VibeBuilders.ai Logo
VibeBuilders.ai

Raised

Explore resources related to raised to help implement AI solutions for your business.

[N] AI Robotics startup Covariant (founded by Peter Chen, Pieter Abbeel, other Berkeley / ex-OpenAI folks) just raised $40M in Series B funding round. “Covariant has recently seen increased usage from clients hoping to avoid supply chain disruption due to the coronavirus pandemic.”
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score0
baylearnThis week

[N] AI Robotics startup Covariant (founded by Peter Chen, Pieter Abbeel, other Berkeley / ex-OpenAI folks) just raised $40M in Series B funding round. “Covariant has recently seen increased usage from clients hoping to avoid supply chain disruption due to the coronavirus pandemic.”

h/t their announcement, VB and WSJ article: Logistics AI Startup Covariant Reaps $40 Million in Funding Round Company plans to explore uses of machine learning for automation beyond warehouse operations Artificial-intelligence robotics startup Covariant raised $40 million to expand its logistics automation technology to new industries and ramp up hiring, the company said Wednesday. The Berkeley, Calif.-based company makes AI software that it says helps warehouse robots pick objects at a faster rate than human workers, with a roughly 95% accuracy rate. Covariant is working with Austrian logistics-automation company Knapp AG and the robotics business of Swiss industrial conglomerate ABB Ltd., which provide hardware such as robot arms or conveyor belts to pair with the startup’s technology platform. “What we’ve built is a universal brain for robotic manipulation tasks,” Covariant co-founder and Chief Executive Peter Chen said in an interview. “We provide the software, they provide the rest of the systems.” Logistics-sector appetite for such technology is growing as distribution and fulfillment operations that have relied on human labor look to speed output and meet rising digital commerce demand. The coronavirus pandemic has accelerated that interest as businesses have sought to adjust their operations to volatile swings in consumer demand and to new restrictions, such as spacing workers further apart to guard against contagion. That has provided a bright spot for some technology startups even as many big backers scale back venture-capital spending. Last month logistics delivery platform Bringg said it raised $30 million in a Series D funding round, for example, as demand for home delivery of food, household goods and e-commerce staples soared among homebound consumers. Covariant’s Series B round brings the company’s total funding to $67 million. New investor Index Ventures led the round, with participation from existing investor Amplify Partners and new investors including Radical Ventures. Mr. Chen said the funding will be used to explore the technology’s potential application in other markets such as manufacturing, recycling or agriculture “where there are repetitive manual processes.” Covariant also plans to hire more engineering and other staff, he said. Covariant was founded in 2017 and now has about 50 employees. The company’s technology uses camera systems to capture images of objects, and artificial intelligence to analyze objects and how to pick them up. Machine learning helps Covariant-powered robots learn from experience. The startup’s customers include a German electrical supplies wholesaler that uses the technology to control a mechanical arm that picks out orders of circuit boards, switches and other goods.

[N] AI Robotics startup Covariant (founded by Peter Chen, Pieter Abbeel, other Berkeley / ex-OpenAI folks) just raised $40M in Series B funding round. “Covariant has recently seen increased usage from clients hoping to avoid supply chain disruption due to the coronavirus pandemic.”
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score0
baylearnThis week

[N] AI Robotics startup Covariant (founded by Peter Chen, Pieter Abbeel, other Berkeley / ex-OpenAI folks) just raised $40M in Series B funding round. “Covariant has recently seen increased usage from clients hoping to avoid supply chain disruption due to the coronavirus pandemic.”

h/t their announcement, VB and WSJ article: Logistics AI Startup Covariant Reaps $40 Million in Funding Round Company plans to explore uses of machine learning for automation beyond warehouse operations Artificial-intelligence robotics startup Covariant raised $40 million to expand its logistics automation technology to new industries and ramp up hiring, the company said Wednesday. The Berkeley, Calif.-based company makes AI software that it says helps warehouse robots pick objects at a faster rate than human workers, with a roughly 95% accuracy rate. Covariant is working with Austrian logistics-automation company Knapp AG and the robotics business of Swiss industrial conglomerate ABB Ltd., which provide hardware such as robot arms or conveyor belts to pair with the startup’s technology platform. “What we’ve built is a universal brain for robotic manipulation tasks,” Covariant co-founder and Chief Executive Peter Chen said in an interview. “We provide the software, they provide the rest of the systems.” Logistics-sector appetite for such technology is growing as distribution and fulfillment operations that have relied on human labor look to speed output and meet rising digital commerce demand. The coronavirus pandemic has accelerated that interest as businesses have sought to adjust their operations to volatile swings in consumer demand and to new restrictions, such as spacing workers further apart to guard against contagion. That has provided a bright spot for some technology startups even as many big backers scale back venture-capital spending. Last month logistics delivery platform Bringg said it raised $30 million in a Series D funding round, for example, as demand for home delivery of food, household goods and e-commerce staples soared among homebound consumers. Covariant’s Series B round brings the company’s total funding to $67 million. New investor Index Ventures led the round, with participation from existing investor Amplify Partners and new investors including Radical Ventures. Mr. Chen said the funding will be used to explore the technology’s potential application in other markets such as manufacturing, recycling or agriculture “where there are repetitive manual processes.” Covariant also plans to hire more engineering and other staff, he said. Covariant was founded in 2017 and now has about 50 employees. The company’s technology uses camera systems to capture images of objects, and artificial intelligence to analyze objects and how to pick them up. Machine learning helps Covariant-powered robots learn from experience. The startup’s customers include a German electrical supplies wholesaler that uses the technology to control a mechanical arm that picks out orders of circuit boards, switches and other goods.

Just raised and here are the stats (July 2024)
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score0.6
tylersellarsThis week

Just raised and here are the stats (July 2024)

CEO of a startup - bootstrapped for 10 months with a team of 7 - Built a waitlist of $15B AUM (fintech) and here's what it took (with no intended story structure) I didn't want to spam, so I decided to go the old school route and manually write every single email (some copy and paste) In order to feel prepared, I would do my research prior to reaching out, albeit sometimes limited due to time x reward Sent over 350 emails to around 300 funds and we received three yes' (to be honest we received more than three, but they wanted too much equity, or they weren’t a good fit culturally) Pre Seed is different for everyone. Some accept pre revenue others expect 100-300k ARR - this was one of the more frustrating pieces for me, due to the fact that it's extremely subjective to what "Earliest Stage" means to some funds. We're pre-product, we had to remove our CTO in the process due to performance issues, we let go of our front-end, hired a new CTO, hired an AI Engineer, and replaced our front end. It's a numbers game. We received 94% no reply - 5% nos (with meetings) - 1% yes' I used OpenVC as my main resource, highly recommend even their free product. I recommend using discount with a SAFE. Some Angels like it better, some VC’s hate it. You have to be willing to play ball with whoever leads. Mercury for banking, perks (like Carta), and SAFE agreement. All great at Mercury. Raising for a B2B business in an enterprise market is much easier, unless deep tech or science backed. But consumer products right now are not raising pre seed from what I can tell. If it means anything - it's a numbers game. Go get what you deserve, but put in the work because no one will just hand it to you. Love this community, always here to help anyone I can.

Raised $450k for my startup, here are the lessons I've learned along the way
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score1
marin_smiljanicThis week

Raised $450k for my startup, here are the lessons I've learned along the way

2021 has been a pretty amazing year for Omnisearch. Having started initial work on Omnisearch at the end of 2020, we entered the new year with a working MVP yet no revenue, no significant partnerships, and no funding. Fast forward to the end of 2021, and we now have fantastic revenue growth, a partnership with a public company, and a far more powerful, complete and polished product. But one milestone really changed Omnisearch’s trajectory: our $450,000 USD pre-seed round by GoAhead Ventures. In this post I want to share the story of how it came about and offer a couple of takeaways to keep in mind when preparing for fundraising. ​ The story Contrary to most advice, my co-founder Matej and I didn’t allocate a specific time to switch to “fundraising mode” but rather talked to investors on an ongoing basis. It was a bit of a distraction from working on the product, but on the positive side we were able to constantly get feedback on the idea, pitch, go-to-market strategy and hiring, as well as hearing investors’ major concerns sooner rather than later. That being said, our six-month long fundraising efforts weren’t yielding results - we talked to about twenty investors, mostly angels or smaller funds, with no success. The feedback was generally of the “too early for us” variety (since we were still pre-revenue), with additional questions about our go-to-market strategy and ideal customer persona. The introduction to our eventual investors, California-based GoAhead Ventures, came through a friend who had pitched them previously. We wrote a simple blurb and sent our pitch deck. We then went through GoAhead’s hyper-efficient screening process, consisting of a 30-minute call, a recorded three-minute pitch, and filling out a simple Google doc. Throughout the whole process, the GoAhead team left an awesome impression thanks to their knowledge of enterprise software and their responsiveness. They ended up investing and the whole deal was closed within two weeks, which is super fast even by Silicon Valley standards. While our fundraising experience is a single data point and your case might be different, here are the key takeaways from our journey. ​ Perseverance wins: Like I said above, we talked to about twenty investors before we closed our round. Getting a series of “no”s sucks, but we took the feedback seriously and tried to prepare better for questions that caught us off guard. But we persevered, keeping in mind that from a bird’s eye perspective it’s an amazing time to be building startups and raising funds. Focus on traction: Sounds pretty obvious, right? The truth is, though, that even a small amount of revenue is infinitely better than none at all. One of the major differences between our eventual successful investor pitch and the earlier ones was that we had actual paying customers, though our MRR was low. This allows you to talk about customers in the present tense, showing there’s actual demand for your product and making the use cases more tangible. And ideally, highlight a couple of customer testimonials to boost your credibility. Have a demo ready: In Omnisearch’s case, the demo was oftentimes the best received part of the pitch or call. We’d show investors the live demo, and for bonus points even asked them to choose a video from YouTube and then try searching through it. This always had a “wow” effect on prospective investors and made the subsequent conversation more exciting and positive. Accelerators: Accelerators like Y Combinator or Techstars can add enormous value to a startup, especially in the early stages. And while it’s a great idea to apply, don’t rely on them too heavily. Applications happen only a few times a year, and you should have a foolproof fundraising plan in case you don’t get in. In our case, we just constantly looked for investors who were interested in our space (defined as enterprise SaaS more broadly), using LinkedIn, AngelList, and intros from our own network. Practice the pitch ad nauseam: Pitching is tough to get right even for seasoned pros, so it pays to practice as often as possible. We took every opportunity to perfect the pitch: attending meetups and giving the thirty-second elevator pitch to other attendees over beer and pizza, participating in startup competitions, going to conferences and exhibiting at our own booth, attending pre-accelerator programs, and pitching to friends who are in the startup world. Show an understanding of the competition: Frankly, this was one of the strongest parts of our pitch and investor conversations. If you’re in a similar space to ours, Gartner Magic Quadrants and Forrester Waves are an awesome resource, as well as sites like AlternativeTo or Capterra and G2. By thoroughly studying these resources we gained a great understanding of the industry landscape and were able to articulate our differentiation more clearly and succinctly. Presenting this visually in a coordinate system or a feature grid is, from our experience, even more effective. Remember it’s just the beginning! Getting your first round of funding is just the beginning of the journey, so it’s important to avoid euphoria and get back to building and selling the product as soon as possible. While securing funding enables you to scale the team, and is a particular relief if the founders had worked without a salary, the end goal is still to build a big, profitable, and overall awesome startup.

Interview with founder of ReadyPlayerMe (raised $70M+ from a16z)
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score1
Due_Cryptographer461This week

Interview with founder of ReadyPlayerMe (raised $70M+ from a16z)

Thanks to everyone who replied to my previous post with the questions you had for Rainer, I added some of them into this interview. I’m Nikita of Databas3 , and that’s my first interview in a series where I’m learning more about the journey of the best tech and web3 founders. Would appreciate your feedback and suggestions for the next guest! Nikita: Let’s begin with a brief introduction. Can you share a bit about yourself and how the business started? Rainer: I’m Rainer, the CTO of ReadyPlayerMe. Our journey began in 2013 with four co-founders. Over the years, our focus has shifted mainly around our product’s evolution, but our core idea always revolved around virtual actors or virtual people. Our initial venture was into hardware. We created the first full-body scanner in the Nordics, a significant step in photogrammetry. This led us to develop the Luna Scanner, a three-meter tall structure designed to capture facial features and likenesses. When Facebook acquired Oculus in 2014, we foresaw the potential of VR and virtual worlds, especially in social experiences. Nikita: Interesting. How did you move on from there? Rainer: Recognizing the limitations of hardware, we transitioned into software. Our early scanner designs had limitations in scalability. For example, our three-meter tall scanner wasn’t a feasible solution for scanning millions of people. So, we leveraged the datasets from our initial projects and designed a mobile version, making facial scanning as easy as using your phone. Around 2015, this was a new territory, as facial scanning wasn’t a mainstream application. Nikita: What were the early applications of these scanned models? Rainer: In the beginning, we focused on 3D printed figurines from full-body scans. However, as we shifted to facial scanning, we licensed our technology to gaming companies, collaborating with giants like Wargaming and Tencent. We even ventured into virtual fittings with H&M. Each collaboration was custom-tailored, blending our technology with their systems. This model made us cash flow positive. Nikita: So this was the beginning of your foray into the gaming industry? Rainer: Precisely. The demand from gaming companies was substantial. As we built custom solutions for these enterprises, we saw a bigger potential. While our cash flow was positive, we realized the challenge of scaling through exclusive enterprise deals. We envisioned our avatar creation tech reaching indie games and beyond. Nikita: And that led to the birth of ReadyPlayerMe? Rainer: Exactly. Once we understood our market direction, we quickly developed the first iteration of ReadyPlayerMe as a web-based experience, emphasizing easy integration for game developers. The initial version was a character builder, allowing users to personalize their avatars, which many adopted for their social media profiles. Our goal was to create avatars that users could connect with and use across various platforms. Instead of licensing our technology, we offered it for free to everyone. As ReadyPlayerMe gained traction, especially in VR applications, we secured funding to further our mission. Nikita: Your growth seems swift and organic. Were there any challenges? Rainer: Our focus on easy integration significantly fueled our adoption. Pairing that with personalized avatars resonated well with our audience. But like any venture, we’ve faced our share of challenges and have always aimed to evolve and better our offerings. The rapid growth in Web3 projects and virtual worlds made personalization and customization more important. With the NFT boom, you could add utility by allowing access to selected collections. This played into web-based games and metaverse applications. The shift towards Web3 and personalization provided a significant tailwind for us. Many used our characters as profile pictures on social media. Nikita: I’ve heard from other founders that a16z really values viral marketing. Was this one reason they wanted to invest in your project? How was the process with them? Rainer: When a16z reached out, it felt like a natural fit. We wanted investors who understood the gaming space. Our main market is Web3, but we’re exploring the top games market. Their expertise in gaming was invaluable. They’ve been very supportive throughout. We were fortunate to be on their radar. Nikita: So your early growth and organic traction played a role in attracting investors? Rainer: Definitely. Early product growth and the potential future trajectory were essential in our discussions. Nikita: As the CTO, you must have faced challenges. Can you speak about the tech side and its evolution? Rainer: The early version of our platform was built by in-house engineers. As we grew, we had to adapt to increasing complexities and ensure we had the right team to execute our vision. My role often shifted between product management and tech, depending on the need. Nikita: It sounds like the startup environment remains strong within your company. Rainer: Absolutely. We’re all committed, hands-on, and working towards building the best product. Nikita: You mentioned the team earlier. How many people are in your team now? Rainer: We have 70 people, with about half in product and engineering. Nikita: And did you hire the tech team? Rainer: We brought on a head of engineering at the beginning of this year. He’s been instrumental in scaling the engineering organization, from increasing the headcount to refining engineering processes. We’ve recently reorganized into domain-specific teams. As the team grows, regular reorganization ensures we focus on delivering specific customer value. Every stage requires attention to the team’s composition to ensure efficient delivery. Nikita: Any advice for founders just starting with their first startup? Rainer: Focus on customer value, no matter how niche it might seem initially. Begin with a specific problem and solution, then expand from there. You don’t need a massive project right away. Begin small, prove the concept, and scale from there. Nikita: You’ve mentioned your love for books and podcasts. Any recommendations? Rainer: For startups, “High Growth Handbook” and “Lean Startup” are must-reads. “Working Backwards” offers insights into Amazon’s customer-centric approach. For podcasts, I listen to “Rework,” “Lenny’s Podcast,” and “Huberman Lab.” Nikita: All of us have some side project ideas from time to time. How do you handle these when managing a big project? Rainer: Over the years, I’ve built various side projects. Some are small applications to solve immediate problems, like a menu bar app for AirPods which made it to No. 1 on Product Hunt, and was nominated for Golden Kitty Award. I sometimes delve into 3D and AI, merging them for technical demos. I keep a list of ideas and pick from them as the urge arises. Nikita: Any final thoughts or advice? Rainer: As you scale, do so with clarity. Avoid scaling just for external appeal. Always hire when there’s genuine need, not just for the sake of expansion. It helps in staying lean and focused.

