said it has been largely bootstrapped until now, primarily funded by $6 million from friends and family. Company founder Jim Belosic believes the time is right to accept investment to meet the speed and volume requirements of a rapidly reindustrializing American economy.#Manufacturing #MadeInAmerica #SendCutSend #Automation #CNC #LaserCutting #IndustrialNews #ManufacturingNow #Reindustrialization #AmericanManufacturing #FactoryTech #ManufacturingIndustry #Startups #IndustrialAutomation #Aerospace #DefenseManufacturing #Robotics #SupplyChain #DataCenters #Innovation

Everyone in wealth management is talking about artificial intelligence, but too much of the conversation still centers on efficiency. Yes, saving time matters. But the bigger opportunity is moving firms from disconnected tools, dashboards and workflows into a world where AI can help deliver timely insights, proactive engagement and more personalized communication at scale. In this episode of The WealthStack Podcast, host Shannon Rosic sits down with A.J. De Rosa, CEO and co-founder of Intellebox, to explore what separates AI as a feature from it as a firmwide strategy, why agentic workflows are not the same as basic automation, and how compliance may become stronger, not weaker, when AI is designed with the right guardrails. Key takeaways: How client engagement and personalization have become the new bottlenecks in wealth management Why AI needs to evolve from point solutions into agentic operating systems How compliance could become stronger with AI-powered oversight and human review Why the future is not human versus AI, but human judgment plus machine intelligence Why efficiency alone is not a growth strategy for advisory firms Resources: Listen to WealthStack on Wealth Management Subscribe and listen to WealthStack on Apple Podcasts Subscribe and listen to WealthStack on Spotify Connect with Shannon Rosic: Shannon Rosic WealthStack website Wealth Management Connect with A.J. De Rosa: LinkedIn: A.J. De Rosa LinkedIn: Intellebox.ai Website: Intellebox.ai aj@Intellebox.ai  Substack: A.J. De Rosa X: Intellebox.ai About Our Guest: AJ DeRosa is the Co-Founder and CEO of Intellebox.ai, where he leads the company's mission to redefine wealth management through agentic AI and a next-generation client engagement platform. His extensive experience in startup leadership, capital formation, and enterprise scaling has positioned him exceptionally well for this next chapter, building an industry-transforming company at the intersection of AI and wealth advisory. AJ brings over 29 years of revenue and operations leadership across finance, AI, and technology. He joined Intellectus Partners as a Partner and CEO-in-Residency, specifically recruited to incubate and launch Intellebox.ai. During his time at Intellectus, AJ helped shape the firm's growth strategy while architecting the vision, commercial model, and market approach that became the foundation of Intellebox. Before launching Intellebox.ai, AJ played integral roles in five venture-backed startups. Most recently, as Chief Revenue Officer and Section 16 Officer at Evolv Technologies, he helped lead the company through hyper-growth and its successful NASDAQ public listing in 2021. Prior to Evolv, AJ served as Chief Revenue Officer at Orbital Insight, where he secured over $120 million in venture capital from firms including Sequoia, Google Ventures, and Lux Capital, relationships he continues to support as an advisor. Earlier, AJ spent more than a decade at Eze Software Group, where he contributed to major private equity transactions and served as Co-Head of Global Sales, solidifying his deep roots in the investment management and hedge fund ecosystem. AJ holds a B.S. in Economics from Lehigh University.

Interview with Xin Yan is the Co-Founder and CEO of Sign, a sovereign-grade digital infrastructure for national systems of money, identity, and capital. By Selva Ozelli Esq., CPA, Author of "Sustainably Investing in Digital Assets Globally" Xin Yan is the Co-Founder and CEO of Sign, a sovereign-grade digital infrastructure for national systems of money, identity, and capital. Under his leadership, Sign has raised a total of $55 million. Other major backers include YZi Labs, IDG Capital, Sequoia and Circle. Trends to watch with Xin Yan An electrical engineer by profession, before co founding Sign in 2021, Xin served as an investor at Huobi Group. What started as an e-signature tool (EthSign) Sign has expanded into Sign Protocol, an omni-chain attestation protocol, and TokenTable, a platform for managing and distributing tokenized assets that bridge the gap between traditional legal agreements and blockchain technology. Yan advocates digital identity and sovereign technology, arguing that the next stage of blockchain adoption will be driven by real-world utility and revenue rather than just speculation. He often refers to the community and movement surrounding the protocol as the "Orange Dynasty". Xin's work currently centers on digital sovereignty, onchain verification, and building infrastructure for nation-states, including digital IDs and Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs). Yan is actively working with governments (e.g., in the UAE and Sierra Leone) to implement blockchain-enabled national infrastructure. Tell us about your educational and professional journey leading up to co-founding Sign. I was an electronic engineer by training, secured over 10 patents at school before dive-dropping into crypto by building my own mining rigs. That hands-on experience led me to a leading VC, where I spent three years as an investment manager and engineer backing cornerstone projects like Polkadot and Avalanche. In 2021, I combined that technical grit with my VC insights to co-found Sign. Tell us about Sign Sign builds secure infrastructure for digital money, identity, and capital. Sign has five years of production deployments and has reached a valuation of $1.3billion. Its systems support governments and regulated institutions in delivering secure, large-scale digital transformation, reaching more than 50 million people in production. Sign works with countries like UAE, Thailand, Kyrgyzstan, Singapore, Barbados and Sierra Leone. Most recently, Sign partnered with the Blockchain Center Abu Dhabi and has raised over $55M across three funding rounds. Your work at Sign currently centers on digital sovereignty, on-chain verification, and building infrastructure for nation-states, including digital IDs and Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs). Which countries are you actively working with? Thailand, Kyrgyzstan, Singapore, Barbados and Sierra Leone The United Arab Emirates (UAE) is a leading global cryptocurrency hub, currently ranked third globally in crypto adoption behind only Singapore and Hong Kong. Its status is defined by a "pro-innovation" regulatory environment, zero personal income tax on crypto gains, and the presence of over 1,800 crypto companies as of early 2026. The UAE's central bank digital currency (CBDC) project, known as the Digital Dirham, has transitioned from an experimental pilot to a formal legal reality as of early 2026 with the Digital Dirham officially recognized as legal tender under Federal Decree-Law No. 6 of 2025. Managed by the Central Bank of the UAE (CBUAE), this initiative is a core pillar of the nation's multi-year Financial Infrastructure Transformation (FIT) program. How is Sign involved with UAE's CBCD project? Sign and ADBC recently partnered to accelerate sovereign blockchain infrastructure in Abu Dhabi. In 2026, the tokenization of the world financial market is rapidly advancing through stablecoins and Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), which function as programmable, on-chain cash for ...

In this episode, we are joined by Armando Quintero – Director of California State Parks.  Armando spent more than two decades with the National Park Service, serving as a park ranger at Sequoia, Point Reyes, and the Golden Gate National Recreation Area. He later led the Sierra Nevada Research Institute at UC Merced, served on the California Water Commission, including as its chair, and was elected to the Marin Municipal Water District Board.  In 2020, Governor Newsom appointed him director of California State Parks, one of the largest state park systems in the nation, with over 280 parks spanning 1.6 million acres.  Armando truly has a passionate and purpose-driven approach to his work, and how he views his responsibility as a leader. He joins us to talk about environmental leadership, equity and access in the outdoors, and what it takes to protect California's most treasured landscapes. 

Shoot us a Text.Episode #1343: Today we discuss dealers trusting people more than AI when it comes to lead follow-up, Hyundai's big push to repair struggling service satisfaction, and a new lawsuit claiming Toyota buyers deserve part of a potential $9 billion tariff refund.Show Notes with links:Dealers still believe the human element wins the sale. A new Urban Science survey shows strong confidence in showroom sales teams, but much less trust in AI lead follow-up. The takeaway? Dealers want better process visibility before turning things over to automation.72% of dealers said they're highly confident in their sales teams' ability to convert leads, while 75% say they respond in under five minutes.Dealers still see weak spots: 38% cited lack of real-time insight into lost sales and 34% pointed to inconsistent follow-up.Consumers expect speed. Urban Science found 82% say follow-up matters, and 72% expect a response within 24 hours.AI still has a trust gap. Only 14% of dealers trust AI tools for lead follow-up compared to 57% who trust in-house sales teams.Urban Science's Eric Demont said dealers need “a clear understanding” of wins, losses and defection patterns to improve conversion rates.Hyundai is trying to fix one of its biggest weak spots: service satisfaction. After years of complaints about delays, parts shortages and overloaded service departments, the automaker is rolling out mobile service vans, technician recruiting and dealership efficiency programs to win customers back.Hyundai says poor service capacity and years of engine replacement recalls overwhelmed dealerships and dragged down customer satisfaction scores.The brand has added 4,000+ service bays nationwide, while dealers are extending hours and adding Saturday service to handle demand.Hyundai plans to launch a 150-van mobile service fleet by year's end to handle oil changes, brake jobs, software updates and other light repairs at homes or workplaces.The company is also recruiting more technicians, improving diagnostic training and coaching 185 dealerships on service efficiency and workflow gaps.Hyundai's Michel Poirier said the goal is climbing back up JD Power rankings by 2028, adding: “Service is the most important part of the business.”A California Toyota buyer is taking aim at tariff pricing, claiming customers helped foot the bill for billions in import costs — and should get paid back if Toyota ever receives tariff refunds. A proposed class action lawsuit claims Toyota passed tariff costs onto buyers through higher vehicle and parts prices.The filing covers buyers and lessees of qualifying Toyota vehicles purchased between February 2025 and February 2026.Toyota reportedly absorbed about $9 billion in tariff-related costs tied to Japan, Canada and Mexico operations.Toyota recently raised prices on several models, including a $1,600 increase for the 2026 Sequoia, while calling the changes part of a “regular review of the prices.”Join Paul J Daly and Kyle Mountsier every morning for the Automotive State of the Union podcast  as they connect the dots across car dealerships, retail trends, emerging tech like AI, and cultural shifts—bringing clarity, speed, and people-first insight to automotive leaders navigating a rapidly changing industry.Get the Daily Push Back email at https://www.asotu.com/JOIN the conversation on LinkedIn at: https://www.linkedin.com/company/asotu/

Atlassian connected its AI agents to a richer layer of company knowledge (documents, projects, goals, people) and measured a 44% improvement in answer accuracy using 48% fewer resources. Same models. Different information. Brian Armstrong restructured Coinbase the same week: 14% headcount cut, five management layers maximum. When AI can surface what previously required institutional memory and senior tenure, the organizational layers built around that knowledge become harder to justify.The visible shift gets covered in tech headlines. What gets lost in the announcement energy: none of this works if the company hasn't decided what it wants AI to do.The more widespread barrier is upstream of governance. Most executives approving AI budgets are working through the aftermath of pilots that underdelivered, first-generation deployments that didn't survive contact with their actual data, and early model results that left skepticism the current tools have since substantially outrun. That trust deficit — organizations evaluating new AI investment based on experiences two generations old — is where enterprise AI projects most commonly stall. Shadow AI governance and deployment intent are real risks, but they're downstream of that harder problem. There is no closing the capability gap inside an organization that is quietly waiting for the next deployment to fail too.John Willis co-wrote The DevOps Handbook because software teams were shipping code fast without feedback loops or governance. He sees the same pattern repeating with AI — and he spent five decades documenting what happens when the gap between vendor promises and operational reality gets this wide.* Why shadow AI is more dangerous than an outright ban* Why throughput without governance means instability at scale* Why governance creates flow instead of stopping it* Why most teams have ML evaluation tools when they need audit trails* Why even a five-person startup needs digitally signed records of agent decisions* What AI winters teach us about where we actually are nowListen: Spotify | Apple PodcastsRikki Singh leads product innovation at Twilio — what the company calls its biggest launch in 17 years. Before Twilio she was at McKinsey, where she co-authored the definitive research on what makes a great PM. The Qualtrics 2026 CX Trends Report found nearly 1 in 5 consumers who used AI customer service saw zero benefit. That number is the benchmark she is working against.* Why most AI CX is still FAQ automation with better packaging* Why the LLM wrapper creates false confidence — the model generates strings, it is not thinking* Vitamins vs painkillers: how to parse what customers don't say out loud* How to protect long-horizon bets inside a public company* Why the brand owns the accountability when AI gets a high-stakes interaction wrongListen: Spotify | Apple Podcasts