160 of Y Combinators 229 Startup Cohort are AI Startups with and 75% of the Cohort has 0 revenue
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score1
DemocratizingfinanceThis week

160 of Y Combinators 229 Startup Cohort are AI Startups with and 75% of the Cohort has 0 revenue

Y Combinator (YC), one of the most prestigious startup accelerators in the world, has just unveiled its latest batch of innovative startups, providing key insights into what the future might hold. Y Combinators Summer 2023 Batch In a recent post by Garry Tan, YC's president, Tan offers a nostalgic look back at his first YC Demo Day in 2008, where he, as a budding entrepreneur, pitched his startup. Now, fifteen years later, he's at the helm, proudly launching the 37th Demo Day, this time for the Summer 2023 batch. Tan proudly declares this batch as one of YC's most impressive yet, emphasizing the deep technical talent of the participants. From a staggering pool of over 24,000 applications, only 229 startups were chosen, making this one of the most competitive batches to date. This batch marks a number of firsts and solidifies several rising trends within the startups landscape. 75% of these companies began their YC journey with zero revenue, and 81% hadn't raised any funding before joining the accelerator. YC's decision to focus on early-stage startups this round signals their commitment to nurturing raw, untapped potential. A Return to Face-to-Face Interaction After three years, YC has brought back the in-person Demo Day format, allowing startups, investors, and mentors to connect directly. While the virtual format has its merits, there's an unmistakable magic in the YC Demo Day room, filled with anticipation, hope, and innovation. AI Takes Center Stage Artificial Intelligence is the standout sector in the Summer 2023 batch. With recent advancements making waves across various industries, there's arguably no better time to launch an AI-focused startup, and no better platform than YC to foster its growth. This signals a clear trend in the startup investing and venture capital space: AI is just getting started. Of the entire Summer 2023 batch, 160 out of the entire 229 Summer 2023 batch that are utilizing or implementing artificial intelligence in some capacity. This means over 2 out of every 3 startups accepted is focused on artificial intelligence in some capacity. Some of the startups include: Quill AI: Automating the job of a financial analyst Fiber AI: Automating prospecting and outbound marketing Reworkd AI: Open Source Zapier of AI Agents Watto AI: AI-powered McKinsey-quality reports in seconds Agentive: AI-powered auditing platform Humanlike: Replace your call center with voice bots that sound human Greenlite: AI compliance team for fintech and banking atla: AI assistants to help in-house lawyers answer legal questions Studdy: An AI Match tutor Glade: League of Legends with AI-generated maps and gameplay and literally over 100 others. As you can see, there's a startup covering nearly every sector of AI in the new batch. YC By The Numbers YC continues to grow as a community. The accelerator now boasts over 10,000 founders spanning more than 4,500 startups. The success stories are impressive: over 350 startups valued at over $150 million and 90 valued at more than $1 billion. The unicorn creation rate of 5% is truly unparalleled in the industry. To cater to the ever-growing community, YC has added more full-time Group Partners than ever. This includes industry veterans such as Tom Blomfield, co-founder of billion-dollar startups GoCardless and Monzo, and YC alumni like Wayne Crosby (Zenter) and Emmett Shear (Twitch). YC Core Values YC's commitment to diversity is evident in the demographics of the S23 batch. They've also spotlighted the industries these startups operate in, with 70% in B2B SaaS/Enterprise, followed by fintech, healthcare, consumer, and proptech/industrials. Garry Tan emphasizes three core tenets for YC investors: to act ethically, to make decisions swiftly, and to commit long-term. He underlines the importance of the YC community, urging investors to provide valuable introductions and guidance to founders. The Road Ahead With YC's track record and the promise shown by the Summer 2023 batch, the future of the startup ecosystem looks promising. As always, YC remains at the forefront, championing innovation and shaping the next generation of global startups. Original Post: https://www.democratizing.finance/post/take-a-peek-into-the-future-with-y-combinators-finalized-summer-2023-batch

How a founder built a B2B AI startup to serve with 65+ global brands (including Fortune500 companies) (I will not promote)
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score1
Royal_Rest8409This week

How a founder built a B2B AI startup to serve with 65+ global brands (including Fortune500 companies) (I will not promote)

AI Palette is an AI-driven platform that helps food and beverage companies predict emerging product trends. I had the opportunity recently to sit down with the founder to get his advice on building an AI-first startup, which he'll be going through in this post. (I will not promote) About AI Palette: Co-founders: >!2 (Somsubhra GanChoudhuri, Himanshu Upreti)!!100+!!$12.7M USD!!AI-powered predictive analytics for the CPG (Consumer Packaged Goods) industry!!Signed first paying customer in the first year!!65+ global brands, including Cargill, Diageo, Ajinomoto, Symrise, Mondelez, and L’Oréal, use AI Palette!!Every new product launched has secured a paying client within months!!Expanded into Beauty & Personal Care (BPC), onboarding one of India’s largest BPC companies within weeks!!Launched multiple new product lines in the last two years, creating a unified suite for brand innovation!Identify the pain points in your industry for ideas* When I was working in the flavour and fragrance industry, I noticed a major issue CPG companies faced: launching a product took at least one to two years. For instance, if a company decided today to launch a new juice, it wouldn’t hit the market until 2027. This long timeline made it difficult to stay relevant and on top of trends. Another big problem I noticed was that companies relied heavily on market research to determine what products to launch. While this might work for current consumer preferences, it was highly inefficient since the product wouldn’t actually reach the market for several years. By the time the product launched, the consumer trends had already shifted, making that research outdated. That’s where AI can play a crucial role. Instead of looking at what consumers like today, we realised that companies should use AI to predict what they will want next. This allows businesses to create products that are ahead of the curve. Right now, the failure rate for new product launches is alarmingly high, with 8 out of 10 products failing. By leveraging AI, companies can avoid wasting resources on products that won’t succeed, leading to better, more successful launches. Start by talking to as many industry experts as possible to identify the real problems When we first had the idea for AI Palette, it was just a hunch, a gut feeling—we had no idea whether people would actually pay for it. To validate the idea, we reached out to as many people as we could within the industry. Since our focus area was all about consumer insights, we spoke to professionals in the CPG sector, particularly those in the insights departments of CPG companies. Through these early conversations, we began to see a common pattern emerge and identified the exact problem we wanted to solve. Don’t tell people what you’re building—listen to their frustrations and challenges first. Going into these early customer conversations, our goal was to listen and understand their challenges without telling them what we were trying to build. This is crucial as it ensures that you can gather as much data about the problem to truly understand it and that you aren't biasing their answers by showing your solution. This process helped us in two key ways: First, it validated that there was a real problem in the industry through the number of people who spoke about experiencing the same problem. Second, it allowed us to understand the exact scale and depth of the problem—e.g., how much money companies were spending on consumer research, what kind of tools they were currently using, etc. Narrow down your focus to a small, actionable area to solve initially. Once we were certain that there was a clear problem worth solving, we didn’t try to tackle everything at once. As a small team of two people, we started by focusing on a specific area of the problem—something big enough to matter but small enough for us to handle. Then, we approached customers with a potential solution and asked them for feedback. We learnt that our solution seemed promising, but we wanted to validate it further. If customers are willing to pay you for the solution, it’s a strong validation signal for market demand. One of our early customer interviewees even asked us to deliver the solution, which we did manually at first. We used machine learning models to analyse the data and presented the results in a slide deck. They paid us for the work, which was a critical moment. It meant we had something with real potential, and we had customers willing to pay us before we had even built the full product. This was the key validation that we needed. By the time we were ready to build the product, we had already gathered crucial insights from our early customers. We understood the specific information they wanted and how they wanted the results to be presented. This input was invaluable in shaping the development of our final product. Building & Product Development Start with a simple concept/design to validate with customers before building When we realised the problem and solution, we began by designing the product, but not by jumping straight into coding. Instead, we created wireframes and user interfaces using tools like InVision and Figma. This allowed us to visually represent the product without the need for backend or frontend development at first. The goal was to showcase how the product would look and feel, helping potential customers understand its value before we even started building. We showed these designs to potential customers and asked for feedback. Would they want to buy this product? Would they pay for it? We didn’t dive into actual development until we found a customer willing to pay a significant amount for the solution. This approach helped us ensure we were on the right track and didn’t waste time or resources building something customers didn’t actually want. Deliver your solution using a manual consulting approach before developing an automated product Initially, we solved problems for customers in a more "consulting" manner, delivering insights manually. Recall how I mentioned that when one of our early customer interviewees asked us to deliver the solution, we initially did it manually by using machine learning models to analyse the data and presenting the results to them in a slide deck. This works for the initial stages of validating your solution, as you don't want to invest too much time into building a full-blown MVP before understanding the exact features and functionalities that your users want. However, after confirming that customers were willing to pay for what we provided, we moved forward with actual product development. This shift from a manual service to product development was key to scaling in a sustainable manner, as our building was guided by real-world feedback and insights rather than intuition. Let ongoing customer feedback drive iteration and the product roadmap Once we built the first version of the product, it was basic, solving only one problem. But as we worked closely with customers, they requested additional features and functionalities to make it more useful. As a result, we continued to evolve the product to handle more complex use cases, gradually developing new modules based on customer feedback. Product development is a continuous process. Our early customers pushed us to expand features and modules, from solving just 20% of their problems to tackling 50–60% of their needs. These demands shaped our product roadmap and guided the development of new features, ultimately resulting in a more complete solution. Revenue and user numbers are key metrics for assessing product-market fit. However, critical mass varies across industries Product-market fit (PMF) can often be gauged by looking at the size of your revenue and the number of customers you're serving. Once you've reached a certain critical mass of customers, you can usually tell that you're starting to hit product-market fit. However, this critical mass varies by industry and the type of customers you're targeting. For example, if you're building an app for a broad consumer market, you may need thousands of users. But for enterprise software, product-market fit may be reached with just a few dozen key customers. Compare customer engagement and retention with other available solutions on the market for product-market fit Revenue and the number of customers alone isn't always enough to determine if you're reaching product-market fit. The type of customer and the use case for your product also matter. The level of engagement with your product—how much time users are spending on the platform—is also an important metric to track. The more time they spend, the more likely it is that your product is meeting a crucial need. Another way to evaluate product-market fit is by assessing retention, i.e whether users are returning to your platform and relying on it consistently, as compared to other solutions available. That's another key indication that your solution is gaining traction in the market. Business Model & Monetisation Prioritise scalability Initially, we started with a consulting-type model where we tailor-made specific solutions for each customer use-case we encountered and delivered the CPG insights manually, but we soon realized that this wasn't scalable. The problem with consulting is that you need to do the same work repeatedly for every new project, which requires a large team to handle the workload. That is not how you sustain a high-growth startup. To solve this, we focused on building a product that would address the most common problems faced by our customers. Once built, this product could be sold to thousands of customers without significant overheads, making the business scalable. With this in mind, we decided on a SaaS (Software as a Service) business model. The benefit of SaaS is that once you create the software, you can sell it to many customers without adding extra overhead. This results in a business with higher margins, where the same product can serve many customers simultaneously, making it much more efficient than the consulting model. Adopt a predictable, simplistic business model for efficiency. Look to industry practices for guidance When it came to monetisation, we considered the needs of our CPG customers, who I knew from experience were already accustomed to paying annual subscriptions for sales databases and other software services. We decided to adopt the same model and charge our customers an annual upfront fee. This model worked well for our target market, aligning with industry standards and ensuring stable, recurring revenue. Moreover, our target CPG customers were already used to this business model and didn't have to choose from a huge variety of payment options, making closing sales a straightforward and efficient process. Marketing & Sales Educate the market to position yourself as a thought leader When we started, AI was not widely understood, especially in the CPG industry. We had to create awareness around both AI and its potential value. Our strategy focused on educating potential users and customers about AI, its relevance, and why they should invest in it. This education was crucial to the success of our marketing efforts. To establish credibility, we adopted a thought leadership approach. We wrote blogs on the importance of AI and how it could solve problems for CPG companies. We also participated in events and conferences to demonstrate our expertise in applying AI to the industry. This helped us build our brand and reputation as leaders in the AI space for CPG, and word-of-mouth spread as customers recognized us as the go-to company for AI solutions. It’s tempting for startups to offer products for free in the hopes of gaining early traction with customers, but this approach doesn't work in the long run. Free offerings don’t establish the value of your product, and customers may not take them seriously. You should always charge for pilots, even if the fee is minimal, to ensure that the customer is serious about potentially working with you, and that they are committed and engaged with the product. Pilots/POCs/Demos should aim to give a "flavour" of what you can deliver A paid pilot/POC trial also gives you the opportunity to provide a “flavour” of what your product can deliver, helping to build confidence and trust with the client. It allows customers to experience a detailed preview of what your product can do, which builds anticipation and desire for the full functionality. During this phase, ensure your product is built to give them a taste of the value you can provide, which sets the stage for a broader, more impactful adoption down the line. Fundraising & Financial Management Leverage PR to generate inbound interest from VCs When it comes to fundraising, our approach was fairly traditional—we reached out to VCs and used connections from existing investors to make introductions. However, looking back, one thing that really helped us build momentum during our fundraising process was getting featured in Tech in Asia. This wasn’t planned; it just so happened that Tech in Asia was doing a series on AI startups in Southeast Asia and they reached out to us for an article. During the interview, they asked if we were fundraising, and we mentioned that we were. As a result, several VCs we hadn’t yet contacted reached out to us. This inbound interest was incredibly valuable, and we found it far more effective than our outbound efforts. So, if you can, try to generate some PR attention—it can help create inbound interest from VCs, and that interest is typically much stronger and more promising than any outbound strategies because they've gone out of their way to reach out to you. Be well-prepared and deliberate about fundraising. Keep trying and don't lose heart When pitching to VCs, it’s crucial to be thoroughly prepared, as you typically only get one shot at making an impression. If you mess up, it’s unlikely they’ll give you a second chance. You need to have key metrics at your fingertips, especially if you're running a SaaS company. Be ready to answer questions like: What’s your retention rate? What are your projections for the year? How much will you close? What’s your average contract value? These numbers should be at the top of your mind. Additionally, fundraising should be treated as a structured process, not something you do on the side while juggling other tasks. When you start, create a clear plan: identify 20 VCs to reach out to each week. By planning ahead, you’ll maintain momentum and speed up the process. Fundraising can be exhausting and disheartening, especially when you face multiple rejections. Remember, you just need one investor to say yes to make it all worthwhile. When using funds, prioritise profitability and grow only when necessary. Don't rely on funding to survive. In the past, the common advice for startups was to raise money, burn through it quickly, and use it to boost revenue numbers, even if that meant operating at a loss. The idea was that profitability wasn’t the main focus, and the goal was to show rapid growth for the next funding round. However, times have changed, especially with the shift from “funding summer” to “funding winter.” My advice now is to aim for profitability as soon as possible and grow only when it's truly needed. For example, it’s tempting to hire a large team when you have substantial funds in the bank, but ask yourself: Do you really need 10 new hires, or could you get by with just four? Growing too quickly can lead to unnecessary expenses, so focus on reaching profitability as soon as possible, rather than just inflating your team or burn rate. The key takeaway is to spend your funds wisely and only when absolutely necessary to reach profitability. You want to avoid becoming dependent on future VC investments to keep your company afloat. Instead, prioritize reaching break-even as quickly as you can, so you're not reliant on external funding to survive in the long run. Team-Building & Leadership Look for complementary skill sets in co-founders When choosing a co-founder, it’s important to find someone with a complementary skill set, not just someone you’re close to. For example, I come from a business and commercial background, so I needed someone with technical expertise. That’s when I found my co-founder, Himanshu, who had experience in machine learning and AI. He was a great match because his technical knowledge complemented my business skills, and together we formed a strong team. It might seem natural to choose your best friend as your co-founder, but this can often lead to conflict. Chances are, you and your best friend share similar interests, skills, and backgrounds, which doesn’t bring diversity to the table. If both of you come from the same industry or have the same strengths, you may end up butting heads on how things should be done. Having diverse skill sets helps avoid this and fosters a more collaborative working relationship. Himanshu (left) and Somsubhra (right) co-founded AI Palette in 2018 Define roles clearly to prevent co-founder conflict To avoid conflict, it’s essential that your roles as co-founders are clearly defined from the beginning. If your co-founder and you have distinct responsibilities, there is no room for overlap or disagreement. This ensures that both of you can work without stepping on each other's toes, and there’s mutual respect for each other’s expertise. This is another reason as to why it helps to have a co-founder with a complementary skillset to yours. Not only is having similar industry backgrounds and skillsets not particularly useful when building out your startup, it's also more likely to lead to conflicts since you both have similar subject expertise. On the other hand, if your co-founder is an expert in something that you're not, you're less likely to argue with them about their decisions regarding that aspect of the business and vice versa when it comes to your decisions. Look for employees who are driven by your mission, not salary For early-stage startups, the first hires are crucial. These employees need to be highly motivated and excited about the mission. Since the salary will likely be low and the work demanding, they must be driven by something beyond just the paycheck. The right employees are the swash-buckling pirates and romantics, i.e those who are genuinely passionate about the startup’s vision and want to be part of something impactful beyond material gains. When employees are motivated by the mission, they are more likely to stick around and help take the startup to greater heights. A litmus test for hiring: Would you be excited to work with them on a Sunday? One of the most important rounds in the hiring process is the culture fit round. This is where you assess whether a candidate shares the same values as you and your team. A key question to ask yourself is: "Would I be excited to work with this person on a Sunday?" If there’s any doubt about your answer, it’s likely not a good fit. The idea is that you want employees who align with the company's culture and values and who you would enjoy collaborating with even outside of regular work hours. How we structure the team at AI Palette We have three broad functions in our organization. The first two are the big ones: Technical Team – This is the core of our product and technology. This team is responsible for product development and incorporating customer feedback into improving the technology Commercial Team – This includes sales, marketing, customer service, account managers, and so on, handling everything related to business growth and customer relations. General and Administrative Team – This smaller team supports functions like finance, HR, and administration. As with almost all businesses, we have teams that address the two core tasks of building (technical team) and selling (commercial team), but given the size we're at now, having the administrative team helps smoothen operations. Set broad goals but let your teams decide on execution What I've done is recruit highly skilled people who don't need me to micromanage them on a day-to-day basis. They're experts in their roles, and as Steve Jobs said, when you hire the right person, you don't have to tell them what to do—they understand the purpose and tell you what to do. So, my job as the CEO is to set the broader goals for them, review the plans they have to achieve those goals, and periodically check in on progress. For example, if our broad goal is to meet a certain revenue target, I break it down across teams: For the sales team, I’ll look at how they plan to hit that target—how many customers they need to sell to, how many salespeople they need, and what tactics and strategies they plan to use. For the technical team, I’ll evaluate our product offerings—whether they think we need to build new products to attract more customers, and whether they think it's scalable for the number of customers we plan to serve. This way, the entire organization's tasks are cascaded in alignment with our overarching goals, with me setting the direction and leaving the details of execution to the skilled team members that I hire.