Paulo Passoni, Managing Partner at Valor Capital, and Olga Maslikhova break down the two forces reshaping tech and capital markets right now — the end of 40 years of global integration as the US-China tech split hardens, and the collapse of the services moat as AI lets companies scale from $0 to $100M in revenue in 24 months by replacing labor. This is the May 2026 edition of TJC Debrief — a monthly show covering tech, venture, and capital markets through a global lens.We cover why China blocked Meta's $2 billion Manus acquisition and what the new US-led versus China-led ecosystem split means for global M&A, how SoftBank's blocked Arm-NVIDIA sale cost half a trillion dollars in value creation and why deals like it will keep happening, Anthropic's $50B round closing in 48 hours with secondary markets pricing ahead of the primary and what it reveals about AI's escape velocity, why Anthropic and OpenAI are forming joint ventures with Blackstone, TPG, Apollo, Sequoia, General Atlantic, and GIC to lock in compute capacity and guaranteed revenue, Plata's $5B round and why Qatar Investment Authority, US endowments, and long-only funds piled in alongside Valor Capital — and what mispriced Russian and Eastern European talent has to do with it, why data is becoming the last real moat and how Nubank, Revolut, CloudWalk, Mercado Libre, and JPMorgan are racing to train proprietary models on their own customer data, the radiologist paradox and what it predicts for tax accountants, lawyers, and every services job AI is supposed to kill, the legal AI startup Enter and the wild story of prompt injections hidden in PDFs filed to courts, why humanoid robots at $600/month today and $100/month in ten years will reshape global labor markets, Elon Musk and SpaceX as the "build potential, then monetize" playbook, and the $0 to $100M in 24 months phenomenon — why early movers in vertical AI are already hitting this scale and where the next opportunities will emerge across legal, wealth management, healthcare, and security.Subscribe to The J Curve Insider newsletter for deeper insights and follow Olga on LinkedIn and Instagram.

In 1891, a knot of men murdered a 1,300-year-old tree to prove it wasn't a "tall tale." We visit the Mark Twain Stump, a 16-foot-wide wooden stage that serves as a monument to early American hubris, the cost of disbelief, and the bittersweet birth of the conservation of the Sequoias. This episode is part of our Weekend Road Trip Series, where we bring you stories of the strange, incredible, and wondrous places right here in the United States, that you can see from the road. This series was produced in partnership with T-Mobile.   Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Mati Staniszewski, co-founder and CEO of ElevenLabs, joins Sequoia partner Andrew Reed at AI Ascent 2026 to talk about how a four-year-old company built a frontier audio AI business with just over 400 people and over $400M in revenue. He explains why audio was overlooked in 2022 when the rest of AI was chasing text and images, why ElevenLabs chose to monetize from day one rather than raise indefinitely, and why he believes voice will be the primary interface for agents, robots, and the next generation of computing. Also: why emotional intelligence is the next frontier in voice, and what happens when one voice agent realizes it's talking to another.

Clovis West High School was placed on lockdown after a suspicious phone call, prompting a response from law enforcement. Students and staff were kept inside classrooms while police investigated, and a nearby elementary school was also put on safety protocols before the situation was cleared and the campus deemed safe. After several hours, the initial search was called off amid reports the cub may have returned to its habitat. However, another sighting was reported a few hours later about a mile away near Spruce and Marks, prompting wildlife officials to resume their search. A massive cyberattack on the Canvas online learning system is affecting colleges across Central California, including Fresno State, UC Merced, and College of the Sequoias. The hack disrupted access to assignments and coursework, and officials say the incident may involve unauthorized access to student data, as schools work to restore systems and assess the impact. Please Like, Comment and Follow 'Philip Teresi on KMJ' on all platforms: --- Philip Teresi on KMJ is available on the KMJNOW app, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube or wherever else you listen to podcasts. -- Philip Teresi on KMJ Weekdays 2-6 PM Pacific on News/Talk 580 AM & 105.9 FM KMJ | Website | Facebook | Instagram | X | Podcast | Amazon | - Everything KMJ KMJNOW App | Podcasts | Facebook | X | Instagram Please Like, Comment and Follow 'Philip Teresi on KMJ' on all platforms: --- Philip Teresi on KMJ is available on the KMJNOW app, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube or wherever else you listen to podcasts. --Philip Teresi on KMJWeekdays 2-6 PM Pacific on News/Talk 580 AM & 105.9 FM KMJ | Website | Facebook | Instagram | X | Podcast | Amazon | -Everything KMJ KMJNOW App | Podcasts | Facebook | X | Instagram See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Clovis West High School was placed on lockdown after a suspicious phone call, prompting a response from law enforcement. Students and staff were kept inside classrooms while police investigated, and a nearby elementary school was also put on safety protocols before the situation was cleared and the campus deemed safe. After several hours, the initial search was called off amid reports the cub may have returned to its habitat. However, another sighting was reported a few hours later about a mile away near Spruce and Marks, prompting wildlife officials to resume their search. A massive cyberattack on the Canvas online learning system is affecting colleges across Central California, including Fresno State, UC Merced, and College of the Sequoias. The hack disrupted access to assignments and coursework, and officials say the incident may involve unauthorized access to student data, as schools work to restore systems and assess the impact. Please Like, Comment and Follow 'Philip Teresi on KMJ' on all platforms: --- Philip Teresi on KMJ is available on the KMJNOW app, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube or wherever else you listen to podcasts. -- Philip Teresi on KMJ Weekdays 2-6 PM Pacific on News/Talk 580 AM & 105.9 FM KMJ | Website | Facebook | Instagram | X | Podcast | Amazon | - Everything KMJ KMJNOW App | Podcasts | Facebook | X | Instagram Please Like, Comment and Follow 'Philip Teresi on KMJ' on all platforms: --- Philip Teresi on KMJ is available on the KMJNOW app, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube or wherever else you listen to podcasts. --Philip Teresi on KMJWeekdays 2-6 PM Pacific on News/Talk 580 AM & 105.9 FM KMJ | Website | Facebook | Instagram | X | Podcast | Amazon | -Everything KMJ KMJNOW App | Podcasts | Facebook | X | Instagram See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Sponsored by Chargebee, subscription and revenue management → check out their startup offer: https://www.chargebee.com/startups - Samar Abbas, Founder of temporal.io https://www.linkedin.com/in/samar-abbas-381997/   - Samar Abbas, co-founder of Temporal.io, shares the journey of building an open-source platform that ensures durable execution of code, allowing developers to focus on business logic instead of handling failures and reliability. - Temporal.io originated from years of experience at companies like Amazon, Microsoft, and Uber, where Samar and his co-founder iterated on workflow and state management systems, eventually creating a new category called "durable execution." - The company's open-source approach led to rapid community adoption, with major companies like Snap using Temporal for mission-critical workloads, validating the product's value and scalability. - Temporal.io monetizes by offering a fully managed cloud service with a consumption-based pricing model, aligning customer costs with the value delivered. - The company has raised significant funding, including a $300M Series D led by Andreessen Horowitz (a16z), with participation from Lightspeed Venture Partners and Sapphire Ventures, reaching a $5B valuation.

If you have any sort of connection to former congressman Barney Frank, please reach out to Graham!Graham Neray is CEO of Oso. Oso provides authorization, governance, and security for AI agents to help customers confidently control their agent footprint. The company was founded in 2019 for authorization-as-a-service more generally, and they have since found traction using their technology to secure AI adoption. The team has raised from some of the top investors in the world including Sequoia, Felicis, and Harpoon. Before Oso, Graham was at MongoDB where he started in product marketing before taking over as Chief of Staff in 2016. Over 7 years he helped the company grow revenue 250x and headcount 30x. In the episode we discuss the transformation of MongoDB over his tenure, the lessons that transferred (and the ones that didn't), the evolution of Oso, controversial takes on building in stealth and creating an open-core company, and a lot more.  https://www.osohq.com/

Boris Cherny, creator of Claude Code at Anthropic, joins Sequoia partner Lauren Reeder at AI Ascent 2026 to talk about where coding goes from here. He explains why he hasn't written a line of code in 2026, why he now ships dozens of PRs a day from his phone, and why he believes coding is effectively solved — at least for the code he writes. Also: why loops are the future, why he thinks Claude Code itself may be 100 lines of code a year from now, and why the invention of the printing press is the right analogy for what's about to happen to software.

Watch This Episode On YouTubeIf you're looking to understand the business of film, let me suggest listening to Ben Fritz, who covers entertainment for the Wall Street Journal and is my guest for the podcast.Why? Well, for me, it's two things. First of all, if you listen to his astonishing documentary podcast called "With Great Power: The Rise of Superhero Cinema", you get to hear why he's such a successful journalist. An executive will offer a throwaway line, and Ben simply asks: why? You get something much closer to the truth from a one syllable question than one might expect.It happens throughout this podcast series from 2023, and it is a true masterclass on how interviews should be conducted.And two -- he's just straight with people. In this episode, we talk about an article he recently co-wrote on MUBI, the streaming service, and the money they've lost over the past year. In almost any other situation, the company doesn't participate, the article is branded a hit piece, and the audience is left wondering about the veracity of the story.Instead, MUBI's CEO is quoted in the article, which tells me the respect he gives the co-authors.Or maybe it's three: just listen to the insight Ben provides in this episode. If you go by the notion that the business offers an explanation of the films that show up on our screens, there's no better person than Ben Fritz.In this episode, Ben and I talk about:his preference for hosting a podcast or being a guest on one;his ability to tell a story evenly without looking for gotcha moments, which distinguishes his journalism;how he got started in filmmaking;what he expects out of the summer festival market;what he's learned between covering filmmaking to AI and back to filmmaking;the future of AI in filmmaking;the "$50 Movie Ticket Has Arrived" article and what it means for theaters;what that means for indie filmmakers;the behind the scenes story of his article, "How VC Money and Israel Outrage Derailed a Hot Hollywood Startup" about MUBI;what MUBI's business model portends for the industry;how production companies make money in such a competitive environment -- branding;why Silicon Valley doesn't invest more in Hollywood;what's next for him and how things have changed since 2019;Ben's Indie Film Highlights: PINK WALL (2019) dir. by Tom Cullen; COW (2021) dir. by Andrea ArnoldMemorable Quotes:"I try to make clear to people I'm not gonna pull any punches, but I'm also not here to try to get a gotcha moment.""I feel like it's becoming a lot like everything in the American economy, which is, it's a have and have-nots world."" What I realized quickly is if you understand the business, then you understand why you get the movies and TV shows that you get, right?"" So you could see more movies getting made, more original movies getting made, more people who don't have access to Disney and Netflix being able to raise a little bit of money and make an interesting movie on their own. So we could see this blossoming of creativity that maybe would rival what we saw in the 1970s."" The danger, which some people in Hollywood think, is the more movies become a premium experience where you spend a lot of money, the more it becomes something people think of as I only do this two or three times a year," " I think the I'm gonna get a specialty label or specialty company to buy it and put it in theaters is...that's like winning the lottery at this point."" The one promising thing in this world of indie film theatrical I've seen recently is you've seen some YouTubers put movies into theaters and find a niche audience."" I was able to connect to a source who was just close to Mubi, who was able to give me a lot of inside information on really what happened."" Mubi is a solid business. That's why Sequoia invested in them. It is a healthy business. They just made this huge mistake last year.""My teenage son knows what A24 is, and that name means something to him.""Sequoia's investment in Mubi was shocking to a lot of people. This is so outside the box for what they normally do. And the only other prominent example of VC investment in entertainment is A24, which definitely has some VC investment in it."Links:Ben Fritz's WSJ PageBen Fritz's Website