Why raise in 2025? - I will not promote
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score1
Able_Swimming_4909This week

Why raise in 2025? - I will not promote

I will not promote Lately, I've been thinking about how AI tools are completely reshaping what it means to bootstrap a startup. It honestly feels like we're living through a golden age for entrepreneurs where you don't necessarily need venture capital to build something big or meaningful. At my company, we're a small team of just four people, bootstrapping our AI-focused startup. Thanks to AI-powered tools, we're able to keep our burn rate ridiculously low, quickly test new ideas, and scale our operations way faster than we ever expected. It’s honestly pretty incredible how accessible advanced technology has become, even compared to just a few years ago. Of course, bootstrapping definitely comes with its own share of headaches. For example, we've noticed that funded startups get significantly better access to cloud credits, advertising budgets, and enterprise-level tools. We do have access to some discounts and free resources, but it rarely compares to what funded startups enjoy. This can feel frustrating, especially when you know you're competing directly with businesses that have those extra advantages. Visibility is another major challenge we've noticed. Without big funding announcements or a well-connected investor backing us, getting attention from media or even early adopters can be tough. It's just harder to make a splash without someone else's endorsement. We've had to accept and work around creatively. That said, there's something genuinely empowering about staying bootstrapped, prioritizing profitability, and maintaining control over our vision. After speaking with several investors, we've become aware of how investors can significantly influence or even redirect the trajectory of a business. We've heard stories where investors gained enough leverage to replace the original founders or have killed perfectly profitable businesses that were not growing "fast enough", which certainly gave us pause. They can definitely be helpful but giving the control over the future of my business to someone else would definitely make me feel anxious. At this time, we simply don't feel raising external capital aligns with our current goals, but we're also aware that this could change in the future. For now, maintaining autonomy and staying close to our original vision remains a priority. I'm curious to hear from others here who've been through this. Have you successfully bootstrapped an AI a tech business? What obstacles did you encounter, and how did you overcome them? EDIT: To give you a bit of perspective, my company is a B2B SaaS in the finance industry based in Europe. We have received VC funding in the past but it was an exceptionally good deal and we don't plan to raise in the near future even-thought it may change if we see the need to help us scale. We have also raised a significant amount in soft funding. Right now, we are growing on our revenues, and we plan to continue this trajectory. Recently, one of our developers left, and although we are a small team, we noticed that it had little to no impact on our productivity.

How a founder built a B2B AI startup to serve with 65+ global brands (including Fortune500 companies) (I will not promote)
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score1
Royal_Rest8409This week

How a founder built a B2B AI startup to serve with 65+ global brands (including Fortune500 companies) (I will not promote)

AI Palette is an AI-driven platform that helps food and beverage companies predict emerging product trends. I had the opportunity recently to sit down with the founder to get his advice on building an AI-first startup, which he'll be going through in this post. (I will not promote) About AI Palette: Co-founders: >!2 (Somsubhra GanChoudhuri, Himanshu Upreti)!!100+!!$12.7M USD!!AI-powered predictive analytics for the CPG (Consumer Packaged Goods) industry!!Signed first paying customer in the first year!!65+ global brands, including Cargill, Diageo, Ajinomoto, Symrise, Mondelez, and L’Oréal, use AI Palette!!Every new product launched has secured a paying client within months!!Expanded into Beauty & Personal Care (BPC), onboarding one of India’s largest BPC companies within weeks!!Launched multiple new product lines in the last two years, creating a unified suite for brand innovation!Identify the pain points in your industry for ideas* When I was working in the flavour and fragrance industry, I noticed a major issue CPG companies faced: launching a product took at least one to two years. For instance, if a company decided today to launch a new juice, it wouldn’t hit the market until 2027. This long timeline made it difficult to stay relevant and on top of trends. Another big problem I noticed was that companies relied heavily on market research to determine what products to launch. While this might work for current consumer preferences, it was highly inefficient since the product wouldn’t actually reach the market for several years. By the time the product launched, the consumer trends had already shifted, making that research outdated. That’s where AI can play a crucial role. Instead of looking at what consumers like today, we realised that companies should use AI to predict what they will want next. This allows businesses to create products that are ahead of the curve. Right now, the failure rate for new product launches is alarmingly high, with 8 out of 10 products failing. By leveraging AI, companies can avoid wasting resources on products that won’t succeed, leading to better, more successful launches. Start by talking to as many industry experts as possible to identify the real problems When we first had the idea for AI Palette, it was just a hunch, a gut feeling—we had no idea whether people would actually pay for it. To validate the idea, we reached out to as many people as we could within the industry. Since our focus area was all about consumer insights, we spoke to professionals in the CPG sector, particularly those in the insights departments of CPG companies. Through these early conversations, we began to see a common pattern emerge and identified the exact problem we wanted to solve. Don’t tell people what you’re building—listen to their frustrations and challenges first. Going into these early customer conversations, our goal was to listen and understand their challenges without telling them what we were trying to build. This is crucial as it ensures that you can gather as much data about the problem to truly understand it and that you aren't biasing their answers by showing your solution. This process helped us in two key ways: First, it validated that there was a real problem in the industry through the number of people who spoke about experiencing the same problem. Second, it allowed us to understand the exact scale and depth of the problem—e.g., how much money companies were spending on consumer research, what kind of tools they were currently using, etc. Narrow down your focus to a small, actionable area to solve initially. Once we were certain that there was a clear problem worth solving, we didn’t try to tackle everything at once. As a small team of two people, we started by focusing on a specific area of the problem—something big enough to matter but small enough for us to handle. Then, we approached customers with a potential solution and asked them for feedback. We learnt that our solution seemed promising, but we wanted to validate it further. If customers are willing to pay you for the solution, it’s a strong validation signal for market demand. One of our early customer interviewees even asked us to deliver the solution, which we did manually at first. We used machine learning models to analyse the data and presented the results in a slide deck. They paid us for the work, which was a critical moment. It meant we had something with real potential, and we had customers willing to pay us before we had even built the full product. This was the key validation that we needed. By the time we were ready to build the product, we had already gathered crucial insights from our early customers. We understood the specific information they wanted and how they wanted the results to be presented. This input was invaluable in shaping the development of our final product. Building & Product Development Start with a simple concept/design to validate with customers before building When we realised the problem and solution, we began by designing the product, but not by jumping straight into coding. Instead, we created wireframes and user interfaces using tools like InVision and Figma. This allowed us to visually represent the product without the need for backend or frontend development at first. The goal was to showcase how the product would look and feel, helping potential customers understand its value before we even started building. We showed these designs to potential customers and asked for feedback. Would they want to buy this product? Would they pay for it? We didn’t dive into actual development until we found a customer willing to pay a significant amount for the solution. This approach helped us ensure we were on the right track and didn’t waste time or resources building something customers didn’t actually want. Deliver your solution using a manual consulting approach before developing an automated product Initially, we solved problems for customers in a more "consulting" manner, delivering insights manually. Recall how I mentioned that when one of our early customer interviewees asked us to deliver the solution, we initially did it manually by using machine learning models to analyse the data and presenting the results to them in a slide deck. This works for the initial stages of validating your solution, as you don't want to invest too much time into building a full-blown MVP before understanding the exact features and functionalities that your users want. However, after confirming that customers were willing to pay for what we provided, we moved forward with actual product development. This shift from a manual service to product development was key to scaling in a sustainable manner, as our building was guided by real-world feedback and insights rather than intuition. Let ongoing customer feedback drive iteration and the product roadmap Once we built the first version of the product, it was basic, solving only one problem. But as we worked closely with customers, they requested additional features and functionalities to make it more useful. As a result, we continued to evolve the product to handle more complex use cases, gradually developing new modules based on customer feedback. Product development is a continuous process. Our early customers pushed us to expand features and modules, from solving just 20% of their problems to tackling 50–60% of their needs. These demands shaped our product roadmap and guided the development of new features, ultimately resulting in a more complete solution. Revenue and user numbers are key metrics for assessing product-market fit. However, critical mass varies across industries Product-market fit (PMF) can often be gauged by looking at the size of your revenue and the number of customers you're serving. Once you've reached a certain critical mass of customers, you can usually tell that you're starting to hit product-market fit. However, this critical mass varies by industry and the type of customers you're targeting. For example, if you're building an app for a broad consumer market, you may need thousands of users. But for enterprise software, product-market fit may be reached with just a few dozen key customers. Compare customer engagement and retention with other available solutions on the market for product-market fit Revenue and the number of customers alone isn't always enough to determine if you're reaching product-market fit. The type of customer and the use case for your product also matter. The level of engagement with your product—how much time users are spending on the platform—is also an important metric to track. The more time they spend, the more likely it is that your product is meeting a crucial need. Another way to evaluate product-market fit is by assessing retention, i.e whether users are returning to your platform and relying on it consistently, as compared to other solutions available. That's another key indication that your solution is gaining traction in the market. Business Model & Monetisation Prioritise scalability Initially, we started with a consulting-type model where we tailor-made specific solutions for each customer use-case we encountered and delivered the CPG insights manually, but we soon realized that this wasn't scalable. The problem with consulting is that you need to do the same work repeatedly for every new project, which requires a large team to handle the workload. That is not how you sustain a high-growth startup. To solve this, we focused on building a product that would address the most common problems faced by our customers. Once built, this product could be sold to thousands of customers without significant overheads, making the business scalable. With this in mind, we decided on a SaaS (Software as a Service) business model. The benefit of SaaS is that once you create the software, you can sell it to many customers without adding extra overhead. This results in a business with higher margins, where the same product can serve many customers simultaneously, making it much more efficient than the consulting model. Adopt a predictable, simplistic business model for efficiency. Look to industry practices for guidance When it came to monetisation, we considered the needs of our CPG customers, who I knew from experience were already accustomed to paying annual subscriptions for sales databases and other software services. We decided to adopt the same model and charge our customers an annual upfront fee. This model worked well for our target market, aligning with industry standards and ensuring stable, recurring revenue. Moreover, our target CPG customers were already used to this business model and didn't have to choose from a huge variety of payment options, making closing sales a straightforward and efficient process. Marketing & Sales Educate the market to position yourself as a thought leader When we started, AI was not widely understood, especially in the CPG industry. We had to create awareness around both AI and its potential value. Our strategy focused on educating potential users and customers about AI, its relevance, and why they should invest in it. This education was crucial to the success of our marketing efforts. To establish credibility, we adopted a thought leadership approach. We wrote blogs on the importance of AI and how it could solve problems for CPG companies. We also participated in events and conferences to demonstrate our expertise in applying AI to the industry. This helped us build our brand and reputation as leaders in the AI space for CPG, and word-of-mouth spread as customers recognized us as the go-to company for AI solutions. It’s tempting for startups to offer products for free in the hopes of gaining early traction with customers, but this approach doesn't work in the long run. Free offerings don’t establish the value of your product, and customers may not take them seriously. You should always charge for pilots, even if the fee is minimal, to ensure that the customer is serious about potentially working with you, and that they are committed and engaged with the product. Pilots/POCs/Demos should aim to give a "flavour" of what you can deliver A paid pilot/POC trial also gives you the opportunity to provide a “flavour” of what your product can deliver, helping to build confidence and trust with the client. It allows customers to experience a detailed preview of what your product can do, which builds anticipation and desire for the full functionality. During this phase, ensure your product is built to give them a taste of the value you can provide, which sets the stage for a broader, more impactful adoption down the line. Fundraising & Financial Management Leverage PR to generate inbound interest from VCs When it comes to fundraising, our approach was fairly traditional—we reached out to VCs and used connections from existing investors to make introductions. However, looking back, one thing that really helped us build momentum during our fundraising process was getting featured in Tech in Asia. This wasn’t planned; it just so happened that Tech in Asia was doing a series on AI startups in Southeast Asia and they reached out to us for an article. During the interview, they asked if we were fundraising, and we mentioned that we were. As a result, several VCs we hadn’t yet contacted reached out to us. This inbound interest was incredibly valuable, and we found it far more effective than our outbound efforts. So, if you can, try to generate some PR attention—it can help create inbound interest from VCs, and that interest is typically much stronger and more promising than any outbound strategies because they've gone out of their way to reach out to you. Be well-prepared and deliberate about fundraising. Keep trying and don't lose heart When pitching to VCs, it’s crucial to be thoroughly prepared, as you typically only get one shot at making an impression. If you mess up, it’s unlikely they’ll give you a second chance. You need to have key metrics at your fingertips, especially if you're running a SaaS company. Be ready to answer questions like: What’s your retention rate? What are your projections for the year? How much will you close? What’s your average contract value? These numbers should be at the top of your mind. Additionally, fundraising should be treated as a structured process, not something you do on the side while juggling other tasks. When you start, create a clear plan: identify 20 VCs to reach out to each week. By planning ahead, you’ll maintain momentum and speed up the process. Fundraising can be exhausting and disheartening, especially when you face multiple rejections. Remember, you just need one investor to say yes to make it all worthwhile. When using funds, prioritise profitability and grow only when necessary. Don't rely on funding to survive. In the past, the common advice for startups was to raise money, burn through it quickly, and use it to boost revenue numbers, even if that meant operating at a loss. The idea was that profitability wasn’t the main focus, and the goal was to show rapid growth for the next funding round. However, times have changed, especially with the shift from “funding summer” to “funding winter.” My advice now is to aim for profitability as soon as possible and grow only when it's truly needed. For example, it’s tempting to hire a large team when you have substantial funds in the bank, but ask yourself: Do you really need 10 new hires, or could you get by with just four? Growing too quickly can lead to unnecessary expenses, so focus on reaching profitability as soon as possible, rather than just inflating your team or burn rate. The key takeaway is to spend your funds wisely and only when absolutely necessary to reach profitability. You want to avoid becoming dependent on future VC investments to keep your company afloat. Instead, prioritize reaching break-even as quickly as you can, so you're not reliant on external funding to survive in the long run. Team-Building & Leadership Look for complementary skill sets in co-founders When choosing a co-founder, it’s important to find someone with a complementary skill set, not just someone you’re close to. For example, I come from a business and commercial background, so I needed someone with technical expertise. That’s when I found my co-founder, Himanshu, who had experience in machine learning and AI. He was a great match because his technical knowledge complemented my business skills, and together we formed a strong team. It might seem natural to choose your best friend as your co-founder, but this can often lead to conflict. Chances are, you and your best friend share similar interests, skills, and backgrounds, which doesn’t bring diversity to the table. If both of you come from the same industry or have the same strengths, you may end up butting heads on how things should be done. Having diverse skill sets helps avoid this and fosters a more collaborative working relationship. Himanshu (left) and Somsubhra (right) co-founded AI Palette in 2018 Define roles clearly to prevent co-founder conflict To avoid conflict, it’s essential that your roles as co-founders are clearly defined from the beginning. If your co-founder and you have distinct responsibilities, there is no room for overlap or disagreement. This ensures that both of you can work without stepping on each other's toes, and there’s mutual respect for each other’s expertise. This is another reason as to why it helps to have a co-founder with a complementary skillset to yours. Not only is having similar industry backgrounds and skillsets not particularly useful when building out your startup, it's also more likely to lead to conflicts since you both have similar subject expertise. On the other hand, if your co-founder is an expert in something that you're not, you're less likely to argue with them about their decisions regarding that aspect of the business and vice versa when it comes to your decisions. Look for employees who are driven by your mission, not salary For early-stage startups, the first hires are crucial. These employees need to be highly motivated and excited about the mission. Since the salary will likely be low and the work demanding, they must be driven by something beyond just the paycheck. The right employees are the swash-buckling pirates and romantics, i.e those who are genuinely passionate about the startup’s vision and want to be part of something impactful beyond material gains. When employees are motivated by the mission, they are more likely to stick around and help take the startup to greater heights. A litmus test for hiring: Would you be excited to work with them on a Sunday? One of the most important rounds in the hiring process is the culture fit round. This is where you assess whether a candidate shares the same values as you and your team. A key question to ask yourself is: "Would I be excited to work with this person on a Sunday?" If there’s any doubt about your answer, it’s likely not a good fit. The idea is that you want employees who align with the company's culture and values and who you would enjoy collaborating with even outside of regular work hours. How we structure the team at AI Palette We have three broad functions in our organization. The first two are the big ones: Technical Team – This is the core of our product and technology. This team is responsible for product development and incorporating customer feedback into improving the technology Commercial Team – This includes sales, marketing, customer service, account managers, and so on, handling everything related to business growth and customer relations. General and Administrative Team – This smaller team supports functions like finance, HR, and administration. As with almost all businesses, we have teams that address the two core tasks of building (technical team) and selling (commercial team), but given the size we're at now, having the administrative team helps smoothen operations. Set broad goals but let your teams decide on execution What I've done is recruit highly skilled people who don't need me to micromanage them on a day-to-day basis. They're experts in their roles, and as Steve Jobs said, when you hire the right person, you don't have to tell them what to do—they understand the purpose and tell you what to do. So, my job as the CEO is to set the broader goals for them, review the plans they have to achieve those goals, and periodically check in on progress. For example, if our broad goal is to meet a certain revenue target, I break it down across teams: For the sales team, I’ll look at how they plan to hit that target—how many customers they need to sell to, how many salespeople they need, and what tactics and strategies they plan to use. For the technical team, I’ll evaluate our product offerings—whether they think we need to build new products to attract more customers, and whether they think it's scalable for the number of customers we plan to serve. This way, the entire organization's tasks are cascaded in alignment with our overarching goals, with me setting the direction and leaving the details of execution to the skilled team members that I hire.

From Running a $350M Startup to Failing Big and Rediscovering What Really Matters in Life ❤️
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score1
Disastrous-Airport88This week

From Running a $350M Startup to Failing Big and Rediscovering What Really Matters in Life ❤️

This is my story. I’ve always been a hustler. I don’t remember a time I wasn’t working since I was 14. Barely slept 4 hours a night, always busy—solving problems, putting out fires. After college (LLB and MBA), I was lost. I tried regular jobs but couldn’t get excited, and when I’m not excited, I spiral. But I knew entrepreneurship; I just didn’t realize it was an option for adults. Then, in 2017 a friend asked me to help with their startup. “Cool,” I thought. Finally, a place where I could solve problems all day. It was a small e-commerce idea, tackling an interesting angle. I worked 17-hour days, delivering on a bike, talking to customers, vendors, and even random people on the street. Things moved fast. We applied to Y Combinator, got in, and raised $18M before Demo Day even started. We grew 100% month-over-month. Then came another $40M, and I moved to NYC. Before I knew it, we had 1,000 employees and raised $80M more. I was COO, managing 17 direct reports (VPs of Ops, Finance, HR, Data, and more) and 800 indirect employees. On the surface, I was on top of the world. But in reality, I was at rock bottom. I couldn’t sleep, drowning in anxiety, and eventually ended up on antidepressants. Then 2022 hit. We needed to raise $100M, but we couldn’t. In three brutal months, we laid off 900 people. It was the darkest period of my life. I felt like I’d failed everyone—myself, investors, my company, and my team. I took a year off. Packed up the car with my wife and drove across Europe, staying in remote places, just trying to calm my nervous system. I couldn’t speak to anyone, felt ashamed, and battled deep depression. It took over a year, therapy, plant medicine, intense morning routines, and a workout regimen to get back on my feet, physically and mentally. Now, I’m on the other side. In the past 6 months, I’ve been regaining my mojo, with a new respect for who I am and why I’m here. I made peace with what I went through over those 7 years—the lessons, the people, the experiences. I started reconnecting with my community, giving back. Every week, I have conversations with young founders, offering direction, or even jumping in to help with their operations. It’s been a huge gift. I also began exploring side projects. I never knew how to code, but I’ve always had ideas. Recent advances in AI gave me the push I needed. I built my first app, as my first attempt at my true passion—consumer products for kids. Today, I feel wholesome about my journey. I hope others can see that too. ❤️ EDIT: Wow, I didn’t expect this post to resonate with so many people. A lot of you have DM’d me, and I’ll try to respond. Just a heads-up, though—I’m juggling consulting and new projects, so I can’t jump on too many calls. Since I’m not promoting anything, I won’t be funneling folks to my page, so forgive me if I don’t get back to everyone. Anyway, it’s amazing to connect with so many of you. I’d love to write more, so let me know what topics you’d be interested in!

Month 2 of building my startup after being laid off - $200 in revenue and 4 (actual) paying customers
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score1
WhosAfraidOf_138This week

Month 2 of building my startup after being laid off - $200 in revenue and 4 (actual) paying customers

In September 2024, I got laid off from my Silicon Valley job. It fucking sucked. I took a day to be sad, then got to work - I'm not one to wallow, I prefer action. Updated my resume, hit up my network, started interviewing. During this time, I had a realization - I'm tired of depending on a single income stream. I needed to diversify. Then it hit me: I literally work with RAG (retrieval augmented generation) in AI. Why not use this knowledge to help small businesses reduce their customer service load and boost sales? One month later, Answer HQ 0.5 (the MVP) was in the hands of our first users (shoutout to these alpha testers - their feedback shaped everything). By month 2, Answer HQ 1.0 launched with four paying customers, and growing. You're probably thinking - great, another chatbot. Yes, Answer HQ is a chatbot at its core. But here's the difference: it actually works. Our paying customers are seeing real results in reducing support load, plus it has something unique - it actively drives sales by turning customer questions into conversions. How? The AI doesn't just answer questions, it naturally recommends relevant products and content (blogs, social media, etc). Since I'm targeting small business owners (who usually aren't tech wizards) and early startups, Answer HQ had to be dead simple to set up. Here's my onboarding process - just 4 steps. I've checked out competitors like Intercom and Crisp, and I can say this: if my non-tech fiancée can set up an assistant on her blog in minutes, anyone can. Key learnings so far: Building in public is powerful. I shared my journey on Threads and X, and the support for a solo founder has been amazing. AI dev tools (Cursor, Claude Sonnet 3.5) have made MVP development incredibly accessible. You can get a working prototype frontend ready in days. I don't see how traditional no-code tools can survive in this age. But.. for a production-ready product? You still need dev skills and background. Example: I use Redis for super-fast loading of configs and themes. An AI won't suggest this optimization unless you know to ask for it. Another example: Cursor + Sonnet 3.5 struggles with code bases with many files and dependencies. It will change things you don't want it to change. Unless you can read code + understand it + know what needs to be changed and not changed, you'll easily run into upper limits of what prompting alone can do. I never mention "artificial intelligence" "AI" "machine learning" or any of these buzzwords once in my copy in my landing page, docs, product, etc. There is no point. Your customers do not care that something has AI in it. AI is not the product. Solving their pain points and problems is the product. AI is simply a tool of many tools like databases, APIs, caching, system design, etc. Early on, I personally onboarded every user through video calls. Time-consuming? Yes. But it helped me deeply understand their pain points and needs. I wasn't selling tech - I was showing them solutions to their problems. Tech stack: NextJS/React/Tailwind/shadcn frontend, Python FastAPI backend. Using Supabase Postgres, Upstash Redis, and Pinecone for different data needs. Hosted on Vercel and Render.com. Customer growth: Started with one alpha tester who saw such great results (especially in driving e-commerce sales) that he insisted on paying for a full year to keep me motivated. This led to two monthly customers, then a fourth annual customer after I raised prices. My advisor actually pushed me to raise prices again, saying I was undercharging for the value provided. I have settled on my final pricing now. I am learning so much. Traditionally, I have a software development and product management background. I am weak in sales and marketing. Building that app, designing the architecture, talking to customers, etc, these are all my strong suits. I enjoy doing it too. But now I need to improve on my ability to market the startup and really start learning things like SEO, content marketing, cold outreach, etc. I enjoying learning new skills. Happy to answer any questions about the journey so far!

Seeking co-founder to build LinkedIn’s biggest rival(curated version)
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score1
ItzdreeThis week

Seeking co-founder to build LinkedIn’s biggest rival(curated version)

How do you connect with likeminded people? You see the polished wins everywhere, but what about the messy drafts , the awkward pitches and the moments you’re not sure you’ve got it right? Problem: The whole idea of founding and starting a business can be super intimidating for some people, specially those who don’t know any founders personally, those who don’t have a large network, those who don’t have rich parents with large networks, those not inserted in an entrepreneurial culture like in the US for example (which is my case). Sometimes all you need is the right support network, and too see others do what you want, to know that it’s possible! Everyone has an “ultimate guide” to make 7 figures or build a business on YouTube but NO ONE shoes you the HOW, just the results… I’ve tried joining founder communities, LinkedIn ,Reddit … you name it. Most of these founder communities are inaccessible for regular people and often ask for you to have an already existing business with a min ARR… or their simply geography based and if you’re not in a certain area you can’t really participate… As of LinkedIn… full of empty AI generated posts about how some random dude raised $10m in 7 days. Okay Jonathan, but what about the HOW?? How did you write your first pitch? How many rejection calls did you get? What is an MVP? There simply isn’t a platform out there to document your founding journey and find inspiration within a community of people who are doing the same as you. What better way to feel motivated then to see someone actually document their process? Solution: I’m working on building a social media platform for aspiring/founders to connect through the RAW, UNFILTERED process of turning ideas into reality in REAL time. It’s all gonna be around the “building in public “ concept and content creation. Picture an instagram/tiktok profile where instead of seeing someone’s dog you see them documenting their founding process—from the moment they had the idea, to the moment they launched, you’re going to see the successes, the fails, the rejected calls, all documented through actual content and not some AI generated LinkedIn post. Imagine if you wanted to learn about how Steve Jobs started Apple , you could simply go through his profile on this app—exactly. To make sure all interactions are meaningful people would have to apply. It’s a truly curated community, with REAL people, building REAL things in REAL time, and not just tell us the story of how they did it… Audience: I’m targeting people who have a burning desire of building a business and early stage founders starting their founder journeys, that don’t have a support network and simply don’t know where to start. People who are tired of watching 30 min “ultimate guides “ on how to make it on YouTube from “business gurus” selling courses. People who haven’t reached the min ARR required to join an “exclusive “ founder a community. People who can’t simply just move to the US to get into the “exclusive” YC combinator. People who want to connect with real people building real things and not anonymous people on Reddit, or LinkedIn influencers again trying to promote their services. I believe in the idea because I’m also part of my audience. Have always wanted to start my own thing just never knew how to and where to find a community of likeminded people . I don’t know any founders myself, I come from a non-entrepreneurial society and I’d pay good money to access a community of REAL passionate founders building REAL things, in REAL time. This would be my first ever business, and I want to share my journey building it and hopefully inspire others to just start so I’ve created a mailing list to keep anyone interested in the project updated on my fails , learnings and successes. I’m not worried about “making it” but just “starting” and hopefully reach the right audience and inspire anyone to start whatever they have marinating in their thoughts. If you’re a founder struggling with staying consistent or an aspiring founder with an insane desire of starting and don’t know how to start, I’d love to get your feedback on what’s stopping you, your challenges starting out and what you’d find useful in such platform. And finally would this be something that interests you?? PS: casually looking for a technical co-founder

80+ Social Media Updates Related to Business Marketing That Occurred in last 5 months
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score0.333
lazymentorsThis week

80+ Social Media Updates Related to Business Marketing That Occurred in last 5 months

Tiktok expanded its caption limits from 100 to 500 Characters. Reddit Updates Search tools, Now you can search User Comments. “Comment search is here”. Pinterest Announces New Partnership with WooCommerce to Expand Product Listings. Google’s launched ‘multisearch’ feature that lets you search using text and image at the same time. Etsy sellers went on strike after platform increases transaction fees. Reddit launched $1 million fund to support various projects going on platform. Instagram is updating its ranking algorithm to put more focus on Original Content LinkedIn Added New tools In creator mode: improved content analytics and Updates profile video Options. Tiktok launched its own gif library “Effect House”. Instagram Updates Reels editing tools adding reordering clips feature. Google Search got a new label to direct people to original news sources YouTube launches new Profile Rings for Stories and Live. Snapchat launched YouTube Link stickers to make video sharing easier! Messenger adds new shortcuts, including a slack like @everyone feature. Pinterest Expands it’s Creator funds program to help more Underrepresented creators. Reddit brings back r/place after 5 years. Google Adds New Seller Performance Badges, New Pricing Insights for eCommerce Brands. Meta and Google agrees to New Data Transfer agreement to keep Instagram and Facebook running in EU. Twitter tests New Interactive Ad types to boost its promotional Appeal. Instagram removed In-stream Ads from its Advertising Options. Tiktok launched new program “CAP” to help creative agencies reach its audience. Twitch shuts down its desktop app. Meta launched the ability to add “share to Reels” feature to third Party Apps. TikTok Adds New ‘Background Player’ Option for Live-Streams. Twitter rolls out ALT badge and improved image description. Fast, A Checkout Startup with $15 billion valuation shuts down after spending all the funds raised in 2021. Wordpress announced new pricing with more traffic and storage limits after receiving backlash from the community. Sales force upgrades marketing field services and sales tools with AI. Dropbox shop launches in open beta to allow creators to sell digital content. Tiktok is the most downloaded app in Quarter 1 of 2022. WhatsApp announced launch of ‘Communities’ - more structured group chats with admin controls. Tiktok expands testing a private dislike button for comments. Twitter acquired “Openback” A notification app to improve timeline and relevance of push notifications YouTube and Tiktok added New options for Automated Captions, Improving Accessibility. A new social media App “Be Real” is trending across the internet grabbing Gen-Zs attention to try the app. WhatsApp got permission to expand payment services to its Indian user base of 100 Million. YouTube Shorts now allows creators to splice in long-form videos. You can use long form video audios and clips for YT shorts. New Snapchat feature ‘Dynamic Stories’ uses a publisher’s RSS feed to automatically create Stories posts. Zoom launches AI-powered features aimed at sales teams. Tiktok started testing who viewed your profile feature. Ogilvy Announced they will no longer work with who edit their bodies and faces for ads. If you don’t know “Oglivy” is the most successful advertising agency of the decade. YouTube Launches New ‘Search Insights’ for all creators. Snapchat Added 13 million new users in Q1 2022 more than both Twitter and Facebook. Google is Introduced new options to reject tracking cookies in Europe after receiving fines from violating EU data laws. Sony & Microsoft are planning to integrate Ads into their gaming platforms Xbox and PlayStation. YouTube Adds new Shorts Shelf to Trending Tab to show Top Shorts in an alternative section. Instagram started testing a reels template feature which enables creators to copy formats from other reels. Google Tests “What People Are Saying” Search Results. Twitter Launches New Test of Promotions for Third Party Tools Within the App. Instagram is changing how hashtags work by experimenting removing Recents tab from hashtags section. Google Adds New Publisher Verification Badges to Extension Listings in the Google Web Store Amazon AWS launches $30M accelerator program aimed at minority founders. Meta launched more fundraising options for Instagram Reels in 30 countries. Brave Search and DuckDuckGo will no longer support Google AMP due to privacy issues. Instagram is working on a pinned post feature and will officially launch in next few months. Meta: You can now add Music to your Facebook comments Twitter tests new closed caption button to switch on captions in Video Clip Elon Musk Bought Twitter $44 Billion and Company is set to go private. Google now lets you request the removal of personal contact information from search results YouTube reveals that Ads between YT Shorts are being tested with selective brands. LinkedInis rolling out a new website link feature. Google Reduces Visibility Of Business Edits With Color Changes To Profile Updates. Instagram expands testing of 90 second Reels. Microsoft Advertising now offers incentive features like cash-back and adding stock images from your website. Facebook & Pinterest are growing again despite all the hype around slow growth of both platform in last quarter. Google Added 9 new Ad policies to prevent misleading ads taking place. Tiktok Introduces Third-party cookies to its Pixel. (like Facebook Pixel) Twitter reportedly overcounted number of daily active users for last 3 years. Google launched Media CDN to compete on content delivery. YouTube expands Thank You Monetisation tool to all eligible creators. Twitch is looking to expand their cut from streamers earnings from 30 to 50% and also thinks of boosting Ads. Snapchat launches a $230 flying drone camera and new e-commerce integrations in Snap Summit 2022. YouTube Expands its ‘Pre-Publish Checks’ Tool to the Mobile App Google Search Console’s URL parameter tool is officially removed for a time period. Twitter creators can now get paid through Cryptocurrency on Twitter with Stripe. Jellysmack- One of the Influencer marketing agency acquires YouTube analytics tool Google & Microsoft Ads brought more revenue in last quarter- 22% Gains! WhatsApp is working on a paid subscription for multi-phone and tablet chatting. Instagram users now spend 20% of their time in the reels section. Google tests new Color for clicked search results by you. Now Clicked results are in Purple. Twitter: Elon plans to remove employees and focus more on influencers for twitter’s growth + new monetisation ideas were shared. YouTube revenue falls as more users spend time on shorts tab than consuming long form content. Drop 👋 to receive June Updates!

GPT Weekly - 19the June Edition - OpenAI's function calling, Meta's free LLM, EU Regulation and more.
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score0.714
level6-killjoyThis week

GPT Weekly - 19the June Edition - OpenAI's function calling, Meta's free LLM, EU Regulation and more.