In this episode of The Rainmaker Podcast, Gui Costin sits down with Keith VanOrden, Head of Retail Distribution for North America at TCW. Keith brings nearly 30 years of experience building and leading sales teams, including more than 13 years at BlackRock, most recently as the national sales manager for iShares, and earlier roles at Delaware Investments, Fidelity, and Putnam, where he started his career in Boston.The conversation opens with Keith's origin story growing up in Philadelphia, attending Syracuse where he met his wife Toby, and his early internship at Smith Barney that pointed him toward distribution. He shares how a literal steno notebook, started during his wholesaling years, became the blueprint for his approach to leadership. Tracking nine different sales managers across six years, he identified the two traits that mattered most: trust and having walked in the team's shoes.When Keith joined TCW three years ago, the firm had great active fixed income, concentrated equity portfolios, and a strong legacy in private credit and asset-backed finance but no retail sales team. He built one from scratch, drawing on the notes and patterns he'd been collecting for decades. Today the team includes 15 internals, 14 in the wirehouse and independent channels, 9 in RIA, and a wealth portfolio consulting team built around white-glove service.Keith and Gui dig into the channelization debate, agreeing that the right answer depends on team size, product breadth, and where revenue actually lives. They unpack TCW's sales process anchored in Sequoia training, transparent alignment between salesperson, client, and firm interests, and a disciplined follow-up cadence. They also break down CRM as the lifeblood of distribution, with Salesforce, voice-to-text dictation, automatic internal follow-ups, and 100% adoption. Keith shares a study that overturns the old 4–6 touchpoints-per-year rule the real number is 8–12 and explains why digital engagement signals have to feed into the CRM to capture the full picture of an account.On communication, Keith emphasizes Team chats over email, including channels he doesn't even know about, which he sees as a healthy sign. He runs annual "retirement parties" for bad ideas and standing meetings that have outlived their usefulness. Gui shares Dakota's check-in cadence short, momentum-driven, never about performing for the boss.Keith reflects on managing up after 14 years with the same boss, emphasizing that he never coasts on the relationship. He describes his leadership style as servant leadership and tells the Ed Harris / Gulf and Western story every time Harris got a big job, he asked his team what they needed to succeed, and then he gave it to them. Keith looks for four traits in salespeople: natural curiosity, work ethic, a development mindset, and genuine love for the business.He closes on his biggest challenge: knowing when to pivot versus when to stick with what's working. Sometimes the highest-leverage move is to keep doing exactly what's working and trust the discipline.Tired of chasing outdated leads? Book a demo to see how Dakota Marketplace simplifies your fundraising process with accurate, up-to-date investor data. 

Dmitri Dolgov, co-CEO of Waymo, joins Sequoia partner Konstantine Buhler at AI Ascent 2026 to talk about the 20-year arc from the DARPA Grand Challenge to fully autonomous service in eleven cities and counting. He explains how Waymo persisted through every AV hype cycle by treating safety as the non-negotiable foundation, why exponential scaling is finally here (10 of Waymo's 20 million autonomous rides have happened in the last seven months), and how the Waymo Foundation Model — a multimodal world action model that powers the driver, the simulator, and the critic — actually works under the hood. Also: why Waymo is now 13x safer than human drivers, and the moment a Waymo detected a pedestrian behind a city bus by reading the LiDAR returns of their feet.

"Many of these AI advancements, where the U.S. is more on the innovative theoretical side of creating new models... China's really ahead on commercializing them, and that's their advantage. I think saying that China and the U.S. are equivalent in AI is probably an overstatement. I think the AI center of innovation continues to be in Silicon Valley. This could change—the gap is closing. I do think the U.S. is still ahead, but I think China is catching up."Fresh out of the studio, Bernard Leong reconnects with Rebecca Fannin, founder of Silicon Dragon Ventures and author of Tech Titans of China, six years on from their first conversation about the original landmark book. Rebecca traces China's transformation from copier to innovator, the decoupling of US-China venture capital and the reroute of capital flows toward the Middle East and Southeast Asia, and an AI race where China commercialises while the US theorises. The conversation moves through Chinese EV dominance, humanoid robotics, and semiconductor self-sufficiency, before opening out to a multipolar tech order with India and Saudi Arabia rising. She closes with a hopeful note on reopening US-China collaboration.Episode Highlights:[00:00] Quote of the Day by Rebecca Fannin from Silicon Dragon Ventures[01:00] Introduction: Rebecca Fannin[03:00] From copier to innovator: the global perception shift[04:00] BAT plus ByteDance: still the tech titans[05:30] Beyond BAT: TMD, ByteDance, DiDi go global[07:00] Temu and the de minimis tariff hit[09:00] Cross-border VC decouples: Sequoia, GGV split[10:00] Capital reroutes to the Middle East and Singapore[11:30] No more golden era for cross-Pacific VC[12:00] AI, quantum, semiconductor funding dries up[13:00] The 2020-2023 crackdown and Beijing's reset[15:00] Apple's supply chain dependency hard to unwind[16:00] The AI race: Chinese open-source models surge[17:30] China commercialises, the US theorises[18:30] Silicon Valley adopts 996 and Chinese-style attacks[20:30] Chinese EVs surpass Tesla and European makers[22:00] Why Xiaomi built a car where Apple couldn't[22:30] DJI, Unitree, UBTech: China's robotics dominance[24:00] Humanoid robots and the policy maker dilemma[25:00] China's semiconductor self-sufficiency push[25:30] Nvidia export controls and the SMIC question[27:00] What few in the West truly understood five years ago[28:00] Quantum computing as the long-term frontier bet[29:00] Beyond binary: India, ASEAN, Saudi Arabia, Israel[31:30] Why China's rise became the biggest tech story[33:00] Hope for a reopening of US-China collaboration[33:30] ClosingProfile: Rebecca Fannin, Author of "The New Tech Titans of China" and Silicon Dragon VenturesLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rebecca-fannin-533128/Podcast Information: Bernard Leong hosts and produces the show. The proper credits for the intro and end music are "Energetic Sports Drive." G. Thomas Craig mixed and edited the episode in both video and audio format.

This week on the show: Todd reports from inside the Oakland federal courthouse where Elon Musk is suing OpenAI, Sam Altman, and Microsoft, with jury selection revealing just how hard it is to find anyone neutral about Musk these days. Meanwhile, Microsoft and OpenAI restructured their partnership the same morning the trial began — and less than 24 hours later, OpenAI's models landed on Amazon's cloud. Then, Microsoft and Amazon both dropped blockbuster earnings, with Azure up 40%, AWS posting its fastest growth in 15 quarters, and the two companies combining for nearly $400 billion in capital spending this year alone. We also discuss a wild Semafor story about a serial entrepreneur who handed his entire life over to an AI agent that now emails people as him, sets up meetings without his knowledge, and even ordered him a computer. Plus, John tells the story of how Seattle's Flying Fish Partners — a VC firm with less than $250 million under management — hustled its way into a $1.1 billion seed round alongside Sequoia, Google, and Nvidia. And we tackle the quickly debunked rumor that Mark Zuckerberg and Tim Cook might buy the Seahawks. And finally, the return of the GeekWire Trivia Challenge.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

“Anyone that's properly using AI now knows that you tell it what you want, it gives you a plan, carries out the work, and you judge and tweak. You're not a passive victim — you're an active user with outcomes in mind.” — Keith Teare Do we really want a no-hands job from Silicon Valley? That Was the Week newsletter publisher Keith Teare — who thinks all tech innovation results in human progress — thinks we do. No hands, no problem, Keith says. But I'm not sure. Especially given the powers-that-be giving us that no-hands job. Keith welcomes the end of what he calls the “typed” and “touched” computing era — keyboards, mice, touchscreens, and all the manifold ways we have used our hands to interact with computers since the 1980s. That's the outcome, he predicts, of the race to AGI. So far so good. But what happens if our no-hands AI future is controlled by Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and Facebook? This week these four behemoths committed 00 billion to AI infrastructure investment in 2026 alone — 2 percent of all US GDP. These companies are racing to build (and own) the foundational mechanics of AGI. That's always how it's been, Keith says, embracing our no-hands future. I'm less open-armed. What happens if we want our hands to fend off AGI? No, I'm not so keen on a no-hands job from Silicon Valley. Especially one couched in the altruism of human progress. Five Takeaways •       The End of the Hand-Driven Computing Era: Andrej Karpathy's observation at Sequoia's AI Ascent: he no longer uses his hands to do his work. He speaks to the computer; the computer acts; he judges and refines. The keyboard, the mouse, the touchscreen — all the hand-driven interfaces that have defined computing since the 1980s are entering their twilight. Karpathy calls it “software 3.0”. Keith, two years ago, wrote an editorial called “eyes, hands, ears, and mouth” about the inclusion of other human attributes beyond hands. That prediction has arrived. •       $700 Billion: The CapEx Explosion: A post by @Signal framed the week's numbers: $700 billion in AI infrastructure spending in 2026, equivalent to 2 percent of all US GDP. This kind of spending, the post observes, usually happens via governments or wars. This time, it's four private companies — Microsoft, Amazon, Google, and Meta — racing to build the foundational mechanics of AGI. Meta was punished by Wall Street for overspending; Google was rewarded because its numbers were strong enough to justify it. The same bet, two different verdicts, depending on your quarterly earnings. •       Was the Internet Privately Built? The ARPANET Argument: Keith's claim: innovation waves have always been privately financed. The railways, the telephone, the electricity grid, the commercial internet. Andrew's counter: ARPANET was a massive government investment that created the protocols on which the internet runs. Keith's response: ARPANET was a university bulletin board that created the precedent, not the infrastructure. Andrew's response: that's not exactly what ARPANET was. They agree that government research matters. They disagree on how much credit it deserves for what became the commercial internet. •       The Revenge of the Idea Guy: Sam Altman's line of the week. In the past, an idea person came up with a concept and then needed expensive engineers to build it. Many ideas never saw the light of day because the engineering cost was prohibitive. Now, anyone can speak an idea into existence. AI builds the plan, executes the work, and you judge and refine. That changes the economics of creativity, advertising, software development, and anything else that used to require specialist execution. The specialist is not dead — but specialists will increasingly use AI to scale themselves, rather than being hired one at a time. •       Should Kids Use AI in Schools? A New Yorker piece asks what it would take to get AI out of schools. Keith's view: the premise misunderstands how AI works now. The fear is passive students asking chatbots for answers and having their brains atrophy. The reality is that proper AI use requires active judgment at every step — telling it what you want, refining the plan, evaluating the output. If schools understand that, they embrace AI. If they don't, they produce graduates unequipped for a world in which the idea guy with AI tools now has the power the engineering team used to have. Andrew's prediction: the kids whose parents ban AI will eventually sue them. About the Guest Keith Teare is a British-American entrepreneur, investor, and publisher of the That Was the Week newsletter — a daily curation of the most important stories at the intersection of technology, business, and culture. He is a co-founder of TechCrunch and a long-time interlocutor on Keen On America. References: •       That Was the Week newsletter by Keith Teare — this week's editorial: “Hand Job?” •       Andrej Karpathy at Sequoia Capital AI Ascent 2026 — the Karpathy interview on Software 3.0 and the end of typed input. •       @Signal, “$700 billion on AI infrastructure” — the post that framed the CapEx question. •       Jessica Winter, “What Will It Take to Get AI Out of Schools?” The New Yorker, 2026. •       Episode 2891: John Steele Gordon on how information technology knitted America together — the ARPANET backstory that feeds directly into this week's argument. About Keen On America Nobody asks more awkward questions than the Anglo-American writer and filmmaker Andrew Keen. In Keen On America, Andrew brings his pointed Transatlantic wit to making sense of the United States — hosting daily interviews about the history and future of this now venerable Republic. With nearly 2,900 episodes since the show launched on TechCrunch in 2010, Keen On America is the most prolific intellectual interview show in the history of podcasting. WebsiteSubstackYouTubeApple PodcastsSpotify Chapters: (00:31) - Keith leads with “Hand Job?” — explaining the headline (03:27) - Karpathy at Sequoia: the end of typed and touched input (04:30) - CapEx: the real story of the week (05:35) - $700 billion — 2% of US GDP on AI infrastructure (06:38) - Was the commercial internet privately built? (07:35) - ARPANET: pathetic bulletin board or foundational infrastructure? (09:08) - Keith and Andrew agree to disagree on government's role (11:00) - Big Tech earnings: Google up, Meta down, and why (17:00) - OpenAI's strategy: the long game

Greg Brockman, co-founder and president of OpenAI, joins Sequoia partner Alfred Lin at AI Ascent 2026 for a conversation that spans the full OpenAI stack. He explains why the company will never have enough compute, why he believes we're 80% of the way to AGI, and why the agentic coding tools that wrote 20% of your code last December are now writing 80% of it. Also: why human attention is becoming the scarcest resource in AI-augmented work, and what it might be like to one day run an organization of 100,000 agents.

Demis Hassabis, co-founder and CEO of Google DeepMind and 2024 Nobel laureate in chemistry for AlphaFold, joins Sequoia partner Konstantine Buhler at AI Ascent 2026 for a wide-ranging conversation about the path to AGI and what comes after. He explains why he believes AGI is achievable by 2030, why drug discovery could collapse from ten years to days, and why we should think of information, not matter or energy, as the most fundamental substance in the universe. Also: what Einstein would tell us about the limits of today's models, and why the next year or two will be critical for humanity.

Andrej Karpathy (co-founder of OpenAI, former head of AI at Tesla, and now founder of Eureka Labs) talks with Sequoia partner Stephanie Zhan at AI Ascent 2026 about what's changed in the year since he coined "vibe coding." He explains why he's never felt more behind as a programmer, why agentic engineering is the more serious discipline taking shape on top of vibe coding, and why we should think of LLMs not as animals but as ghosts: jagged, statistical, summoned entities that require a new kind of taste and judgment to direct. He also touches on Software 3.0, the limits of verifiability, and why you can outsource your thinking but never your understanding.

Limited BONUS: First 1,000 builders get $1,000. Claim yours while supplies lasts.: https://startup-ideas-pod.link/hyperagent I sit down with Howie Liu, co-founder and CEO of Airtable, to talk about the agent economy and the launch of HyperAgent. We walk through Sequoia's charts on AI agent deployment, the economics of token-based work versus human labor, and why frontier agents have crossed a threshold that changes how companies get built. Howie then does a live show-and-tell of HyperAgent, including a custom "Greg Isenberg contrarian AI" skill he spins up in real time. This one is for anyone building a solopreneur business, operating a fleet of agents, or trying to figure out where to place their bet in the agent ecosystem Timestamps 00:00 – Intro 02:22 – Sequoia's AI agent deployment chart reaction 04:41 – Copilot vs Autopilot territory and the $1T+ opportunity 08:13 – Agent economics vs human labor costs 11:12 – Fastest enterprise adoption curve in history 14:48 – The agent command center and fleet of 20 agents 18:03 – What is HyperAgent? 19:43 – Live demo: hyperlocal real estate market reports 22:38 – HyperAgent as the founder, not just the developer 23:21 – Street View, Zillow redesigns, and visual tool power 24:15 – Command center view across a fleet of agents 25:48 – Skills as the key primitive for frontier agents 26:30 – Building the Greg Isenberg contrarian AI skill live 32:31 – HyperAgent vs Perplexity Computer, Manus, OpenClaw, Codex 34:52 – Reviewing writing skill 36:55 – The arbitrage of persistence 41:31 – Confidence milestones: first dollar, $10K/month 35:27 – Reviewing contrarian tweet drafts live 45:05 – Giving the agent feedback and building rubrics 50:15 – Connectors, OAuth, and building custom API skills 53:03 – How to get started with HyperAgent 01:01:54 – Credit giveaway for listeners 01:03:31 – Closing Thoughts Key Points Frontier agents have crossed a threshold in the last 4–5 months where they function as true autonomous coworkers, not just chat assistants. Reframe agent cost by value delivered: a $150 token spend for a board memo beats hours of human time, so anchor on opportunity cost. The real arbitrage is persistence: 99% of people quit after one shot, while daily practice for 30/60/90 days produces top 1% operators. Skills are the most important primitive in frontier agents, turning generally intelligent models into domain experts through playbooks. HyperAgent's differentiation is a low floor plus a high ceiling, with rubrics, LLM-as-judge evals, and fleet-wide observability for scaling. Aim for $100B companies with under 5 employees, built on fleets of always-on agents mapped to human job roles. The #1 tool to find startup ideas/trends - https://www.ideabrowser.com LCA helps Fortune 500s and fast-growing startups build their future - from Warner Music to Fortnite to Dropbox. We turn 'what if' into reality with AI, apps, and next-gen products https://latecheckout.agency/ The Vibe Marketer - Resources for people into vibe marketing/marketing with AI: https://www.thevibemarketer.com/ FIND ME ON SOCIAL X/Twitter: https://twitter.com/gregisenberg Instagram: https://instagram.com/gregisenberg/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/gisenberg/ FIND HOWIE ON SOCIAL X/Twitter: https://x.com/howietl Hyperagent: https://www.hyperagent.com Airtable: https://www.airtable.com-