This is a recap covering the major news from last week. 🔥Top 3 news - OpenAI’s updates, Meta’s upcoming free LLM and EU Regulation 🗞️Interesting reads include PSA about protecting your keys, The GPT ouroboros, Reddit - OpenAI’s moat, and more.. 🧑‍🎓Learning includes a Step-by-step guide from a non-technical founder who launched his MVP, Chatbot for your Gdrive and more 🔥Top 3 AI news in the past week OpenAI: New Pricing, Models, & Functions OpenAI has been on a roll. Last week we saw the release of OpenAI best practice on using GPT. This week we saw some amazing updates. Three major buckets were: First, the price decreases for both embeddings and GPT-3.5 tokens. Second, new models for gpt-4 and gpt-3.5. A new longer context model for gpt-3.5. Third, a new function calling capability. Why is it important? Previously, the output from OpenAI was all text. So, calling an external API from GPT was quite difficult. You had to parse the text data and things were often incorrect. Langchain created the Agents and Tools feature to tackle this problem. It was still unreliable and prone to issues. Now you get native support to generate a fixed format output. You can use the output to generate functional calls and also pass functions which need to be called. For example, if your app has multiple API endpoints then you can use GPT to generate the API calls with parameters. You can also pass the endpoints as function calls to ensure the correct function is executed. This functionality can further be used to generate structured data (JSON) out of GPT. So, you can generate data from GPT and load it into your backend. What’s next? This functionality allows turning natural language responses into structured data. This can be used to create “intelligent” backends using LLMs. We might see implementations in no-code tools to allow more robust and natural-language tools for non-technical folks. The structured data process goes both ways. You can also feed structured data into GPT for better responses. This feature also has its share of issues. Function calling suffers from the same prompt injection issues. Malicious actors can pass malicious code in function or the responses. For example, creation of queries using functions might contain malicious code to delete data. Without proper user validation this code will be executed automatically and delete data. So, using LLM as the back-end layer needs proper security implementation. Meta's LLM: Commercial Use Ahead Llama has been a boon for the open source community. Many of the open source models rely on Llama. The issue is that Llama is research-only and cannot be used commercially. So, no one can use it to build any product. Meta is now working on the next version of the model. This model will be available for commercial use. This is in stark contrast to both OpenAI and Google. Both safe-guarde their models and make it available through API. Why is it important? Certain industries cannot use LLM APIs because of strict restrictions on data privacy. These companies would want to run their own instance of a foundational model. A commercially available foundational model is also going to help people who want to keep their “API call” costs next to 0. A commercially available free-for-all model will also help push the open source community further. Just like Llama. What’s next? Sam Altman has said OpenAI didn’t release GPT-3 as open-source because they didn’t think people would be able to run it. Now OpenAI is working on an open-source model. This is going to be weaker than GPT-4. Let the battle of LLMs begin. EU's Proposed Legislation and Its Impact on AI Usage The EU parliament voted to move ahead with the E.U. AI Act. This act aims to ensure consumer protection against the dangers of AI. Why is it important? OpenAI and Sam Altman want regulations for models. They have proposed a IAEA-type of agency to stop the proliferation of LLM models. As per OpenAI, all models should be regulated and monitored. The suggestion of a license based regulation has led to significant backlash. Many people have called it “regulatory capture” - with the aim of shutting down competing LLMs. Licensing based regulations might not really be effective. The EU is approaching regulation from a different angle. It doesn’t focus on how models are developed. Rather focuses on how AI will/can be used. They have broken down use cases into 4 categories - unacceptable (prohibited), high, medium and low risk. For example, Building a Pre-Crime software,on%20crimes%20not%20yet%20committed.) to predict crimes? Building a Social credit system? Unacceptable. Using tools to influence elections or recommendation algorithms? High (Highly regulated). Using generative AI tools to create text or images on news sites? Medium (Add label that the content is AI generated) AI providers also need to disclose their training source. To me this sounds like good legislation. What do you guys think? But, OpenAI has warned that EU regulations might force them to pull out completely. What’s next? The disclosure requirements might help various publishing companies. AI and media companies are in talks to pay for training data. Google has been leading the charge. Additionally, OpenAI and Deepmind will open their models for safety and research purposes to the UK government. 🗞️10 AI news highlights and interesting reads PSA: If you are using Repl to write code, you might want to check your OpenAI API keys. If you have left them embedded then people can pirate and steal the keys. LLMs rely on human annotation or human feedback to learn. And one way to generate human annotation is crowdsourcing. But what if the crowdsource human annotators use LLMs? Research shows 33-46% workers used LLMs. So, basically we go from Human -> AI -> Human -> AI. The AI ouroboros. Researchers also say generated data to train models might cause serious issue. All the talks about moats \- Reddit might be OpenAI’s \future\ moat. Given the amount of complaints about how Google search experience has deteriorated during the blackout, this might be true? Doctors are using ChatGPT but not to diagnose.Rather to be more empathetic. We discussed this just a month ago. And guess where the data for this study came from? Reddit AskDocs. Moat FTW?! Beatles to make a comeback…using Generative AI. SnapFusion - Text to Image diffusion on mobile phones. Large context lengths are important for better GPT experience. The secret sauce for 100k context length. There is a lot of bad AI research out there. Some border on snake oil. Most AI “research” should be double checked and challenged. A new research on huggingface said that GPT-4 can ace MIT curriculum. Now someone is replicating the results and say that GPT-4 can’t beat MIT. Are we seeing peak AI? Especially when people from Deepmind and Meta are involved? Mistral AI raised $113 million in seed round with no product. Some might say this funding is for the team and the team is really solid. The issue though is whether the valuation is justified when OpenAI and Google already have a head start. The AI Hype Wall of Shame. \- Collection of articles which mislead people about AI in various aspects. 🧑‍🎓3 Learning Resources Building and Launching a company using GPT-4 with prompts. (The author didn’t know how to code but created and launched the MVP in a month). Chatbot for your Gdrive - https://www.haihai.ai/gpt-gdrive/ Building ChatGPT plugin using Supabase - https://supabase.com/blog/building-chatgpt-plugins-template That’s it folks. Thank you for reading and have a great week ahead. If you are interested in a focused weekly recap delivered to your inbox on Mondays you can subscribe here. It is FREE!

Looking for a technical co-founder to build LinkedIn’s rival
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score1
ItzdreeThis week

Looking for a technical co-founder to build LinkedIn’s rival

How do you connect with likeminded people? You see the polished wins everywhere, but what about the messy drafts , the awkward pitches and the moments you’re not sure you’ve got it right? Problem: The whole idea of founding and starting a business can be super intimidating for some people, specially those who don’t know any founders personally, those who don’t have a large network, those who don’t have rich parents with large networks, those not inserted in an entrepreneurial culture like in the US for example (which is my case). Sometimes all you need is the right support network, and too see others do what you want, to know that it’s possible! Everyone has an “ultimate guide” to make 7 figures or build a business on YouTube but NO ONE shoes you the HOW, just the results… I’ve tried joining founder communities, LinkedIn ,Reddit … you name it. Most of these founder communities are inaccessible for regular people and often ask for you to have an already existing business with a min ARR… or their simply geography based and if you’re not in a certain area you can’t really participate… As of LinkedIn… full of empty AI generated posts about how some random dude raised $10m in 7 days. Okay Jonathan, but what about the HOW?? How did you write your first pitch? How many rejection calls did you get? What is an MVP? There simply isn’t a platform out there to document your founding journey and find inspiration within a community of people who are doing the same as you. What better way to feel motivated then to see someone actually document their process? Solution: I’m working on building a social media platform for aspiring/founders to connect through the RAW, UNFILTERED process of turning ideas into reality in REAL time. It’s all gonna be around the “building in public “ concept and content creation. Picture an instagram/tiktok profile where instead of seeing someone’s dog you see them documenting their founding process—from the moment they had the idea, to the moment they launched, you’re going to see the successes, the fails, the rejected calls, all documented through actual content and not some AI generated LinkedIn post. Imagine if you wanted to learn about how Steve Jobs started Apple , you could simply go through his profile on this app—exactly. To make sure all interactions are meaningful people would have to apply. It’s a truly curated community, with REAL people, building REAL things in REAL time, and not just tell us the story of how they did it… Audience: I’m targeting people who have a burning desire of building a business and early stage founders starting their founder journeys, that don’t have a support network and simply don’t know where to start. People who are tired of watching 30 min “ultimate guides “ on how to make it on YouTube from “business gurus” selling courses. People who haven’t reached the min ARR required to join an “exclusive “ founder a community. People who can’t simply just move to the US to get into the “exclusive” YC combinator. People who want to connect with real people building real things and not anonymous people on Reddit, or LinkedIn influencers again trying to promote their services. I believe in the idea because I’m also part of my audience. Have always wanted to start my own thing just never knew how to and where to find a community of likeminded people . I don’t know any founders myself, I come from a non-entrepreneurial society and I’d pay good money to access a community of REAL passionate founders building REAL things, in REAL time. This would be my first ever business, and I want to share my journey building it and hopefully inspire others to just start so I’ve created a mailing list to keep anyone interested in the project updated on my fails , learnings and successes. I’m not worried about “making it” but just “starting” and hopefully reach the right audience and inspire anyone to start whatever they have marinating in their thoughts. If you’re a founder struggling with staying consistent or an aspiring founder with an insane desire of starting and don’t know how to start, I’d love to get your feedback on what’s stopping you, your challenges starting out and what you’d find useful in such platform. And finally would this be something that interests you?? Feel free to subscribe to get new updates 🫶🏼 : https://mailchi.mp/037c56b89994/d-founder PS: casually looking for a technical co-founder

[N] How Stability AI’s Founder Tanked His Billion-Dollar Startup
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score0.667
milaworldThis week