The Great private Capital Reset is upon us. Markets are volatile and driving new economic imperatives. Are VC funds still VC funds, even if they raise billions per fund? What happened to the rest of the market? What is driving VC investments? What do Limited Partners think? What is on their minds? This and more, in episode 76 of Tech Deciphered. Navigation: Intro The State of the Reset: The Hangover from the Party? LP Fatigue and VC Differentiation What Really Matters: Performance.. Returns The Mega Fund Question The Case for Smaller… Rightsized Funds What Comes Next? Conclusion Our co-hosts: Bertrand Schmitt, Entrepreneur in Residence at Red River West, co-founder of App Annie / Data.ai, business angel, advisor to startups and VC funds, @bschmitt Nuno Goncalves Pedro, Investor, Managing Partner, Founder at Chamaeleon, @ngpedro Our show: Tech DECIPHERED brings you the Entrepreneur and Investor views on Big Tech, VC and Start-up news, opinion pieces and research. We decipher their meaning, and add inside knowledge and context. Being nerds, we also discuss the latest gadgets and pop culture news Subscribe To Our Podcast Bertrand Introduction Welcome to episode 76 of Tech Deciphered. This episode will be about the great private capital reset. As you know, or you have probably heard, there is significant structural transformation in the world of venture capital, and we are probably witnessing a fundamental reset of the private capital stack. We got a huge bubble in 2020, 2021. Fueled by near-zero interest rates. We got inflated fund size, compressed due diligence, and now a generation of zombie funds and zombie startups. Now that rates have normalized, exits have not been as much as expected. LP patience is a warning sign, and I guess the industry is being forced to confront an uncomfortable truth: most VC funds raised since 2017 might not return what their LPs expected. You know, how do we start?   Nuno This is going to be a relatively nuanced episode. Obviously, there is going to be a lot of haves and have-nots, both in terms of VC funds, also in terms of startups. And so I want to start with that. This is going to be more nuanced than all transformational and disruptive.   Bertrand It’s not the end. It’s not the end.   Nuno State of the Reset: The Hangover from the Party? It’s not the end. There’s still huge mega funds that are raising more and more. It’s clear that the music has stopped, right? So if we’re playing the game of chairs, the music has stopped. Around ’22, ’23, we started seeing the first signals that funds had raised way too much money. Firms collectively raised around $669 billion globally in 2021 alone. If we fast forward now to last year, 2025, depending on the sources, we did some internal analysis at Chameleon. We came up with $75.6 billion was raised last year by 493 funds, right? So That’s a significant drop, right, in terms of fundraising. Other sources would say a little bit more. There’s a little bit of a discussion around how much did the top 30 funds capture. If you believe some of the stats out there, they would say that actually top 30 funds captured 75% of all capital raised last year. We did again some internal analysis at Chameleon, and the conclusion we came to, it was closer to 50 to 55%. So not as dramatic as some of the sources out there, but still pretty dramatic. There’s a lot of capital concentration on the top funds. Again, the top 30 funds would’ve raised 50 to 55% of capital or up to 75% according to other sources. So definitely a tremendous amount of concentration. There was a lot more fragmentation in terms of capital raised if we’re looking at the years from 2010, 2011, all the way through 2021. So 2021 would’ve been sort of the peak of non-concentration if you look at that. And that again, now we are getting more and more concentration. There’s more and more of this arbitrage around, I’ll give money to the top funds, I will not give money to the smaller funds, or I’ll give less money to the smaller funds. There’s a little bit of a movement around concentration. We’ll talk about it later and what that means. Are mega funds really better? Are the small funds still the way to go? We’ll talk a lot about that later in today’s episode. There seems to be a little bit of a bifurcation. We could say it’s either bifurcation around top-tier VCs or larger VC funds versus smaller VC funds. My perspective is the bifurcation that we’re seeing right now is more of a bifurcation between funds that are no longer just stepped into the VC space, but they’re actually becoming more and more private equity firms with full asset management range from early stage all the way to late stage. Think of it almost like a private equity hedge fund, quasi, versus classic VC funds. And I think what we’re seeing is the Andreessen Horowitzes, the a16zs of the world, the NEAs, the Sequoia Capitals, just to name a few, becoming more and more broad asset class managers across private equity, whereas you have more classic VC happening in earlier stages. And so that’s the real bifurcation that I think is actually happening.   Bertrand And maybe not really hedge fund, because they are always still long-only funds. So there is no hedging happening, at least as far as I know.   Nuno Well, some of these guys have become RIAs, like A16z has become an RIA, so they can do secondaries.   Bertrand That’s true. Yeah.   Nuno And they can also sell stuff, etc. So I don’t know how aggressive they’re going to be in terms of secondaries and selling and actually doing other kinds of services you can do if you’re an RIA. But it’s not, I think, out of the realm of possibility that they would sort of acquire and sell stock more rapidly. In that way, to your point, Bertrand, maybe they actually become beyond just long guys, right?   Bertrand Yes. Another trend I have seen is some of the larger VC funds seems to have no problem investing in multiple competitors. This was not possible before. I mean, if you’re a VC fund, you had some sort of duty not to invest in the competitors, but now some invest OpenAI, Anthropic at the same time. Do you see that as part of this evolution?   Nuno For sure. And I think there’s a lot of people like the ostrich putting their heads below the ground and it’s like, “Eh, no, no, nothing to see here.” But that does constitute a conflict of interest. And if I’m a startup raising, this assumption that you will not invest in one of my competitors is no longer there, certainly for the mega funds, because of that notion of deployment of capital. Now, some funds will still hide under the notion, actually formally from a fund perspective, we’re not investing in competitors. It just happens that different types of our funds are investing in competitors. Like maybe my growth fund is investing in a competitor to my early stage fund, right? But our funds are relatively independent. So I think there’s a little bit of hide and seek that will go on if you talk to some of the fund managers. Well, they say, well, we’re not investing out of the same fund into these competitors. But between you and I, as we know, a lot of these partnerships actually do a lot of stuff together at the general partnership level. So are there really actual Chinese walls between the funds? Well, it really depends on the partnership. And to be honest, most of the partnerships don’t have very significant Chinese walls between the funds, right? The managing general partners sometimes actually occupy investment committee roles across different funds. So I think the conflict of interest is there. So that’s why I say there’s a little bit of ostrich behavior. Put your head behind the ground or below the ground and just pretend nothing is happening. Just sharing maybe a couple of interesting stats. Global fund closings for 2025, according to our numbers at Chameleon, 1,098 closed. In 2025. Closed is when you start deploying capital, right? Whereas— so it’s not closed down, it’s closed like we start deploying capital. And that number, 1,098, is dramatically down from 1,600 in 2024. And it’s actually the lowest number of closings that we saw since 2014. So again, this is bad, right? It means there’s less funds doing fund closings and deploying capital in the market than since 2014 and dramatically below the 2024 numbers, right? Where we already saw some market readjustments. The number of active VC firms in the US that did 2+ deals, which is not a huge bar, has dropped 38% back to numbers in 2023. So we don’t have numbers that are a little bit more up to date, but basically in 2023, those numbers are already dramatically dropped. So there’s less and less active funds. So there’s funds that might be in the market, but they’re not actually deploying that much capital, not doing that many investment. They’re sort of either zombie funds or relatively passive funds that have passed their investment period. For those listening to us, the investment period for a VC fund is normally between the first 3 to 5 years of the fund, which is when you build your portfolio, when you can invest in new companies. After that time period, everything that you do up to normally what would be year 10 is follow-ons. You put more money into the companies that you’re already invested in, that you already constructed portfolio with during those 3 to 5 years.   Bertrand Yeah, that’s a pretty scary change. And obviously, I guess we’ll come to it, but the time it takes to fully liquidate investments is getting longer and longer. In the old days, we used to talk about VC funds having a 10-year life, maybe a +1/+1 in terms of extension of the fund life. But it looks like it’s taking 16 to 18 years actually to get full liquidity from a fund investment.   Nuno LP Fatigue and VC Differentiation And I think that’s the scariest piece. I mean, just to share some numbers, we in venture capital talk about vintages, right? Which year did your fund start in? Normally when you did your first close onto the fund, as we were saying before, close is when you get all your investors at that moment in time to come in and you do your first close so the next fund starts running. 2018 vintage funds, right? This is now almost 7 years ago. So you should start having— actually 8 years ago almost at this point in time. You should start already getting distributions or you start getting cash back if you’re a limited partner and investor in those funds, you should start getting cash back. Half of all 2018 vintage funds have returned $0 to their LPs. So they’ve had no distributions to their LPs. 2020 vintage, which was a very hot vintage, only 42% have begun any distribution. So 58% have distributed $0, right? 2021, only 25% have done any distributions. Now, I happen to have a 2018 vintage fund and a 2021 fund. My 2018 fund has already distributed over 3x net of fees in distributions, and my 2021 fund’s already over 10% distributed back in distribution. So we’re very proud of that. But in general, the numbers are awful. There’s no liquidity back to LPs. And to your point, that’s kind of a big deal because some of these funds have been going on for 7, 8 years, and where’s the liquidity going to come from? On the other hand, if you look at TVPI, so DPI is distributions to paid-ins cash on cash. But if you look at TVPI, which is total value to paid-in, which also includes the book value or the value that you’re marking it on your books, basically the paper value as we call it for the company, even on that, the median 2017 fund, so 2017 vintage fund has a TVPI, total value to paid-in, of only around 1.76x, which is well below what should be, which is sort of the 2 to 3x benchmark of a really good performing fund. So the median funds are doing very, very poorly overall. So if you add that to the fact of what’s happening and distributions are taking a long time, back to your point, Bertrand, it’s taking like— this should be a 10-year asset class, maybe 11, 12 years, and now it’s looking a little bit like a 15, to 18-year asset class, which is not what most limited partners sign up for. Part of this dynamic, I think, is that we’ve had tremendously overvalued private companies over the last few years, right? Secondly, these companies have just stayed private longer. And I was having a discussion recently with a friend of mine, it’s like, hey, what’s this thing about companies are staying private much longer? Is there some dynamic around secondaries? And the reality is there is a dynamic around secondaries, right? Because if I’m a very large fund and I can get away with doing secondaries on my portfolio, I will get liquidity at some point, right? But someone else is stuck with private stock, which hopefully will IPO, but who knows, right? And so there’s this funny dynamic right now of because of secondaries, because of a couple of other things that are happening in the market, actually a lot of these startups are staying private for tremendous amounts of times, and some of them will IPO and they’ll be huge deals. Some of them might not and might not warrant the latest private valuations that they’ve exercised. And so there’s this tremendous noise that we’re seeing in the mid to late funnel of privately held companies where some are just waiting to be public. Some of them might not be able to go public at anything that is an up round versus private valuations that they’ve had in previous moments and in previous rounds.   Bertrand And obviously the 2 to 3x returns that funds are targeting, and obviously more 3x than 2x, I mean, that was good and nice if it’s a 10-year fund, but if it’s the same 3x for 15 to 18 years, it’s not at all the same rate of return annualized. So it’s a really, really, really big issue if you keep the return the same, but you extend the duration of the fund. Concerning going IPO, there is a lot of complexity going public, the IPO process itself, but also after that when you’re a public company. It changed how you can run the business. Some would argue that we have had an issue with more companies delisting than companies listing on the public market. So I think there might be also separate issues about the efficiency of the public market and maybe a need for change. We went very strongly in one direction for the public market, have post and run, but was it really ultimately the right thing to do? I’m actually not so sure.   Nuno Yeah, I mean, just to be clear, this is anecdotal, but when we tell prospective LPs at Chameleon about our returns, the last few funds, 2018, 2021, the first reaction is, “You must be lying, right? Surely you can’t have distributions already for 2021,” et cetera, et cetera. So clearly there’s almost a state of disbelief right now from limited partners. And liquidity does matter. So clearly you have to move forward. So how did we get to this point where we had this bubble 2021 all around that time space and now things don’t look so good. Well, the macro conditions have changed dramatically. I mean, rates when they were near zero, safer assets yield nothing or yield nothing. So basically you had to push capital into longer duration risk assets like venture capital. And so you had to push it. So the opportunity cost of capital also has fundamentally shifted. Obviously a 3x VC return in 15 years over 10 actually competes very poorly against 5% annual credit returns over several years. So there’s been a readjustment of stuff. And then the public equities in particular, the tech public equities have had a lot of volatility, but some of them have done extremely well, right? Chipsets, things like NVIDIA, the Amazons of the world, Alphabets, et cetera, et cetera. They’ve done very, very well. So why would I invest in a long-term illiquid asset that takes now longer to give me money back, and in some case doesn’t give me back, if I can invest just in public equities, and a variety of other things. The venture debt costs have increased dramatically. The burn rates that were sustainable back in the day with sort of the addition of venture debt, private credit, et cetera, now are overblown at this moment in time. At the end of the day, there’s been a lot of movements also overall in the pipeline in terms of valuations, et cetera, et cetera. Now, I would put a grain of salt into all the numbers I just told you. There still is a little bit of the haves and have-nots in startup land. Certainly in early stage where if you’re a hot AI company, you can get away with raising a Series C or $480 million. This is actually a true story. Series C, right? Not Series C, a $480 million at $4 billion pre-money valuation. Whereas if you are maybe in a space that’s less hot, you’ll have more difficulty in raising money at this point in time, might not be able to even raise a Series C, right? So there’s a little bit of the haves and have-nots happening on the VC side in early stage that has been really amplified by the macro regime and where we’re at, which is actively zero-rate era is done and now the new regime is quite different. And so I can get better returns by doing something else.   Bertrand Kind of makes sense. I mean, if you have some ways the SaaSpocalypse in the public market because there is that fear that AI is going to completely change the game for especially for the more typical software companies. Good luck raising private money to quote unquote just build traditional software companies. You cannot expect a warm embrace from the private market if the public markets are completely destroying that category. I’m not saying that this is there forever, uh, things might change over time, but for sure what’s happening on the public markets always have a very strong impact on the private market.   Nuno Indeed. So what’s happening in this relationship between limited partners and VCs, the general partners? Again, limited partners are the people that give venture capital firms and venture capital funds their capital to actually deploy. And they are a variety of different players, right? Could be endowments, like university endowments, pension funds, family offices, very high net worth individuals, fund of funds, et cetera, et cetera. I mean, in particular, if you look at the institutional investors, the endowments, the pension funds, the fund of funds, they have allocations that they do to different asset classes typically. And the feedback that we’ve received from the market is they are increasingly frustrated with what’s happening in terms of distributions. They’re not getting capital back. It’s like, I gave you capital 8 years ago, 9 years ago, 2017, 2018 vintages, and I’m not getting any capital back. So what the hell’s happening? On paper, it looks maybe the fund’s doing okay or it’s doing great in some cases, but where’s my money? And so that creates a little bit of wait-and-see kind of game on portfolio allocation. As we’re thinking through their re-ups, putting more capital into funds that they’re already actually put capital or putting in capital into new slots, into new fund managers that they want to put money into. They’re like, well, let’s wait and see. I want to get my money back or get some money back first before I redeploy it. Again, this is a little bit the haves and have-nots because we’ve seen, for example, a couple of top-end LPs in terms of returns that have a little bit the opposite problem, right? Because they are into funds that are performing extremely well. They actually are over that period and they want to actually redeploy. But to be honest, the average in the industry right now is a wait-and-see game. It’s like, I want to wait and see, which leads to what can only be characterized— I was hearing someone the other day, one of the top advisors in the LP community, saying this is the worst fundraising environment ever for venture capital. Not the last 20 years, 30 years, like ever, right? Since this became an asset class more institutionally in the late ’60s, early ’70s, Pulse Robo 2 as it was created, this is the worst fundraising environment ever. Oh, wow.   Bertrand And concerning TVPI, let’s not forget that typically it’s not mark-to-market. So the metrics in terms of TVPI, correct me if I’m wrong, you know, but the metrics in TVPI are based on typically the last fundraise. So if the valuation went down but there was no additional fundraise, we wouldn’t know by looking at the TVPI metrics. It will only be updated if there is a new Financing, equity financing, or an exit.   Nuno Yeah, normally most funds act like that. Some funds are a little bit more aggressive and do do mark-to-market, but normally funds would be conservative and say, hey, I’m being conservative, it’s whatever is the last known valuation of the company. And if there wasn’t a priced round, it’s a little bit more obscure than that, right, Bertrand? Because it might actually be the company has raised money on a note, or either convertible note or a SAFE note, and that wouldn’t count as a priced round. So I would say actually, even if it was a cap that’s below with a significant discount, I won’t recognize the assets as a down round. I won’t recognize the asset with a lower valuation because formally it wasn’t a price round. So it’s on the one hand conservative, on the other hand, it’s only relating to price rounds or exits to your point. So it’s sort of, you can be like, hmm, well, we opt to do that because we think it’s actually the most conservative route. Mark-to-market is extremely difficult to do. And who would do the mark-to-market for you, right? It’s like it’s some valuation firm, et cetera.   Bertrand I’m not saying a mark-to-market is easy, but I’m not sure I would call using the last valuation something conservative in the context that most startups will fail. So it’s not clear.   Nuno Well, in some cases it is, some cases it’s not, right? Depends on the startup situation, to be honest. Yeah, yeah.   Bertrand But yeah, at least that’s how it’s done. So for instance, to evaluate the impact of the SaaS apocalypse, it’s tough to know. We will have on the private market. I mean, we will see that in a few quarters. Because if companies still exist in that environment, if they still do additional truly price rounds after that, that’s when I will start to know.   Nuno I mean, just to share a little bit more data, like VC fund close time stretched to 15 months. Basically, it’s just taking a long time to raise money. It’s taking a long time to do your first close, get your fund running. When entrepreneurs complain to me that their fundraising is difficult, I always say, you have no clue how difficult it is compared to ours. First-time funds have collapsed. We had some numbers that only 77 first-time funds actually closed. I assume this is in 2025 versus 215 in 2023. So that’s a huge number. We did some internal analysis on our side and we did some analysis that emerging fund managers, emerging fund managers are normally people that are in their first one or two funds. Basically emerging fund managers gained some ground until 2017. Reaching by then a slice that was 63.7% of all capital raised in 2017. But since then, the capital deployed to emerging managers has been largely reduced to actually 24.2%, right? So it’s gone from 63.7% in 2017 to 24.2%. So this has been a culling of sorts on emerging managers and almost like a slaughterhouse of emerging managers. Compared to previous situations, which is obviously incredibly concerning if you’re an emerging manager starting your VC firm, et cetera, et cetera. So really tremendously problematic for those. We think capital’s not leaving VC. I think we see a lot of the institutionals saying— there’s some numbers as high as 33% of institutional investors plan to invest more in venture in the next 12 months. So I don’t think capital’s leaving VC. I think it’s really concentrating. We’ll come back to the concentration issue later in the episode. And part of that concentration comes from a topic that has been widely spoken in venture capital recently, which is differentiation. How do you differentiate in venture capital if you’re talking to a limited partner, right? How does my firm differentiate versus the firm next to mine? And that’s incredibly, incredibly challenging. Bertrand, what are your thoughts on that?   Bertrand Differentiation is always a question. I mean, if you’re an entrepreneur, Typically, you think fully about the best possible partner for your stage and for your type of business model. You want a VC who understands fully your business model, because if they don’t, then it’s going to be troubled down the line. But that’s true that another piece of the puzzle is that the best VCs help you get more visibility in terms of achieving potential customer deals, in terms of attracting the best talent. And that’s where VCs’ brand names can help. If you can say you have backing by some of the top, most visible names in the industry, and usually these are the mega funds because others have trouble to be as visible, then they have some sort of unfair advantage compared to others. So I can see that there is some level of concentration happening naturally, especially in the later stage from Series B onwards.   Nuno What Really Matters: Performance… Returns Yeah, I mean, we did some analysis internally about What are the top funds that invested in the top performing companies in early stage, Series C, Series A? And we looked at it by size of fund and the top performing normally are funds below $100 million, but in some cases very closely followed by funds between $100 and $500 million. And actually funds above $500 million, so $500 million to $1 billion and then $1 billion and above are actually tremendously underperforming. So this notion of the industry that says, well, the mega funds still see The top investments early on, because they still deploy in Series C and Series A opportunistically, in some cases even spray and pray if they have their own incubation and acceleration programs, is not true. Actually, we verified that over the last 12 to 13 years. It is not 12 to 13 years in vintage, right? So up to a 2021 vintage fund. So we went basically 12, 13 years back from there. And it’s not true. Actually, the most performing are 0 to 100 and then 100 to 500. And as I said, there’s 100 to 500 in a couple of years actually are a little bit better. Than the $0 to $100 million ones. So that’s the first thing that’s a conclusion. And actually, that’s not shocking. If we remember back in the day, Kleiner Perkins used to raise funds up to $600 million, Benchmark raised their $425 million funds. It seems like the sweet spot for a VC fund would be around $500 million at the top end, like maximum. And now somehow people are saying, well, I’m raising a $3 billion VC fund. It’s like, well, it can’t be a VC fund. The return profile is totally different, right? You can’t deploy that capital just based on early stage investing. And by the way, you’re not seeing the guys at early stage, all that you’re seeing, you’re going to make your returns in mid to late stage, right? Back to what we said at the beginning of the episode. So there’s a little bit of the haves and have-nots there. The big guys are raising more and more money, but they’re no longer venture capital. And I think limited partners that are a little bit more evolved, that are a little bit more conscious of this, that have been in the market longer, are realizing that shift. So it’s like if they want to have the alpha of venture capital, they need to deploy to the sub-$100 million funds or the sub-$500 million funds, right? That’s where they need to actually focus their VC capital. They can still deploy to mega funds, but they’re deploying to a different asset class. They’re deploying to a private equity, mid to late stage asset class, which looks maybe a little bit more like a growth fund or something like that. The second part of differentiation is the honest truth is most VC funds are like, I have proprietary network access, right? I’m ex-Stripe or I’m ex-Google or I’m ex-Facebook or whatever, and I have access to that. I mean, we know proprietary networks from that standpoint are no longer true. The whole thing that created Silicon Valley back in the ’70s of what I used to call the country club deals where there were a few people coming out of the big companies, the Fairchilds of the world, later on the Intels of the world, et cetera, et cetera, that made some money along the way that sort of bootstrapped their next companies, were well-known quantity to the existing VCs and raised money relatively easy on ideas, that doesn’t work anymore. Someone was telling me the other day one interesting thing that I wasn’t quite aware of, a lot of it had to do with the NDAs. I don’t know if you knew this, Bertrand, but like the fact that in California, it was sort of the Silicon Valley community sort of imposed this, we don’t sign NDAs thing and Boston continued signing it. And this whole NDA enforcement issue and non-compete, actually not the NDA thing, but more strongly that California did not enforce non-competes. I could leave Fairchild and start a company that magically was doing something that could be considered competitive to Fairchild. And that was sort of part of the acceleration actually of venture capital in California versus, for example, Boston, which was sort of hand in hand at the beginning.   Bertrand Yeah, I mean, I’m a big, big believer in California success coming from not enforcing or banning non-compete agreements. I think it’s a key part of the game. If you lock people into not doing something similar in the next 6 months to 24 months. And the industry has always been moving fast. So this is a significant time where you are blocked to do something very similar. I think it was really an issue. So I think it’s a key part of the game and it has been there. I don’t know how it started, but I think that non-enforcement of non-compete has been a key part of the success of California. I’m actually pleased to say that Washington State is going in the same direction. They are just signing a non-compete ban. And you might remember that at the federal level, I think in 2024, there was also a ban that was put in place to ban non-compete, but this has been reversed by the courts. So this is not there anymore. So that’s why we see a state like Washington State putting their own ban, and we might see more state by state moving in that direction. I think it was not helping at all, this non-compete. I mean, there is obviously stuff that needs to be done, like you cannot steal secrets, you cannot steal IP.   Nuno Yeah.   Bertrand Even stealing employees, there should be some restraints. We need to find the right balance, but you have to be careful there. That was key for the success of California, and I’m glad to see that this is a trend that’s going to go beyond California. And I hope most states will have a ban on non-compete.   Nuno Maybe just to close on the differentiation process, two things. One, I think there’s this notion When you talk to some LPs, that seems to be a little bit ingrained, some LPs that prefer specialized funds. We’ve also done some significant analysis internally and have talked to a couple of datasets other than our own, or people that own datasets other than our own, and the feedback has actually been not so fast. Actually, generalist funds over time cannot perform specialist funds. There seems to be a little bit of a sweet spot around generalist funds. We like to call ourselves multi-specialized at Chameleon, but ultimately from the perspective of specialized versus Generalist funds, the picture’s not as clear as specialized funds outperform generalists or generalists outperform specialized. We’ve seen there are pockets where actually generalists outperform specialized, in other pockets where specialized of a certain size can outperform generalists. So that’s one topic on differentiation that is a little bit broader. And then the final topic on differentiation, it’s really an industry that hasn’t innovated dramatically on where it creates the most value, which is really the picking stage, right? So it’s having great deal flow, very optimal, productive, efficient due diligence with very few resources and the ability to then get into those deals. That’s where most of the value is created. And then hopefully liquidating the asset if there’s an opportunity to do so at the right time, either through secondary trade sales or an IPO or something else. And what we’ve seen is the industry has innovated very little. I mean, the only thing I could point out in terms of core innovation at the top of the funnel has been the creation of the mega funds, the well-known funds, right? Like a16z, Union Square Ventures, et cetera, et cetera. But there needs to be more innovation on that cycle. And that’s why we certainly at Chameleon believe that the future is to have quant and AI-native VC firms that develop their own tooling, their own platforms. We have Mantis in our case that allow you to have this unfair advantage in how you source deals and how you do due diligence, how you get into the deals, et cetera, and how you take it to the next level. And we think that’s the beginning of the next stage is that the industry becomes more tech-enabled, shockingly enough, an industry that has made all its returns on tech or almost all of its returns on tech. That we need to be more tech-enabled ourselves. But I think the writing is on the wall there, and that will be a source of differentiation certainly over the next 3 to 5 years.   Bertrand One thing the industry has innovated somewhat and maybe could innovate even more is providing liquidity beyond trade sale and an IPO, because it’s clear that if VCs want more liquidity without waiting 18 years, you need that liquidity at different stage, not just when it’s time to do an exit, a full exit for the business. And for employees as well. I mean, it’s one thing to stay for a company for 4 years, which is your typical vesting. Maybe you extend that to 6 years, to 8 years, you have a great time at the company. But to think that maybe you have to stick around for 15 to 20 years in order to get liquidity on your stock options. I mean, that’s too much to ask for most people. I mean, people have a life, they have other things to do, other plans, they might want to move, they come at a different stage of life. So you need to provide them liquidity. The new game is we are not going to exit until 15 to 20 years, else it’s truly unfair. It’s not just unfair, but people will say, you know what, I’m going to go across the street, go work for Amazon or Google. I will have RSUs at best regularly that are liquid, and why bother? I mean, we need to find pathways to liquidity for both investors but also employees. There has been a change in that direction, but I think we need more of this change, and maybe not just reserved for the absolute biggest, most successful companies like OpenAI or SpaceX, but also us as well. Hopefully we can find a way.   Nuno Well, now we have these AI companies that actually grow so fast that they will IPO in one year. Now, isn’t that what’s going to happen? They raise They raised $500 million in Series C or $1.4 billion in Series C, and they’re going to IPO in 2 years. No? Is that not the new reality? I’m being facetious.   Bertrand At the same time, I mean, there are rumors that some of them are going to IPO this year. I mean, we talk about OpenAI, about Anthropic. I mean, OpenAI is quite old, but Anthropic is a relatively new business, quote unquote. So I think it’s a good time.   Nuno The Mega Fund Question So maybe it will be true after all. Moving to the next section, are mega funds still venture capital, Bertrand? Are they still venture capital funds?   Bertrand Yeah, I guess venture capital is a term that can encompass from small to very big funds. I truly don’t know. I mean, once you reach a growth stage, are you truly a VC fund? I don’t know. I think some of these definitions are kind of arbitrary from my perspective. What is clear is that you as a business need different providers of capital. And as we just discussed, you as a business, probably need to keep going and stay private for longer. One reason being, again, there is a tremendous cost to being a public company. There are some true strategic disadvantages. And at the same time, just practically, I mean, you need to get bigger and bigger in order to have a chance of a successful IPO. So you cannot just go IPO at a $500 million valuation. I mean, that’s like committing suicide, at least in the US market on NASDAQ. So my point is, you truly have no choice. You need to extend and If you need to extend, then you need to have capital providers that are there at later stage and therefore have more money. Is it still true venture capital? Is it true venture? I don’t know. At some point, it makes sense that from the startups to the capital providers, everyone adjusts to a reality where the life cycle is getting longer.   Nuno We don’t think it is. We don’t think mega funds are venture capital. We have actually some data that shows that they’re not in terms of actual returns. The alphas you can generate, the IRR that you can generate is actually not comparable. We did some analysis again with some of our datasets and from 2012 to 2022, so that’s the datasets that we used so that we had actual distributions and stuff we could take into account and so on and so forth. And looking at IRR, just to share some numbers in terms of IRR over those 10 years on sub-$100 million funds versus above $1 billion funds, the differences are incredibly stark. And this is true for global and US IRR, right? So just to quote some numbers in terms of average, sub-$100 million funds, global IRR of 22.9%, US IRR of 21.6% versus above $1 billion, 9.1% and 9.0%. Median IRR, if we just looked at median, 7.3% and 16.6% for sub-$100 million funds, 7.5% and 8.1% above $1 billion. Top quartile IRR, sub-$100 million, 31% versus 30.4% US IRR. And then above $1 billion funds, 14.7%, 15.5%. So it’s very clear if you sort of cut this in different ways, averages, medians, top quartiles, et cetera, over all these years that sub-$100 million funds are in a very different asset class than above $1 billion funds. They’re in different alpha that you can generate and so on and so forth. Now to the point you made, Bertrand, I don’t fully disagree with the point you made of the bigger funds should become bigger. I just think they’re becoming different things. Now, again, some of these funds will hide under the facts like, well, wait a second, we have all these assets under management, but they’re over different funds. Sequoia, we’re still raising small early-stage funds, $500, $600 million funds. And then we have larger funds for growth, et cetera, et cetera. Andreessen Horowitz, a little bit less clear what they’re actually doing. We heard that they’ve raised $15 billion across funds. I’m not sure if that’s the exact number at the end of the day. But the point is, if I’m a multi-asset class manager, like early growth, et cetera, et cetera, then it still applies what Nunu is saying. I’m still going after the $500 million, $600 million early-stage funds. Well, not so fast, right? Because you still have all this capital with managing general partners that are maybe across funds for which their incentives in particular, both carry and management fees are coming from the larger funds. Et cetera, et cetera. So there’s necessarily conflicts of interest. In many cases, the funds are just straight up big, right? And so they are above a billion. And so I don’t think a lot of these guys are in early-stage investing anymore, right? It may appear that they are, but I don’t think that’s where the returns necessarily are going to come from. And so if you are a limited partner, if you’re looking at your asset class allocation, again, you’re absolutely free to put money into mega funds because that’s the kind of asset class you want to play in. In terms of a blended private equity asset class that has a little bit of growth, a little bit of whatever, or actually a lot of growth, a lot of late stage, and maybe a little bit of early stage. And I want something that’s a little bit more blended, right? But if I still want the alpha venture capital, I need to deploy to funds that are early stage, right? And that’s like up to $100 million, up to $500 million. I think that’s my two cents on that topic. We see crossover things coming around, like guys who do both public and private markets. Again, that starts feeling a bit like a hedge fund. A lot of these funds have also become RAs, as we discussed earlier. So I feel the writing’s on the wall. The mega funds are going more and more after either some mechanism of edging or a mechanism that’s a little bit more blended in terms of private equity than classic venture capital.   Bertrand Yes, I think a few things. One, if you’re an LP, I can imagine that dealing with multiple $100 million funds might be more difficult. You, you need to know the partners, you need to have some background, uh, visibility. You need potentially to change regularly of VC investments. So I can see some level of simplicity if you just focus on the bigger ones, especially if you have a lot of assets you have to put to work. Another piece of the puzzle, I would guess that the bigger funds are able to return money faster because they are at later stage of the cycle. So instead of that 15 to 18 years, maybe they are more in a 5 to 10 year range, while the smaller funds being there more early might be the one who are taking longer to deliver. So I can see that Yes, there is an IRR picture, but there is also time to liquidity that is not the same. So that can probably also influence. And in terms of crossover PE hybrid model, I mean, for sure we have seen some of the public equity investors doing crossover, meaning going into private equity firms like Coatue, like Tiger Global and others. And for companies that are preparing for IPO, there is a lot of value to work with these firms because they have very good visibility and understanding of the public markets. And their presence in the cap table is also a sign of quality, typically for public market investors. So there is a lot of value and logic for them to be there on both sides of the puzzle. But again, the fact that firms keep delaying IPOs, that the market is not so much startup-friendly, makes this model a bit more difficult. But personally, I think there is value there.   Nuno Yeah, I think on the mega fund, just so that I’m not boo-booing everything, I mean, but there’s definitely angles in terms of the asset class that make a lot of sense. And there’s the scalability of the model. The ability to go after Series B, Series C, as well as mid-stage, as well as late-stage, even secondaries over time, to your point, in some cases even public equities. And that level of skill I think matters. We’ve also seen, as we’ve known, we won’t mention any brands, but people will know who they are, that late-stage hedge funds and investors, even if they’ve done okay-ish in growth in private equity, don’t necessarily do well in venture. So it’s clearly a very different asset class, right? So once you start getting venture teams together, The returns are not quite the same. Actually, sometimes they’re not even quite the same as the growth investments. So clearly they’re very good at the growth side, but not so good in early stage. But definitely there is a case for it. The Case for Smaller…Rightsized Funds But if we switch gears maybe to the small, or I would call right-sized funds, maybe just to quote a couple of numbers and then open up the discussion. Small funds do seem to outperform larger funds. There’s a lot of data in the market that shows some of that dynamic outperformance frequency. All the Very historical numbers from Cambridge Associates from 1981 to 2010. 19 out of 30 vintages were won by sub-$150 million funds. We did our own analysis as I was sharing before. Funds between $0 and $100 won most years between around 2010 and 2021. And the years that they didn’t outperform in terms of investing in the top-performing companies in early-stage Series C, Series A, they were outperformed by the $100 to $500 million funds. The $500 to $1 billion funds and $1 billion or above were never even in the same league in terms of performance, of having identified those top performers in terms of quantity over those early-stage investments. Top 10 funds by vintage, 2004 to 2006, 2016 numbers. Top 10 funds, 73% were sub-$100 million. 2004 to 2016, top 10 funds by vintage, 73% of those were sub-$100 million. So there seems to be a little bit of a case that actually smaller funds, sub-$100 million, sub-$500 million in some cases, are outperforming the larger funds over time. Now, these funds are complex in and of itself. The positive of it is small fund GPs like myself, we are deeply invested in our own funds. We’re not there to just make management fee monies. I mean, we’re not making $1 million, $2 million a year in management fees of salary ourselves, like some of the larger funds. So we are there to really get the carry and be less focused on management fees. And so I think there’s a little bit of alignment around that and really taking that kind of perspective on portfolio construction and liquidation, being also more aggressive on the individual time that we spend with our startups. On the negative side, obviously a lot of these smaller funds, not the case of Chameleon, but others out there are single GPs, very little teams or very small teams. And so it’s sometimes difficult to actually do a lot for portfolio companies as well. And this is where the mega funds, for example, a16z notably would say, hey, we have 600+ people that can support you, right? On market development, business development, communications, talent recruiting, all this stuff. Question mark whether that’s the right way to do it in terms of operating model, if technology is not a better way of supplying that value back to your portfolio companies, or if there’s no better way of doing it. But still, that’s one of the appeals of actually dealing with a larger mega fund if you’re a startup, right? That they will have the resources, also the financial resources to put more capital in you. But also, again, if there’s entrepreneurs listening to this right now, and hopefully there are, it’s a two-edged sword, right? Because if you have Andreessen Horowitz putting money in you, or NEA, or General Catalyst, or whatever, putting money in you on a Series C and then not doubling down on the Series A or the Series B, there will be questions, right? Because like they have the capital, they have other funds, so why the hell are they not putting more money in? Um, so, so it’s a little bit of a two-edged sword.   Bertrand Yeah, I think that one is a pretty big one. And on top of it, as we discussed, some of these big firms have multiple funds managed technically by different teams. So you might have convinced the early-stage teams, they have investors, they’re happy, but you don’t convince the growth-stage firm. As you say, it might raise questions because people might think that there is some communication between the early-stage team and the growth-stage team. So why the heck are they not deciding to invest? And as we also discussed, even worse possible situation, what happens if the growth-stage team has invested in your competitor? It’s even more trouble. So I think trying to understand how firms behave, what’s the reputation of the firm, what’s the reputation of the partner you are working with, I mean, can have tremendous importance and impact. When it’s time for you to work with a firm.   Nuno Indeed. I mean, at the end of the day, we still believe that the smaller fund— we at Chameleon discuss the notion that our limit should be $500 million per fund, right? And that’s the logic of it. We think that model is the model that works well in venture capital. We do recognize, as I said before, why mega funds keep raising more and more money, right? It becomes a harm’s race at that end of the market. As I said, probably a slightly different asset class, or if not a significantly different asset class as well. So seeing a little bit both sides of the market, I mean, we often compete with the mega funds, but honestly, a lot of the mega funds are kind to us and they let us in. And this whole notion of elbows out, we haven’t felt it that much in the market. And people see our value at the table. And in many cases, I, I do see the larger funds more and more seeing the value of smaller funds coming in on the same rounds and even in some cases co-leading early stage rounds like Series C. So it’s not like elbows are out everywhere across the board. So I don’t mean to say this is like an all-out war between small funds and big funds and the small funds need to win or the big funds need to win. I think actually there’s a lot of potential for coexistence. My point is more that the asset classes and the returns are quite different over time, and that’s how I would think through it. And if you’re an entrepreneur, you should think about that as well, right? What are the implications of taking money from certain funds versus others in terms of the expected returns, expected time allocated to you? For example, if you’re not doing very well as a as a company, right? Will the big funds spend the same amount of energy on you if you’re not doing great and all of that? So it’s a little bit sort of a beware, open your eyes, both for limited partners and for startups. What do you actually want, right? What do you want from your VC firm if you’re a startup? And what do you want from your VC firm if you’re an LP?   Bertrand I must say, as an entrepreneur, uh, a board member, I have seen some situations where the bigger funds are actually trying sometimes to elbow out the existing investors. Like, uh, we have that much money to put to work, we cannot do less. And you’re like, yeah, but I don’t need that much money. And then they’re like, okay, just don’t let your existing investors do their pro rata. I don’t think it’s great because an entrepreneur, if your investors, your VCs, trusted you earlier stage when it’s more risky, and when it’s becoming less risky, you don’t give them the right to their pro rata because you have to let this big guy come in. That’s not great. Or even if there is not this pro rata issue, when an investor tries to put more money to work than it’s really necessary, it’s also not a good idea as an entrepreneur to take more capital than you could use. It will dilute you more, it will set higher expectations in terms of valuation, it will push you to use that capital faster than maybe would be reasonable. So I think that’s something you want to be careful with the bigger funds. So don’t talk to funds that are in some ways beyond your stage and try to make it work in that context. Or don’t accept to have your strategy change dramatically for no good reason by funds that just want to put too much money to work in your business. And that for me is surprising because it should also be in their best interest not to invest in businesses that are not ready to accept that much capital. But as we have seen, there were in the past some funds that believe that capital is a moat. Was a good idea. So hopefully, I guess we’re a bit behind that. But yeah, I would say entrepreneurs, be careful, find partners that are the right partners for you at your current stage. Sometimes some big names look great, but at the same time, if it comes with a lot of issues, from too much capital to also taking the risk that these partners don’t understand the stage of the business you are in or your industry, Just be careful. There is a lot of value to have firms that are very focused on your stage, on your industry, are finely attuned to that situation.   Nuno What Comes Next? Maybe to end in terms of sections, what comes next? And maybe we can come up with some predictions that are a little bit provocative on what’s going to happen to the market. You, if you’re listening to us, feel free to interact with us on LinkedIn, on X. If you have our email address, shoot us an email as well. We’d love to hear from you if you think these are the right predictions or if we’re totally off. Maybe I’ll throw in the first one, Bertrand, and we’ll go one by one. So we’ll each put one at the table and see where we head. My first one is that we’ll have a huge culling of VC investors. We had this rapid expansion of the VC asset class with arguably at least tens of thousands of firms globally, maybe even over 10,000 in the US. I think we’ll have a culling and the culling will continue and we’ll have several firms sort of getting eliminated over the next couple of years that will have either because they’re having tremendous difficulty doing their first close in their next fund, or the returns are not there, or it’s a firm that has done 3, 4 funds, but for some reason the returns have just gone out of whack in the last few years during the bull years. And so therefore, actually they can’t justify to raise more funds out there. So I predict there will be a significant elimination of active firms in the next at least 2 to 3 years. So maybe by 2028, and we’ll be below, I don’t know, 30% of number of active firms that we are today. The other side of it is I do think if we look beyond that, 2029, 2030, and so on, we’ll have the reemergence of not micro funds, but nano funds where people will start deploying capital very, very early and writing small angel checks, but doing it in a way that it’s sort of not this cottage industry that we’ve had of angel investors. So I think angel investment will be disrupted by people that will use more and more of the AI toolification out there to actually manage their portfolios of 10, 15, 5K investments in a way that is a lot more professional, creating sort of an advent of nano funds.   Bertrand Yeah, makes sense. On my side, in terms of prediction, I think there is a possibility that the mega fund model keeps expanding and looks more similar over time to some PE models. So do we have the top 10 VC firms that look more like a Blackstone than a Kleiner Perkins or Sequoia used to be? That for me will be an interesting question and development. I think that there is some possibility that it keeps going in that direction. A lot of incentives are pushing things that way.   Nuno My next prediction is that DPI, distributions to paid-in cash on cash, just cash back, will become essential for limited partners. I think TVPI, total value to paid-in, that also has in there, as we just said, paper valuations. There’s a lot of disbelief now around the TVPI metric if there isn’t distributions going alongside it. For those who, again, don’t know what TVPI is, it’s total value paid in, but it also includes DPI. So it’s cash on cash component plus a remaining valuation to paid in, an RVPI. And the problem is the RVPI really, in reality, it’s that kind of on-paper valuation that never gets attributed. I think LPs, they’ve seen the writing on the wall and they’re like, dude, just show me your DPI numbers. I don’t care about TVPI. Some LPs will still ask about TVPI just to make sure that the rest is sort of looking in order. Like, show me the money, show me the cash. Actually, it’s not money, show me the cash, right? I want money back.   Bertrand But that’s an issue. I mean, if you’re supposed to raise financing every 3 or 4 years, good luck getting DPI to show for that. So you need to be at least on your third fund in order to be able to show DPI, I guess.   Nuno I mean, my corollary to that, Bertrand, is if you allow me just to have a corollary kind of prediction, is that we’ll see certainly for funds like $50 million and above, $100 million, $200 million, et cetera, even increased concentration, right? I really need to have anchors that believe in me over time. And we might start having, again, the advent— we had it some decades ago, the advent of cap table kind of VCs, right? Like Sutter Hill Ventures, right? Where they’re not really raising funds anymore. And so we might have the advent of that, that we’ll have structures that are created that have more permanent capital allocated to them, or at the very least more concentrated capital by very few players.   Bertrand Interesting. Me on my side, as I shared before, I believe secondaries are, are important and here to stay. Um, in the past, some could argue, is it a distress signal or something? I, I don’t think it’s true anymore. In a world where your average startup might take 15 to 18 years to exit through M&A or IPO, we need to have other options. For funds, for employees, they cannot be expected to stick around for so long and have no liquidity. I mean, it’s just pure madness. It’s just bad alignment at some point to do that. So I think secondaries are becoming the third liquidity pathway for VCs, for employees, and it should be more and more a key part of the game, a key infrastructure in the VC/startups tech industry.   Nuno I mean, on specialized versus generalist funds, I believe we’ll continue seeing the coexistence of those two models where the specialized funds will in many pockets actually outperform generalist funds, but where we’ll continue seeing that the large franchises, the tier one franchises will likely be generalist funds. I mean, we just saw it in the cycle. The AI cycle went upon us. We had a 2021 fund. We could easily adapt and go into AI and figure out that AI was growing very fast. I mean, if you have an ultra-specialized fund and that’s your remit and that’s the only thing you can invest on, very difficult to change even during our investment period. I will put a caveat on that. We don’t call, for example, ourselves at Chameleon generalist. We call ourselves multi-specialized because our scoring models for the verticals that we track are specialized within Mantis. Because the partnership is specialized, we all focus on different areas. And because we have the Kin network that allows us to tap into that level of expertise, Again, I think the world will be specialized coexistence. Some pockets specialized will do very well, certainly on the smaller fund size, but the big franchises will likely look a little bit more generalist. And as I said, multi-specialized from our perspective is the future. We’ll start seeing more and more funds that are multi-specialized like ourselves. Do you want to talk about AI and how it’ll distort the metrics? No.   Bertrand Yes. I think AI is an exciting moment in the tech industry. It feels in some ways that the same way we had a big distortion coming with COVID and work from home in 2020, 2021. 2021, where suddenly everyone and their mother will build a SaaS company or invest in a SaaS company. AI feels a bit of the same. I mean, to be clear, I truly believe it’s deserved. I mean, we are facing a dramatic shift in how computing is being done in terms of value you can get from software. So at the same time, AI will probably distort this matrix for a long time. We clearly see a split where investments are going, in what startups are being created. So I think, yeah, we will see some distortion. And we know that maybe 50% of all deal value is going to AI in 2025. We have seen single rounds reaching 40 billion, like to OpenAI. We have seen, as you discussed, some seed stage investment of 400 million. So AI investing and AI startups are definitely a beast on their own. And will distort VC metrics for a long time. And we might need two sets of metrics in parallel, you know, AI versus everything else. So that would be an interesting bifurcation in the industry in some ways. I would say it’s fair to separate AI versus non-AI. We reach a point where it’s two different beasts.   Nuno Conclusion So in conclusion, AI has changed the world and it’s changing VC as well, as we discussed earlier in the episode. We have a tremendous momentous occasion for the asset class where venture capital is really bifurcating into very large funds, which no longer are in venture capital or seemingly may be distributed between different asset classes, and the smaller funds, sub-$500 million and sub-$100 million, that keep having the better returns, but also with much smaller scale. We’re seeing a culling of the industry where the industry is definitely getting smaller and smaller and more concentrated at both ends, number of VC firms, as well as a number of limited partners per fund and the interest that some of these limited partners have of being more and more concentrated in their own portfolio allocations. And last but not the least, the discussion around specialized versus generalist, where it seems like there’s some clear winners on some asset classes, on some sizes, in some industries, but on others, there’s other kinds of winners. And so maybe the future is multi-specialized, as I framed at the end. Thank you so much for listening. If you want to check us out and if you want to comment, feel free to send us messages on X, LinkedIn, to both myself and Bertrand, as well as send us an email. Thank you so much, Bertrand.   Bertrand Thank you, Nuno.