[N] How Stability AI’s Founder Tanked His Billion-Dollar Startup

forbes article: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrickcai/2024/03/29/how-stability-ais-founder-tanked-his-billion-dollar-startup/ archive no paywall: https://archive.is/snbeV How Stability AI’s Founder Tanked His Billion-Dollar Startup Mar 29, 2024 Stability AI founder Emad Mostaque took the stage last week at the Terranea Resort in Palos Verdes, California to roaring applause and an introduction from an AI-generated Aristotle who announced him as “a modern Prometheus” with “the astuteness of Athena and the vision of Daedalus.” “Under his stewardship, AI becomes the Herculean force poised to vanquish the twin serpents of illness and ailment and extend the olive branch of longevity,” the faux Aristotle proclaimed. “I think that’s the best intro I’ve ever had,” Mostaque said. But behind Mostaque's hagiographic introduction lay a grim and fast metastasizing truth. Stability, once one of AI’s buzziest startups, was floundering. It had been running out of money for months and Mostaque had been unable to secure enough additional funding. It had defaulted on payments to Amazon whose cloud service undergirded Stability’s core offerings. The star research team behind its flagship text-to-image generator Stable Diffusion had tendered their resignations just three days before — as Forbes would first report — and other senior leaders had issued him an ultimatum: resign, or we walk too. Still, onstage before a massive audience of peers and acolytes, Mostaque talked a big game. “AI is jet planes for the mind,” he opined. “AI is our collective intelligence. It's the human Colossus.” He claimed a new, faster version of the Stable Diffusion image generator released earlier this month could generate “200 cats with hats per second.” But later, when he was asked about Stability’s financial model, Mostaque fumbled. “I can’t say that publicly,” he replied. “But it’s going well. We’re ahead of forecast.” Four days later, Mostaque stepped down as CEO of Stability, as Forbes first reported. In a post to X, the service formerly known as Twitter, he claimed he’d voluntarily abdicated his role to decentralize “the concentration of power in AI.” But sources told Forbes that was hardly the case. Behind the scenes, Mostaque had fought to maintain his position and control despite mounting pressure externally and internally to step down. Company documents and interviews with 32 current and former employees, investors, collaborators and industry observers suggest his abrupt exit was the result of poor business judgment and wild overspending that undermined confidence in his vision and leadership, and ultimately kneecapped the company. Mostaque, through his attorneys, declined to comment on record on a detailed list of questions about the reporting in this story. But in an email to Forbes earlier this week he broadly disputed the allegations. “Nobody tells you how hard it is to be a CEO and there are better CEOs than me to scale a business,” he said in a statement. “I am not sure anyone else would have been able to build and grow the research team to build the best and most widely used models out there and I’m very proud of the team there. I look forward to moving onto the next problem to handle and hopefully move the needle.” In an emailed statement, Christian Laforte and Shan Shan Wong, the interim co-CEOs who replaced Mostaque, said, "the company remains focused on commercializing its world leading technology” and providing it “to partners across the creative industries." After starting Stability in 2019, Mostaque built the company into an early AI juggernaut by seizing upon a promising research project that would become Stable Diffusion and funding it into a business reality. The ease with which the software generated detailed images from the simplest text prompts immediately captivated the public: 10 million people used it on any given day, the company told Forbes in early 2023. For some true believers, Mostaque was a crucial advocate for open-source AI development in a space dominated by the closed systems of OpenAI, Google and Anthropic. But his startup’s rise to one of the buzziest in generative AI was in part built on a series of exaggerations and misleading claims, as Forbes first reported last year (Mostaque disputed some points at the time). And they continued after he raised $100 million at a $1 billion valuation just days after launching Stable Diffusion in 2022. His failure to deliver on an array of grand promises, like building bespoke AI models for nation states, and his decision to pour tens of millions into research without a sustainable business plan, eroded Stability’s foundations and jeopardized its future. "He was just giving shit away,” one former employee told Forbes. “That man legitimately wanted to transform the world. He actually wanted to train AI models for kids in Malawi. Was it practical? Absolutely not." By October 2023, Stability would have less than $4 million left in the bank, according to an internal memo prepared for a board meeting and reviewed by Forbes. And mounting debt, including months of overdue Amazon Web Services payments, had already left it in the red. To avoid legal penalties for skipping Americans staff’s payroll, the document explained, the London-based startup was considering delaying tax payments to the U.K. government. It was Stability’s armada of GPUs, the wildly powerful and equally expensive chips undergirding AI, that were so taxing the company’s finances. Hosted by AWS, they had long been one of Mostaque’s bragging points; he often touted them as one of the world’s 10 largest supercomputers. They were responsible for helping Stability’s researchers build and maintain one of the top AI image generators, as well as break important new ground on generative audio, video and 3D models. “Undeniably, Stability has continued to ship a lot of models,” said one former employee. “They may not have profited off of it, but the broader ecosystem benefitted in a huge, huge way.” But the costs associated with so much compute were now threatening to sink the company. According to an internal October financial forecast seen by Forbes, Stability was on track to spend $99 million on compute in 2023. It noted as well that Stability was “underpaying AWS bills for July (by $1M)” and “not planning to pay AWS at the end of October for August usage ($7M).” Then there were the September and October bills, plus $1 million owed to Google Cloud and $600,000 to GPU cloud data center CoreWeave. (Amazon, Google and CoreWeave declined to comment.) With an additional $54 million allocated to wages and operating expenses, Stability’s total projected costs for 2023 were $153 million. But according to its October financial report, its projected revenue for the calendar year was just $11 million. Stability was on track to lose more money per month than it made in an entire year. The company’s dire financial position had thoroughly soured Stability’s current investors, including Coatue, which had invested tens of millions in the company during its $101 million funding round in 2022. In the middle of 2023, Mostaque agreed to an independent audit after Coatue raised a series of concerns, according to a source with direct knowledge of the matter. The outcome of the investigation is unclear. Coatue declined to comment. Within a week of an early October board meeting where Mostaque shared that financial forecast, Lightspeed Venture Partners, another major investor, sent a letter to the board urging them to sell the company. The distressing numbers had “severely undermined” the firm’s confidence in Mostaque’s ability to lead the company. “In particular, we are surprised and deeply concerned by a cash position just now disclosed to us that is inconsistent with prior discussions on this topic,” Lightspeed’s general counsel Brett Nissenberg wrote in the letter, a copy of which was viewed by Forbes. “Lightspeed believes that the company is not likely financeable on terms that would assure the company’s long term sound financial position.” (Lightspeed declined a request for comment.) The calls for a sale led Stability to quietly begin looking for a buyer. Bloomberg reported in November that Stability approached AI startups Cohere and Jasper to gauge their interest. Stability denied this, and Jasper CEO Timothy Young did the same when reached for comment by Forbes. A Cohere representative declined to comment. But one prominent AI company confirmed that Mostaque’s representatives had reached out to them to test the waters. Those talks did not advance because “the numbers didn’t add up,” this person, who declined to be named due to the confidential nature of the talks, told Forbes. Stability also tried to court Samsung as a buyer, going so far as to redecorate its office in advance of a planned meeting with the Korean electronics giant. (Samsung said that it invested in Stability in 2023 and that it does not comment on M&A discussions.) Coatue had been calling for Mostaque’s resignation for months, according to a source with direct knowledge. But it and other investors were unable to oust him because he was the company’s majority shareholder. When they tried a different tact by rallying other investors to offer him a juicy equity package to resign, Mostaque refused, said two sources. By October, Coatue and Lightspeed had had enough. Coatue left the board and Lightspeed resigned its observer seat. “Emad infuriated our initial investors so much it’s just making it impossible for us to raise more money under acceptable terms,” one current Stability executive told Forbes. The early months of 2024 saw Stability’s already precarious position eroding further still. Employees were quietly laid off. Three people in a position to know estimated that at least 10% of staff were cut. And cash reserves continued to dwindle. Mostaque mentioned a lifeline at the October board meeting: $95 million in tentative funding from new investors, pending due diligence. But in the end, only a fraction of it was wired, two sources say, much of it from Intel, which Forbes has learned invested $20 million, a fraction of what was reported. (Intel did not return a request for comment by publication time.) Two hours after Forbes broke the news of Mostaque’s plans to step down as CEO, Stability issued a press release confirming his resignation. Chief operating officer Wong and chief technology officer Laforte have taken over in the interim. Mostaque, who said on X that he still owns a majority of the company, also stepped down from the board, which has now initiated a search for a permanent CEO. There is a lot of work to be done to turn things around, and very little time in which to do it. Said the current Stability executive, “There’s still a possibility of a turnaround story, but the odds drop by the day.” In July of 2023, Mostaque still thought he could pull it off. Halfway through the month, he shared a fundraising plan with his lieutenants. It was wildly optimistic, detailing the raise of $500 million in cash and another $750 million in computing facilities from marquee investors like Nvidia, Google, Intel and the World Bank (Nvidia and Google declined comment. Intel did not respond. The World Bank said it did not invest in Stability). In a Slack message reviewed by Forbes, Mostaque said Google was “willing to move fast” and the round was “likely to be oversubscribed.” It wasn’t. Three people with direct knowledge of these fundraising efforts told Forbes that while there was some interest in Stability, talks often stalled when it came time to disclose financials. Two of them noted that earlier in the year, Mostaque had simply stopped engaging with VCs who asked for numbers. Only one firm invested around that time: actor Ashton Kutcher’s Sound Ventures, which invested $35 million in the form of a convertible SAFE note during the second quarter, according to an internal document. (Sound Ventures did not respond to a request for comment.) And though he’d managed to score a meeting with Nvidia and its CEO Jensen Huang, it ended in disaster, according to two sources. “Under Jensen's microscopic questions, Emad just fell apart,” a source in position to know told Forbes. Huang quickly concluded Stability wasn’t ready for an investment from Nvidia, the sources said. Mostaque told Forbes in an email that he had not met with Huang since 2022, except to say “hello and what’s up a few times after.” His July 2023 message references a plan to raise $150 million from Nvidia. (Nvidia declined to comment.) After a June Forbes investigation citing more than 30 sources revealed Mostaque’s history of misleading claims, Mostaque struggled to raise funding, a Stability investor told Forbes. (Mostaque disputed the story at the time and called it "coordinated lies" in his email this week to Forbes). Increasingly, investors scrutinized his assertions and pressed for data. And Young, now the CEO of Jasper, turned down a verbal offer to be Stability’s president after reading the article, according to a source with direct knowledge of the matter. The collapse of the talks aggravated the board and other executives, who had hoped Young would compensate for the sales and business management skills that Mostaque lacked, according to four people in a position to know. (Young declined to comment.) When Stability’s senior leadership convened in London for the CogX conference in September, the financing had still not closed. There, a group of executives confronted Mostaque asking questions about the company’s cash position and runway, according to three people with direct knowledge of the incident. They did not get the clarity they’d hoped for. By October, Mostaque had reduced his fundraising target by more than 80%. The months that followed saw a steady drumbeat of departures — general counsel Adam Avrunin, vice presidents Mike Melnicki, Ed Newton-Rex and Joe Penna, chief people officer Ozden Onder — culminating in the demoralizing March exit of Stable Diffusion’s primary developers Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Patrick Esser and Dominik Lorenz. Rombach, who led the team, had been angling to leave for months, two sources said, first threatening to resign last summer because of the fundraising failures. Others left over concerns about cash flow, as well as liabilities — including what four people described as Mostaque’s lax approach to ensuring that Stability products could not be used to produce child sexual abuse imagery. “Stability AI is committed to preventing the misuse of AI and prohibits the use of our image models and services for unlawful activity, including attempts to edit or create CSAM,” Ella Irwin, senior vice president of integrity, said in a statement. Newton-Rex told Forbes he resigned because he disagreed with Stability’s position that training AI on copyrighted work without consent is fair use. Melnicki and Penna declined to comment. Avrunin and Onder could not be reached for comment. None of the researchers responded to requests for comment. The Stable Diffusion researchers’ departure as a cohort says a lot about the state of Stability AI. The company’s researchers were widely viewed as its crown jewels, their work subsidized with a firehose of pricey compute power that was even extended to people outside the company. Martino Russi, an artificial intelligence researcher, told Forbes that though he was never formally employed by Stability, the company provided him a “staggering” amount of compute between January and April 2023 to play around with developing an AI video generator that Stability might someday use. “It was Candy Land or Coney Island,” said Russi, who estimates that his experiment, which was ultimately shelved, cost the company $2.5 million. Stable Diffusion was simultaneously Stability’s marquee product and its existential cash crisis. One current employee described it to Forbes as “a giant vacuum that absorbed everything: money, compute, people.” While the software was widely used, with Mostaque claiming downloads reaching into the hundreds of millions, Stability struggled to translate that wild success into revenue. Mostaque knew it could be done — peers at Databricks, Elastic and MongoDB had all turned a free product into a lucrative business — he just couldn’t figure out how. His first attempt was Stability’s API, which allowed paying customers to integrate Stable Diffusion into their own products. In early 2023, a handful of small companies, like art generator app NightCafe and presentation software startup Tome, signed on, according to four people with knowledge of the deals. But Stability’s poor account management services soured many, and in a matter of months NightCafe and Tome canceled their contracts, three people said. NightCafe founder Angus Russell told Forbes that his company switched to a competitor which “offered much cheaper inference costs and a broader service.” Tome did not respond to a request for comment. Meanwhile, Mostaque’s efforts to court larger companies like Samsung and Snapchat were failing, according to five people familiar with the effort. Canva, which was already one of the heaviest users of open-sourced Stable Diffusion, had multiple discussions with Stability, which was angling for a contract it hoped would generate several millions in annual revenue. But the deal never materialized, four sources said. “These three companies wanted and needed us,” one former employee told Forbes. “They would have been the perfect customers.” (Samsung, Snap and Canva declined to comment.) “It’s not that there was not an appetite to pay Stability — there were tons of companies that would have that wanted to,” the former employee said. “There was a huge opportunity and demand, but just a resistance to execution.” Mostaque’s other big idea was to provide governments with bespoke national AI models that would invigorate their economies and citizenry. “Emad envisions a world where AI through 100 national models serves not as a tool of the few, but as a benefactor to all promising to confront great adversaries, cancer, autism, and the sands of time itself,” the AI avatar of Aristotle said in his intro at the conference. Mostaque told several prospective customers that he could deliver such models within 60 days — an untenable timeline, according to two people in position to know. Stability attempted to develop a model for the Singaporean government over the protestation of employees who questioned its technical feasibility, three sources familiar with the effort told Forbes. But it couldn’t pull it off and Singapore never became a customer. (The government of Singapore confirmed it did not enter into a deal with Stability, but declined to answer additional questions.) As Stability careened from one new business idea to another, resources were abruptly reallocated and researchers reassigned. The whiplash shifts in a largely siloed organization demoralized and infuriated employees. “There were ‘urgent’ things, ‘urgent urgent’ things and ‘most urgent,’” one former employee complained. “None of these things seem important if everything is important.” Another former Stability executive was far more pointed in their assessment. “Emad is the most disorganized leader I have ever worked with in my career,” this person told Forbes. “He has no vision, and changes directions every week, often based on what he sees on Twitter.” In a video interview posted shortly before this story was published, Mostaque explained his leadership style: “I'm particularly great at taking creatives, developers, researchers, others, and achieving their full potential in designing systems. But I should not be dealing with, you know, HR and operations and business development and other elements. There are far better people than me to do that.” By December 2023, Stability had partially abandoned its open-source roots and announced that any commercial use of Stable Diffusion would cost customers at least $20 per month (non-commercial and research use of Stable Diffusion would remain free). But privately, Stability was considering a potentially more lucrative source of revenue: reselling the compute it was leasing from providers like AWS, according to six people familiar with the effort. Though it was essentially GPU arbitrage, Stability framed the strategy to investors as a “managed services” offering. Its damning October financial report projected optimistically that such an offering would bring in $139 million in 2024 — 98% of its revenue. Multiple employees at the time told Forbes they feared reselling compute, even if the company called it “managed services,” would violate the terms of Stability’s contract with AWS. Amazon declined to comment. “The line internally was that we are not reselling compute,” one former employee said. “This was some of the dirtiest feeling stuff.” Stability also discussed reselling a cluster of Nvidia A100 chips, leased via CoreWeave, to the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, three sources said. “It was under the guise of managed services, but there wasn’t any management happening,” one of these people told Forbes. Andreessen Horowitz and CoreWeave declined to comment. Stability did not respond to questions about if it plans to continue this strategy now that Mostaque is out of the picture. Regardless, interim co-CEOs Wong and Laforte are on a tight timeline to clean up his mess. Board chairman Jim O’Shaughnessy said in a statement that he was confident the pair “will adeptly steer the company forward in developing and commercializing industry-leading generative AI products.” But burn continues to far outpace revenue. The Financial Times reported Friday that the company made $5.4 million of revenue in February, against $8 million in costs. Several sources said there are ongoing concerns about making payroll for the roughly 150 remaining employees. Leadership roles have gone vacant for months amid the disarray, leaving the company increasingly directionless. Meanwhile, a potentially catastrophic legal threat looms over the company: A trio of copyright infringement lawsuits brought by Getty Images and a group of artists in the U.S. and U.K., who claim Stability illegally used their art and photography to train the AI models powering Stable Diffusion. A London-based court has already rejected the company’s bid to throw out one of the lawsuits on the basis that none of its researchers were based in the U.K. And Stability’s claim that Getty’s Delaware lawsuit should be blocked because it's a U.K.-based company was rejected. (Stability did not respond to questions about the litigation.) AI-related copyright litigation “could go on for years,” according to Eric Goldman, a law professor at Santa Clara University. He told Forbes that though plaintiffs suing AI firms face an uphill battle overcoming the existing legal precedent on copyright infringement, the quantity of arguments available to make are virtually inexhaustible. “Like in military theory, if there’s a gap in your lines, that’s where the enemy pours through — if any one of those arguments succeeds, it could completely change the generative AI environment,” he said. “In some sense, generative AI as an industry has to win everything.” Stability, which had more than $100 million in the bank just a year and a half ago, is in a deep hole. Not only does it need more funding, it needs a viable business model — or a buyer with the vision and chops to make it successful in a fast-moving and highly competitive sector. At an all hands meeting this past Monday, Stability’s new leaders detailed a path forward. One point of emphasis: a plan to better manage resources and expenses, according to one person in attendance. It’s a start, but Mostaque’s meddling has left them with little runway to execute. His resignation, though, has given some employees hope. “A few people are 100% going to reconsider leaving after today,” said one current employee. “And the weird gloomy aura of hearing Emad talking nonsense for an hour is gone.” Shortly before Mostaque resigned, one current Stability executive told Forbes that they were optimistic his departure could make Stability appealing enough to receive a small investment or sale to a friendly party. “There are companies that have raised hundreds of millions of dollars that have much less intrinsic value than Stability,” the person said. “A white knight may still appear.”

[N] How Stability AI’s Founder Tanked His Billion-Dollar Startup
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score0.667
milaworldThis week