Gaby never planned to leave the trail. She was sick, alone, and wandering near Vernal Fall while her family hiked in Yosemite. When she walked off the trail to photograph a tree, she stepped into something she still cannot fully explain. The forest went quiet. The trees started moving in a gentle, rhythmic dance that felt like an invitation. And for the next four hours, she was somewhere else entirely, though it only felt like two minutes. Her story is one of the most vivid firsthand accounts of the Missing 411 phenomenon we have ever heard, and she is here to tell it because her love for her five-year-old son pulled her back before the door closed behind her. And the photo of the tree that started it all never showed up on her phone.  We unpack Gaby's experience alongside the broader mystery of people vanishing in America's national parks. From time slips and sound vacuums to the role of granite, quartz, and physical ailments, her account checks nearly every box that David Paulides has cataloged over decades of research. She also shares a wild encounter at Sequoia involving massive eyes in the trees and her stepdad's own strange experience at Zion. This is one of those episodes that will make you think twice the next time someone says "stay on the trail." Want to listen to this episode and a catalog of more than 100 other members-only episodes? Check out the vibrant community, extra episodes, and perks of being a Blurry Creatures member at ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://blurrycreatures.com/pages/members⁠⁠⁠⁠. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The lovely and talented EJ Marcus returns to the show this week!! Drew and EJ talk about being turned green, working at a preschool, fish hatcheries, how to handle a vegan dog's diet, Club Penguin, the power of Sequoia trees, and so much more.EJ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ejhavingfun/?hl=enEJ Tiktok: https://www.tiktok.com/@ejhavingfunFollow The Comment Section on IG! https://www.instagram.com/thecommentsection/Shop Mother's Day Beauty Gifts at SephoraVisit Macy's to discover the new Calvin Klein euphoria elixirs. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