[N] How Stability AI’s Founder Tanked His Billion-Dollar Startup

forbes article: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrickcai/2024/03/29/how-stability-ais-founder-tanked-his-billion-dollar-startup/ archive no paywall: https://archive.is/snbeV How Stability AI’s Founder Tanked His Billion-Dollar Startup Mar 29, 2024 Stability AI founder Emad Mostaque took the stage last week at the Terranea Resort in Palos Verdes, California to roaring applause and an introduction from an AI-generated Aristotle who announced him as “a modern Prometheus” with “the astuteness of Athena and the vision of Daedalus.” “Under his stewardship, AI becomes the Herculean force poised to vanquish the twin serpents of illness and ailment and extend the olive branch of longevity,” the faux Aristotle proclaimed. “I think that’s the best intro I’ve ever had,” Mostaque said. But behind Mostaque's hagiographic introduction lay a grim and fast metastasizing truth. Stability, once one of AI’s buzziest startups, was floundering. It had been running out of money for months and Mostaque had been unable to secure enough additional funding. It had defaulted on payments to Amazon whose cloud service undergirded Stability’s core offerings. The star research team behind its flagship text-to-image generator Stable Diffusion had tendered their resignations just three days before — as Forbes would first report — and other senior leaders had issued him an ultimatum: resign, or we walk too. Still, onstage before a massive audience of peers and acolytes, Mostaque talked a big game. “AI is jet planes for the mind,” he opined. “AI is our collective intelligence. It's the human Colossus.” He claimed a new, faster version of the Stable Diffusion image generator released earlier this month could generate “200 cats with hats per second.” But later, when he was asked about Stability’s financial model, Mostaque fumbled. “I can’t say that publicly,” he replied. “But it’s going well. We’re ahead of forecast.” Four days later, Mostaque stepped down as CEO of Stability, as Forbes first reported. In a post to X, the service formerly known as Twitter, he claimed he’d voluntarily abdicated his role to decentralize “the concentration of power in AI.” But sources told Forbes that was hardly the case. Behind the scenes, Mostaque had fought to maintain his position and control despite mounting pressure externally and internally to step down. Company documents and interviews with 32 current and former employees, investors, collaborators and industry observers suggest his abrupt exit was the result of poor business judgment and wild overspending that undermined confidence in his vision and leadership, and ultimately kneecapped the company. Mostaque, through his attorneys, declined to comment on record on a detailed list of questions about the reporting in this story. But in an email to Forbes earlier this week he broadly disputed the allegations. “Nobody tells you how hard it is to be a CEO and there are better CEOs than me to scale a business,” he said in a statement. “I am not sure anyone else would have been able to build and grow the research team to build the best and most widely used models out there and I’m very proud of the team there. I look forward to moving onto the next problem to handle and hopefully move the needle.” In an emailed statement, Christian Laforte and Shan Shan Wong, the interim co-CEOs who replaced Mostaque, said, "the company remains focused on commercializing its world leading technology” and providing it “to partners across the creative industries." After starting Stability in 2019, Mostaque built the company into an early AI juggernaut by seizing upon a promising research project that would become Stable Diffusion and funding it into a business reality. The ease with which the software generated detailed images from the simplest text prompts immediately captivated the public: 10 million people used it on any given day, the company told Forbes in early 2023. For some true believers, Mostaque was a crucial advocate for open-source AI development in a space dominated by the closed systems of OpenAI, Google and Anthropic. But his startup’s rise to one of the buzziest in generative AI was in part built on a series of exaggerations and misleading claims, as Forbes first reported last year (Mostaque disputed some points at the time). And they continued after he raised $100 million at a $1 billion valuation just days after launching Stable Diffusion in 2022. His failure to deliver on an array of grand promises, like building bespoke AI models for nation states, and his decision to pour tens of millions into research without a sustainable business plan, eroded Stability’s foundations and jeopardized its future. "He was just giving shit away,” one former employee told Forbes. “That man legitimately wanted to transform the world. He actually wanted to train AI models for kids in Malawi. Was it practical? Absolutely not." By October 2023, Stability would have less than $4 million left in the bank, according to an internal memo prepared for a board meeting and reviewed by Forbes. And mounting debt, including months of overdue Amazon Web Services payments, had already left it in the red. To avoid legal penalties for skipping Americans staff’s payroll, the document explained, the London-based startup was considering delaying tax payments to the U.K. government. It was Stability’s armada of GPUs, the wildly powerful and equally expensive chips undergirding AI, that were so taxing the company’s finances. Hosted by AWS, they had long been one of Mostaque’s bragging points; he often touted them as one of the world’s 10 largest supercomputers. They were responsible for helping Stability’s researchers build and maintain one of the top AI image generators, as well as break important new ground on generative audio, video and 3D models. “Undeniably, Stability has continued to ship a lot of models,” said one former employee. “They may not have profited off of it, but the broader ecosystem benefitted in a huge, huge way.” But the costs associated with so much compute were now threatening to sink the company. According to an internal October financial forecast seen by Forbes, Stability was on track to spend $99 million on compute in 2023. It noted as well that Stability was “underpaying AWS bills for July (by $1M)” and “not planning to pay AWS at the end of October for August usage ($7M).” Then there were the September and October bills, plus $1 million owed to Google Cloud and $600,000 to GPU cloud data center CoreWeave. (Amazon, Google and CoreWeave declined to comment.) With an additional $54 million allocated to wages and operating expenses, Stability’s total projected costs for 2023 were $153 million. But according to its October financial report, its projected revenue for the calendar year was just $11 million. Stability was on track to lose more money per month than it made in an entire year. The company’s dire financial position had thoroughly soured Stability’s current investors, including Coatue, which had invested tens of millions in the company during its $101 million funding round in 2022. In the middle of 2023, Mostaque agreed to an independent audit after Coatue raised a series of concerns, according to a source with direct knowledge of the matter. The outcome of the investigation is unclear. Coatue declined to comment. Within a week of an early October board meeting where Mostaque shared that financial forecast, Lightspeed Venture Partners, another major investor, sent a letter to the board urging them to sell the company. The distressing numbers had “severely undermined” the firm’s confidence in Mostaque’s ability to lead the company. “In particular, we are surprised and deeply concerned by a cash position just now disclosed to us that is inconsistent with prior discussions on this topic,” Lightspeed’s general counsel Brett Nissenberg wrote in the letter, a copy of which was viewed by Forbes. “Lightspeed believes that the company is not likely financeable on terms that would assure the company’s long term sound financial position.” (Lightspeed declined a request for comment.) The calls for a sale led Stability to quietly begin looking for a buyer. Bloomberg reported in November that Stability approached AI startups Cohere and Jasper to gauge their interest. Stability denied this, and Jasper CEO Timothy Young did the same when reached for comment by Forbes. A Cohere representative declined to comment. But one prominent AI company confirmed that Mostaque’s representatives had reached out to them to test the waters. Those talks did not advance because “the numbers didn’t add up,” this person, who declined to be named due to the confidential nature of the talks, told Forbes. Stability also tried to court Samsung as a buyer, going so far as to redecorate its office in advance of a planned meeting with the Korean electronics giant. (Samsung said that it invested in Stability in 2023 and that it does not comment on M&A discussions.) Coatue had been calling for Mostaque’s resignation for months, according to a source with direct knowledge. But it and other investors were unable to oust him because he was the company’s majority shareholder. When they tried a different tact by rallying other investors to offer him a juicy equity package to resign, Mostaque refused, said two sources. By October, Coatue and Lightspeed had had enough. Coatue left the board and Lightspeed resigned its observer seat. “Emad infuriated our initial investors so much it’s just making it impossible for us to raise more money under acceptable terms,” one current Stability executive told Forbes. The early months of 2024 saw Stability’s already precarious position eroding further still. Employees were quietly laid off. Three people in a position to know estimated that at least 10% of staff were cut. And cash reserves continued to dwindle. Mostaque mentioned a lifeline at the October board meeting: $95 million in tentative funding from new investors, pending due diligence. But in the end, only a fraction of it was wired, two sources say, much of it from Intel, which Forbes has learned invested $20 million, a fraction of what was reported. (Intel did not return a request for comment by publication time.) Two hours after Forbes broke the news of Mostaque’s plans to step down as CEO, Stability issued a press release confirming his resignation. Chief operating officer Wong and chief technology officer Laforte have taken over in the interim. Mostaque, who said on X that he still owns a majority of the company, also stepped down from the board, which has now initiated a search for a permanent CEO. There is a lot of work to be done to turn things around, and very little time in which to do it. Said the current Stability executive, “There’s still a possibility of a turnaround story, but the odds drop by the day.” In July of 2023, Mostaque still thought he could pull it off. Halfway through the month, he shared a fundraising plan with his lieutenants. It was wildly optimistic, detailing the raise of $500 million in cash and another $750 million in computing facilities from marquee investors like Nvidia, Google, Intel and the World Bank (Nvidia and Google declined comment. Intel did not respond. The World Bank said it did not invest in Stability). In a Slack message reviewed by Forbes, Mostaque said Google was “willing to move fast” and the round was “likely to be oversubscribed.” It wasn’t. Three people with direct knowledge of these fundraising efforts told Forbes that while there was some interest in Stability, talks often stalled when it came time to disclose financials. Two of them noted that earlier in the year, Mostaque had simply stopped engaging with VCs who asked for numbers. Only one firm invested around that time: actor Ashton Kutcher’s Sound Ventures, which invested $35 million in the form of a convertible SAFE note during the second quarter, according to an internal document. (Sound Ventures did not respond to a request for comment.) And though he’d managed to score a meeting with Nvidia and its CEO Jensen Huang, it ended in disaster, according to two sources. “Under Jensen's microscopic questions, Emad just fell apart,” a source in position to know told Forbes. Huang quickly concluded Stability wasn’t ready for an investment from Nvidia, the sources said. Mostaque told Forbes in an email that he had not met with Huang since 2022, except to say “hello and what’s up a few times after.” His July 2023 message references a plan to raise $150 million from Nvidia. (Nvidia declined to comment.) After a June Forbes investigation citing more than 30 sources revealed Mostaque’s history of misleading claims, Mostaque struggled to raise funding, a Stability investor told Forbes. (Mostaque disputed the story at the time and called it "coordinated lies" in his email this week to Forbes). Increasingly, investors scrutinized his assertions and pressed for data. And Young, now the CEO of Jasper, turned down a verbal offer to be Stability’s president after reading the article, according to a source with direct knowledge of the matter. The collapse of the talks aggravated the board and other executives, who had hoped Young would compensate for the sales and business management skills that Mostaque lacked, according to four people in a position to know. (Young declined to comment.) When Stability’s senior leadership convened in London for the CogX conference in September, the financing had still not closed. There, a group of executives confronted Mostaque asking questions about the company’s cash position and runway, according to three people with direct knowledge of the incident. They did not get the clarity they’d hoped for. By October, Mostaque had reduced his fundraising target by more than 80%. The months that followed saw a steady drumbeat of departures — general counsel Adam Avrunin, vice presidents Mike Melnicki, Ed Newton-Rex and Joe Penna, chief people officer Ozden Onder — culminating in the demoralizing March exit of Stable Diffusion’s primary developers Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Patrick Esser and Dominik Lorenz. Rombach, who led the team, had been angling to leave for months, two sources said, first threatening to resign last summer because of the fundraising failures. Others left over concerns about cash flow, as well as liabilities — including what four people described as Mostaque’s lax approach to ensuring that Stability products could not be used to produce child sexual abuse imagery. “Stability AI is committed to preventing the misuse of AI and prohibits the use of our image models and services for unlawful activity, including attempts to edit or create CSAM,” Ella Irwin, senior vice president of integrity, said in a statement. Newton-Rex told Forbes he resigned because he disagreed with Stability’s position that training AI on copyrighted work without consent is fair use. Melnicki and Penna declined to comment. Avrunin and Onder could not be reached for comment. None of the researchers responded to requests for comment. The Stable Diffusion researchers’ departure as a cohort says a lot about the state of Stability AI. The company’s researchers were widely viewed as its crown jewels, their work subsidized with a firehose of pricey compute power that was even extended to people outside the company. Martino Russi, an artificial intelligence researcher, told Forbes that though he was never formally employed by Stability, the company provided him a “staggering” amount of compute between January and April 2023 to play around with developing an AI video generator that Stability might someday use. “It was Candy Land or Coney Island,” said Russi, who estimates that his experiment, which was ultimately shelved, cost the company $2.5 million. Stable Diffusion was simultaneously Stability’s marquee product and its existential cash crisis. One current employee described it to Forbes as “a giant vacuum that absorbed everything: money, compute, people.” While the software was widely used, with Mostaque claiming downloads reaching into the hundreds of millions, Stability struggled to translate that wild success into revenue. Mostaque knew it could be done — peers at Databricks, Elastic and MongoDB had all turned a free product into a lucrative business — he just couldn’t figure out how. His first attempt was Stability’s API, which allowed paying customers to integrate Stable Diffusion into their own products. In early 2023, a handful of small companies, like art generator app NightCafe and presentation software startup Tome, signed on, according to four people with knowledge of the deals. But Stability’s poor account management services soured many, and in a matter of months NightCafe and Tome canceled their contracts, three people said. NightCafe founder Angus Russell told Forbes that his company switched to a competitor which “offered much cheaper inference costs and a broader service.” Tome did not respond to a request for comment. Meanwhile, Mostaque’s efforts to court larger companies like Samsung and Snapchat were failing, according to five people familiar with the effort. Canva, which was already one of the heaviest users of open-sourced Stable Diffusion, had multiple discussions with Stability, which was angling for a contract it hoped would generate several millions in annual revenue. But the deal never materialized, four sources said. “These three companies wanted and needed us,” one former employee told Forbes. “They would have been the perfect customers.” (Samsung, Snap and Canva declined to comment.) “It’s not that there was not an appetite to pay Stability — there were tons of companies that would have that wanted to,” the former employee said. “There was a huge opportunity and demand, but just a resistance to execution.” Mostaque’s other big idea was to provide governments with bespoke national AI models that would invigorate their economies and citizenry. “Emad envisions a world where AI through 100 national models serves not as a tool of the few, but as a benefactor to all promising to confront great adversaries, cancer, autism, and the sands of time itself,” the AI avatar of Aristotle said in his intro at the conference. Mostaque told several prospective customers that he could deliver such models within 60 days — an untenable timeline, according to two people in position to know. Stability attempted to develop a model for the Singaporean government over the protestation of employees who questioned its technical feasibility, three sources familiar with the effort told Forbes. But it couldn’t pull it off and Singapore never became a customer. (The government of Singapore confirmed it did not enter into a deal with Stability, but declined to answer additional questions.) As Stability careened from one new business idea to another, resources were abruptly reallocated and researchers reassigned. The whiplash shifts in a largely siloed organization demoralized and infuriated employees. “There were ‘urgent’ things, ‘urgent urgent’ things and ‘most urgent,’” one former employee complained. “None of these things seem important if everything is important.” Another former Stability executive was far more pointed in their assessment. “Emad is the most disorganized leader I have ever worked with in my career,” this person told Forbes. “He has no vision, and changes directions every week, often based on what he sees on Twitter.” In a video interview posted shortly before this story was published, Mostaque explained his leadership style: “I'm particularly great at taking creatives, developers, researchers, others, and achieving their full potential in designing systems. But I should not be dealing with, you know, HR and operations and business development and other elements. There are far better people than me to do that.” By December 2023, Stability had partially abandoned its open-source roots and announced that any commercial use of Stable Diffusion would cost customers at least $20 per month (non-commercial and research use of Stable Diffusion would remain free). But privately, Stability was considering a potentially more lucrative source of revenue: reselling the compute it was leasing from providers like AWS, according to six people familiar with the effort. Though it was essentially GPU arbitrage, Stability framed the strategy to investors as a “managed services” offering. Its damning October financial report projected optimistically that such an offering would bring in $139 million in 2024 — 98% of its revenue. Multiple employees at the time told Forbes they feared reselling compute, even if the company called it “managed services,” would violate the terms of Stability’s contract with AWS. Amazon declined to comment. “The line internally was that we are not reselling compute,” one former employee said. “This was some of the dirtiest feeling stuff.” Stability also discussed reselling a cluster of Nvidia A100 chips, leased via CoreWeave, to the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, three sources said. “It was under the guise of managed services, but there wasn’t any management happening,” one of these people told Forbes. Andreessen Horowitz and CoreWeave declined to comment. Stability did not respond to questions about if it plans to continue this strategy now that Mostaque is out of the picture. Regardless, interim co-CEOs Wong and Laforte are on a tight timeline to clean up his mess. Board chairman Jim O’Shaughnessy said in a statement that he was confident the pair “will adeptly steer the company forward in developing and commercializing industry-leading generative AI products.” But burn continues to far outpace revenue. The Financial Times reported Friday that the company made $5.4 million of revenue in February, against $8 million in costs. Several sources said there are ongoing concerns about making payroll for the roughly 150 remaining employees. Leadership roles have gone vacant for months amid the disarray, leaving the company increasingly directionless. Meanwhile, a potentially catastrophic legal threat looms over the company: A trio of copyright infringement lawsuits brought by Getty Images and a group of artists in the U.S. and U.K., who claim Stability illegally used their art and photography to train the AI models powering Stable Diffusion. A London-based court has already rejected the company’s bid to throw out one of the lawsuits on the basis that none of its researchers were based in the U.K. And Stability’s claim that Getty’s Delaware lawsuit should be blocked because it's a U.K.-based company was rejected. (Stability did not respond to questions about the litigation.) AI-related copyright litigation “could go on for years,” according to Eric Goldman, a law professor at Santa Clara University. He told Forbes that though plaintiffs suing AI firms face an uphill battle overcoming the existing legal precedent on copyright infringement, the quantity of arguments available to make are virtually inexhaustible. “Like in military theory, if there’s a gap in your lines, that’s where the enemy pours through — if any one of those arguments succeeds, it could completely change the generative AI environment,” he said. “In some sense, generative AI as an industry has to win everything.” Stability, which had more than $100 million in the bank just a year and a half ago, is in a deep hole. Not only does it need more funding, it needs a viable business model — or a buyer with the vision and chops to make it successful in a fast-moving and highly competitive sector. At an all hands meeting this past Monday, Stability’s new leaders detailed a path forward. One point of emphasis: a plan to better manage resources and expenses, according to one person in attendance. It’s a start, but Mostaque’s meddling has left them with little runway to execute. His resignation, though, has given some employees hope. “A few people are 100% going to reconsider leaving after today,” said one current employee. “And the weird gloomy aura of hearing Emad talking nonsense for an hour is gone.” Shortly before Mostaque resigned, one current Stability executive told Forbes that they were optimistic his departure could make Stability appealing enough to receive a small investment or sale to a friendly party. “There are companies that have raised hundreds of millions of dollars that have much less intrinsic value than Stability,” the person said. “A white knight may still appear.”

[D] The machine learning community has a toxicity problem
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score1
yusuf-bengioThis week

[D] The machine learning community has a toxicity problem

It is omnipresent! First of all, the peer-review process is broken. Every fourth NeurIPS submission is put on arXiv. There are DeepMind researchers publicly going after reviewers who are criticizing their ICLR submission. On top of that, papers by well-known institutes that were put on arXiv are accepted at top conferences, despite the reviewers agreeing on rejection. In contrast, vice versa, some papers with a majority of accepts are overruled by the AC. (I don't want to call any names, just have a look the openreview page of this year's ICRL). Secondly, there is a reproducibility crisis. Tuning hyperparameters on the test set seem to be the standard practice nowadays. Papers that do not beat the current state-of-the-art method have a zero chance of getting accepted at a good conference. As a result, hyperparameters get tuned and subtle tricks implemented to observe a gain in performance where there isn't any. Thirdly, there is a worshiping problem. Every paper with a Stanford or DeepMind affiliation gets praised like a breakthrough. For instance, BERT has seven times more citations than ULMfit. The Google affiliation gives so much credibility and visibility to a paper. At every ICML conference, there is a crowd of people in front of every DeepMind poster, regardless of the content of the work. The same story happened with the Zoom meetings at the virtual ICLR 2020. Moreover, NeurIPS 2020 had twice as many submissions as ICML, even though both are top-tier ML conferences. Why? Why is the name "neural" praised so much? Next, Bengio, Hinton, and LeCun are truly deep learning pioneers but calling them the "godfathers" of AI is insane. It has reached the level of a cult. Fourthly, the way Yann LeCun talked about biases and fairness topics was insensitive. However, the toxicity and backlash that he received are beyond any reasonable quantity. Getting rid of LeCun and silencing people won't solve any issue. Fifthly, machine learning, and computer science in general, have a huge diversity problem. At our CS faculty, only 30% of undergrads and 15% of the professors are women. Going on parental leave during a PhD or post-doc usually means the end of an academic career. However, this lack of diversity is often abused as an excuse to shield certain people from any form of criticism. Reducing every negative comment in a scientific discussion to race and gender creates a toxic environment. People are becoming afraid to engage in fear of being called a racist or sexist, which in turn reinforces the diversity problem. Sixthly, moral and ethics are set arbitrarily. The U.S. domestic politics dominate every discussion. At this very moment, thousands of Uyghurs are put into concentration camps based on computer vision algorithms invented by this community, and nobody seems even remotely to care. Adding a "broader impact" section at the end of every people will not make this stop. There are huge shitstorms because a researcher wasn't mentioned in an article. Meanwhile, the 1-billion+ people continent of Africa is virtually excluded from any meaningful ML discussion (besides a few Indaba workshops). Seventhly, there is a cut-throat publish-or-perish mentality. If you don't publish 5+ NeurIPS/ICML papers per year, you are a looser. Research groups have become so large that the PI does not even know the name of every PhD student anymore. Certain people submit 50+ papers per year to NeurIPS. The sole purpose of writing a paper has become to having one more NeurIPS paper in your CV. Quality is secondary; passing the peer-preview stage has become the primary objective. Finally, discussions have become disrespectful. Schmidhuber calls Hinton a thief, Gebru calls LeCun a white supremacist, Anandkumar calls Marcus a sexist, everybody is under attack, but nothing is improved. Albert Einstein was opposing the theory of quantum mechanics. Can we please stop demonizing those who do not share our exact views. We are allowed to disagree without going for the jugular. The moment we start silencing people because of their opinion is the moment scientific and societal progress dies. Best intentions, Yusuf

[N] How Stability AI’s Founder Tanked His Billion-Dollar Startup
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score0.667
milaworldThis week