(April 22, 2026) United States and Iran delay talks in high-stakes game of chicken. California homeowners face ‘Zone 0’ changes due to fires. DOJ charges Southern Poverty Law Center with fraud. How a pickleball injury highlights fraud in California’s hospice industry. Wildfires killed nearly 20% of the world’s giant Sequoias… how crews are racing to save the rest.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Is Everyone In Hell? The New Yorker Article: they are CLEARLY in hell. Listen to our PRE-SHOW and watch us on VIDEO only on Patreon. ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Join the Rose Garden today⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠! CONNECT WITH US: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TikTok⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Merch⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ EMAIL: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠2blackgirls1rose@gmail.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow Natasha's Substack The Nite Owl: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠theniteowl.substack.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Jack Dorsey and Sequoia's Roelof Botha published a sweeping essay arguing that AI can replace the information-routing function of hierarchy itself — and Block is betting the company on it. Today we read through their vision for the "company as intelligence," then compare it to the messy, bottom-up reality emerging at Every, where agents are already forming a shadow org chart.Brought to you by:KPMG – Agentic AI is powering a potential $3 trillion productivity shift, and KPMG's new paper, Agentic AI Untangled, gives leaders a clear framework to decide whether to build, buy, or borrow—download it at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.kpmg.us/Navigate⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Mercury - Modern banking for business and now personal accounts. Learn more at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://mercury.com/personal-banking⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Zenflow Work - Agents for knowledge work - ⁠⁠https://zenflow.free/⁠⁠Drata - The agentic trust management platform - ⁠⁠https://drata.com/⁠⁠Blitzy - Want to accelerate enterprise software development velocity by 5x? ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://blitzy.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠AssemblyAI - The best way to build Voice AI apps - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.assemblyai.com/brief⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Robots & Pencils - Cloud-native AI solutions that power results ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://robotsandpencils.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠The Agent Readiness Audit from Superintelligent - Go to ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://besuper.ai/ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠to request your company's agent readiness score.The AI Daily Brief helps you understand the most important news and discussions in AI. Subscribe to the podcast version of The AI Daily Brief wherever you listen: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://pod.link/1680633614⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Our Newsletter is BACK: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://aidailybrief.beehiiv.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Interested in sponsoring the show? sponsors@aidailybrief.ai

The return of the Big Show is here on Calm Down with Erin Andrews and Charissa Thompson! Charissa explains why her afternoon consisted of running errands without undergarments and an eventful trip with her family to see the sequoias. Erin and Charissa talk about using AI to test new hairstyles before making the big commitment. Plus, Erin shares a personal life update and why you should always remember to be thankful and appreciative of healthcare professionals. Get your tickets for Calm Down Live at Netflix is a Joke Fest: https://www.ticketweb.com/event/netflix-is-a-joke-presents-hollywood-improv-the-main-room-tickets/14172844?pl=hollyimprovSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.