[N] How Stability AI’s Founder Tanked His Billion-Dollar Startup

forbes article: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrickcai/2024/03/29/how-stability-ais-founder-tanked-his-billion-dollar-startup/ archive no paywall: https://archive.is/snbeV How Stability AI’s Founder Tanked His Billion-Dollar Startup Mar 29, 2024 Stability AI founder Emad Mostaque took the stage last week at the Terranea Resort in Palos Verdes, California to roaring applause and an introduction from an AI-generated Aristotle who announced him as “a modern Prometheus” with “the astuteness of Athena and the vision of Daedalus.” “Under his stewardship, AI becomes the Herculean force poised to vanquish the twin serpents of illness and ailment and extend the olive branch of longevity,” the faux Aristotle proclaimed. “I think that’s the best intro I’ve ever had,” Mostaque said. But behind Mostaque's hagiographic introduction lay a grim and fast metastasizing truth. Stability, once one of AI’s buzziest startups, was floundering. It had been running out of money for months and Mostaque had been unable to secure enough additional funding. It had defaulted on payments to Amazon whose cloud service undergirded Stability’s core offerings. The star research team behind its flagship text-to-image generator Stable Diffusion had tendered their resignations just three days before — as Forbes would first report — and other senior leaders had issued him an ultimatum: resign, or we walk too. Still, onstage before a massive audience of peers and acolytes, Mostaque talked a big game. “AI is jet planes for the mind,” he opined. “AI is our collective intelligence. It's the human Colossus.” He claimed a new, faster version of the Stable Diffusion image generator released earlier this month could generate “200 cats with hats per second.” But later, when he was asked about Stability’s financial model, Mostaque fumbled. “I can’t say that publicly,” he replied. “But it’s going well. We’re ahead of forecast.” Four days later, Mostaque stepped down as CEO of Stability, as Forbes first reported. In a post to X, the service formerly known as Twitter, he claimed he’d voluntarily abdicated his role to decentralize “the concentration of power in AI.” But sources told Forbes that was hardly the case. Behind the scenes, Mostaque had fought to maintain his position and control despite mounting pressure externally and internally to step down. Company documents and interviews with 32 current and former employees, investors, collaborators and industry observers suggest his abrupt exit was the result of poor business judgment and wild overspending that undermined confidence in his vision and leadership, and ultimately kneecapped the company. Mostaque, through his attorneys, declined to comment on record on a detailed list of questions about the reporting in this story. But in an email to Forbes earlier this week he broadly disputed the allegations. “Nobody tells you how hard it is to be a CEO and there are better CEOs than me to scale a business,” he said in a statement. “I am not sure anyone else would have been able to build and grow the research team to build the best and most widely used models out there and I’m very proud of the team there. I look forward to moving onto the next problem to handle and hopefully move the needle.” In an emailed statement, Christian Laforte and Shan Shan Wong, the interim co-CEOs who replaced Mostaque, said, "the company remains focused on commercializing its world leading technology” and providing it “to partners across the creative industries." After starting Stability in 2019, Mostaque built the company into an early AI juggernaut by seizing upon a promising research project that would become Stable Diffusion and funding it into a business reality. The ease with which the software generated detailed images from the simplest text prompts immediately captivated the public: 10 million people used it on any given day, the company told Forbes in early 2023. For some true believers, Mostaque was a crucial advocate for open-source AI development in a space dominated by the closed systems of OpenAI, Google and Anthropic. But his startup’s rise to one of the buzziest in generative AI was in part built on a series of exaggerations and misleading claims, as Forbes first reported last year (Mostaque disputed some points at the time). And they continued after he raised $100 million at a $1 billion valuation just days after launching Stable Diffusion in 2022. His failure to deliver on an array of grand promises, like building bespoke AI models for nation states, and his decision to pour tens of millions into research without a sustainable business plan, eroded Stability’s foundations and jeopardized its future. "He was just giving shit away,” one former employee told Forbes. “That man legitimately wanted to transform the world. He actually wanted to train AI models for kids in Malawi. Was it practical? Absolutely not." By October 2023, Stability would have less than $4 million left in the bank, according to an internal memo prepared for a board meeting and reviewed by Forbes. And mounting debt, including months of overdue Amazon Web Services payments, had already left it in the red. To avoid legal penalties for skipping Americans staff’s payroll, the document explained, the London-based startup was considering delaying tax payments to the U.K. government. It was Stability’s armada of GPUs, the wildly powerful and equally expensive chips undergirding AI, that were so taxing the company’s finances. Hosted by AWS, they had long been one of Mostaque’s bragging points; he often touted them as one of the world’s 10 largest supercomputers. They were responsible for helping Stability’s researchers build and maintain one of the top AI image generators, as well as break important new ground on generative audio, video and 3D models. “Undeniably, Stability has continued to ship a lot of models,” said one former employee. “They may not have profited off of it, but the broader ecosystem benefitted in a huge, huge way.” But the costs associated with so much compute were now threatening to sink the company. According to an internal October financial forecast seen by Forbes, Stability was on track to spend $99 million on compute in 2023. It noted as well that Stability was “underpaying AWS bills for July (by $1M)” and “not planning to pay AWS at the end of October for August usage ($7M).” Then there were the September and October bills, plus $1 million owed to Google Cloud and $600,000 to GPU cloud data center CoreWeave. (Amazon, Google and CoreWeave declined to comment.) With an additional $54 million allocated to wages and operating expenses, Stability’s total projected costs for 2023 were $153 million. But according to its October financial report, its projected revenue for the calendar year was just $11 million. Stability was on track to lose more money per month than it made in an entire year. The company’s dire financial position had thoroughly soured Stability’s current investors, including Coatue, which had invested tens of millions in the company during its $101 million funding round in 2022. In the middle of 2023, Mostaque agreed to an independent audit after Coatue raised a series of concerns, according to a source with direct knowledge of the matter. The outcome of the investigation is unclear. Coatue declined to comment. Within a week of an early October board meeting where Mostaque shared that financial forecast, Lightspeed Venture Partners, another major investor, sent a letter to the board urging them to sell the company. The distressing numbers had “severely undermined” the firm’s confidence in Mostaque’s ability to lead the company. “In particular, we are surprised and deeply concerned by a cash position just now disclosed to us that is inconsistent with prior discussions on this topic,” Lightspeed’s general counsel Brett Nissenberg wrote in the letter, a copy of which was viewed by Forbes. “Lightspeed believes that the company is not likely financeable on terms that would assure the company’s long term sound financial position.” (Lightspeed declined a request for comment.) The calls for a sale led Stability to quietly begin looking for a buyer. Bloomberg reported in November that Stability approached AI startups Cohere and Jasper to gauge their interest. Stability denied this, and Jasper CEO Timothy Young did the same when reached for comment by Forbes. A Cohere representative declined to comment. But one prominent AI company confirmed that Mostaque’s representatives had reached out to them to test the waters. Those talks did not advance because “the numbers didn’t add up,” this person, who declined to be named due to the confidential nature of the talks, told Forbes. Stability also tried to court Samsung as a buyer, going so far as to redecorate its office in advance of a planned meeting with the Korean electronics giant. (Samsung said that it invested in Stability in 2023 and that it does not comment on M&A discussions.) Coatue had been calling for Mostaque’s resignation for months, according to a source with direct knowledge. But it and other investors were unable to oust him because he was the company’s majority shareholder. When they tried a different tact by rallying other investors to offer him a juicy equity package to resign, Mostaque refused, said two sources. By October, Coatue and Lightspeed had had enough. Coatue left the board and Lightspeed resigned its observer seat. “Emad infuriated our initial investors so much it’s just making it impossible for us to raise more money under acceptable terms,” one current Stability executive told Forbes. The early months of 2024 saw Stability’s already precarious position eroding further still. Employees were quietly laid off. Three people in a position to know estimated that at least 10% of staff were cut. And cash reserves continued to dwindle. Mostaque mentioned a lifeline at the October board meeting: $95 million in tentative funding from new investors, pending due diligence. But in the end, only a fraction of it was wired, two sources say, much of it from Intel, which Forbes has learned invested $20 million, a fraction of what was reported. (Intel did not return a request for comment by publication time.) Two hours after Forbes broke the news of Mostaque’s plans to step down as CEO, Stability issued a press release confirming his resignation. Chief operating officer Wong and chief technology officer Laforte have taken over in the interim. Mostaque, who said on X that he still owns a majority of the company, also stepped down from the board, which has now initiated a search for a permanent CEO. There is a lot of work to be done to turn things around, and very little time in which to do it. Said the current Stability executive, “There’s still a possibility of a turnaround story, but the odds drop by the day.” In July of 2023, Mostaque still thought he could pull it off. Halfway through the month, he shared a fundraising plan with his lieutenants. It was wildly optimistic, detailing the raise of $500 million in cash and another $750 million in computing facilities from marquee investors like Nvidia, Google, Intel and the World Bank (Nvidia and Google declined comment. Intel did not respond. The World Bank said it did not invest in Stability). In a Slack message reviewed by Forbes, Mostaque said Google was “willing to move fast” and the round was “likely to be oversubscribed.” It wasn’t. Three people with direct knowledge of these fundraising efforts told Forbes that while there was some interest in Stability, talks often stalled when it came time to disclose financials. Two of them noted that earlier in the year, Mostaque had simply stopped engaging with VCs who asked for numbers. Only one firm invested around that time: actor Ashton Kutcher’s Sound Ventures, which invested $35 million in the form of a convertible SAFE note during the second quarter, according to an internal document. (Sound Ventures did not respond to a request for comment.) And though he’d managed to score a meeting with Nvidia and its CEO Jensen Huang, it ended in disaster, according to two sources. “Under Jensen's microscopic questions, Emad just fell apart,” a source in position to know told Forbes. Huang quickly concluded Stability wasn’t ready for an investment from Nvidia, the sources said. Mostaque told Forbes in an email that he had not met with Huang since 2022, except to say “hello and what’s up a few times after.” His July 2023 message references a plan to raise $150 million from Nvidia. (Nvidia declined to comment.) After a June Forbes investigation citing more than 30 sources revealed Mostaque’s history of misleading claims, Mostaque struggled to raise funding, a Stability investor told Forbes. (Mostaque disputed the story at the time and called it "coordinated lies" in his email this week to Forbes). Increasingly, investors scrutinized his assertions and pressed for data. And Young, now the CEO of Jasper, turned down a verbal offer to be Stability’s president after reading the article, according to a source with direct knowledge of the matter. The collapse of the talks aggravated the board and other executives, who had hoped Young would compensate for the sales and business management skills that Mostaque lacked, according to four people in a position to know. (Young declined to comment.) When Stability’s senior leadership convened in London for the CogX conference in September, the financing had still not closed. There, a group of executives confronted Mostaque asking questions about the company’s cash position and runway, according to three people with direct knowledge of the incident. They did not get the clarity they’d hoped for. By October, Mostaque had reduced his fundraising target by more than 80%. The months that followed saw a steady drumbeat of departures — general counsel Adam Avrunin, vice presidents Mike Melnicki, Ed Newton-Rex and Joe Penna, chief people officer Ozden Onder — culminating in the demoralizing March exit of Stable Diffusion’s primary developers Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Patrick Esser and Dominik Lorenz. Rombach, who led the team, had been angling to leave for months, two sources said, first threatening to resign last summer because of the fundraising failures. Others left over concerns about cash flow, as well as liabilities — including what four people described as Mostaque’s lax approach to ensuring that Stability products could not be used to produce child sexual abuse imagery. “Stability AI is committed to preventing the misuse of AI and prohibits the use of our image models and services for unlawful activity, including attempts to edit or create CSAM,” Ella Irwin, senior vice president of integrity, said in a statement. Newton-Rex told Forbes he resigned because he disagreed with Stability’s position that training AI on copyrighted work without consent is fair use. Melnicki and Penna declined to comment. Avrunin and Onder could not be reached for comment. None of the researchers responded to requests for comment. The Stable Diffusion researchers’ departure as a cohort says a lot about the state of Stability AI. The company’s researchers were widely viewed as its crown jewels, their work subsidized with a firehose of pricey compute power that was even extended to people outside the company. Martino Russi, an artificial intelligence researcher, told Forbes that though he was never formally employed by Stability, the company provided him a “staggering” amount of compute between January and April 2023 to play around with developing an AI video generator that Stability might someday use. “It was Candy Land or Coney Island,” said Russi, who estimates that his experiment, which was ultimately shelved, cost the company $2.5 million. Stable Diffusion was simultaneously Stability’s marquee product and its existential cash crisis. One current employee described it to Forbes as “a giant vacuum that absorbed everything: money, compute, people.” While the software was widely used, with Mostaque claiming downloads reaching into the hundreds of millions, Stability struggled to translate that wild success into revenue. Mostaque knew it could be done — peers at Databricks, Elastic and MongoDB had all turned a free product into a lucrative business — he just couldn’t figure out how. His first attempt was Stability’s API, which allowed paying customers to integrate Stable Diffusion into their own products. In early 2023, a handful of small companies, like art generator app NightCafe and presentation software startup Tome, signed on, according to four people with knowledge of the deals. But Stability’s poor account management services soured many, and in a matter of months NightCafe and Tome canceled their contracts, three people said. NightCafe founder Angus Russell told Forbes that his company switched to a competitor which “offered much cheaper inference costs and a broader service.” Tome did not respond to a request for comment. Meanwhile, Mostaque’s efforts to court larger companies like Samsung and Snapchat were failing, according to five people familiar with the effort. Canva, which was already one of the heaviest users of open-sourced Stable Diffusion, had multiple discussions with Stability, which was angling for a contract it hoped would generate several millions in annual revenue. But the deal never materialized, four sources said. “These three companies wanted and needed us,” one former employee told Forbes. “They would have been the perfect customers.” (Samsung, Snap and Canva declined to comment.) “It’s not that there was not an appetite to pay Stability — there were tons of companies that would have that wanted to,” the former employee said. “There was a huge opportunity and demand, but just a resistance to execution.” Mostaque’s other big idea was to provide governments with bespoke national AI models that would invigorate their economies and citizenry. “Emad envisions a world where AI through 100 national models serves not as a tool of the few, but as a benefactor to all promising to confront great adversaries, cancer, autism, and the sands of time itself,” the AI avatar of Aristotle said in his intro at the conference. Mostaque told several prospective customers that he could deliver such models within 60 days — an untenable timeline, according to two people in position to know. Stability attempted to develop a model for the Singaporean government over the protestation of employees who questioned its technical feasibility, three sources familiar with the effort told Forbes. But it couldn’t pull it off and Singapore never became a customer. (The government of Singapore confirmed it did not enter into a deal with Stability, but declined to answer additional questions.) As Stability careened from one new business idea to another, resources were abruptly reallocated and researchers reassigned. The whiplash shifts in a largely siloed organization demoralized and infuriated employees. “There were ‘urgent’ things, ‘urgent urgent’ things and ‘most urgent,’” one former employee complained. “None of these things seem important if everything is important.” Another former Stability executive was far more pointed in their assessment. “Emad is the most disorganized leader I have ever worked with in my career,” this person told Forbes. “He has no vision, and changes directions every week, often based on what he sees on Twitter.” In a video interview posted shortly before this story was published, Mostaque explained his leadership style: “I'm particularly great at taking creatives, developers, researchers, others, and achieving their full potential in designing systems. But I should not be dealing with, you know, HR and operations and business development and other elements. There are far better people than me to do that.” By December 2023, Stability had partially abandoned its open-source roots and announced that any commercial use of Stable Diffusion would cost customers at least $20 per month (non-commercial and research use of Stable Diffusion would remain free). But privately, Stability was considering a potentially more lucrative source of revenue: reselling the compute it was leasing from providers like AWS, according to six people familiar with the effort. Though it was essentially GPU arbitrage, Stability framed the strategy to investors as a “managed services” offering. Its damning October financial report projected optimistically that such an offering would bring in $139 million in 2024 — 98% of its revenue. Multiple employees at the time told Forbes they feared reselling compute, even if the company called it “managed services,” would violate the terms of Stability’s contract with AWS. Amazon declined to comment. “The line internally was that we are not reselling compute,” one former employee said. “This was some of the dirtiest feeling stuff.” Stability also discussed reselling a cluster of Nvidia A100 chips, leased via CoreWeave, to the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, three sources said. “It was under the guise of managed services, but there wasn’t any management happening,” one of these people told Forbes. Andreessen Horowitz and CoreWeave declined to comment. Stability did not respond to questions about if it plans to continue this strategy now that Mostaque is out of the picture. Regardless, interim co-CEOs Wong and Laforte are on a tight timeline to clean up his mess. Board chairman Jim O’Shaughnessy said in a statement that he was confident the pair “will adeptly steer the company forward in developing and commercializing industry-leading generative AI products.” But burn continues to far outpace revenue. The Financial Times reported Friday that the company made $5.4 million of revenue in February, against $8 million in costs. Several sources said there are ongoing concerns about making payroll for the roughly 150 remaining employees. Leadership roles have gone vacant for months amid the disarray, leaving the company increasingly directionless. Meanwhile, a potentially catastrophic legal threat looms over the company: A trio of copyright infringement lawsuits brought by Getty Images and a group of artists in the U.S. and U.K., who claim Stability illegally used their art and photography to train the AI models powering Stable Diffusion. A London-based court has already rejected the company’s bid to throw out one of the lawsuits on the basis that none of its researchers were based in the U.K. And Stability’s claim that Getty’s Delaware lawsuit should be blocked because it's a U.K.-based company was rejected. (Stability did not respond to questions about the litigation.) AI-related copyright litigation “could go on for years,” according to Eric Goldman, a law professor at Santa Clara University. He told Forbes that though plaintiffs suing AI firms face an uphill battle overcoming the existing legal precedent on copyright infringement, the quantity of arguments available to make are virtually inexhaustible. “Like in military theory, if there’s a gap in your lines, that’s where the enemy pours through — if any one of those arguments succeeds, it could completely change the generative AI environment,” he said. “In some sense, generative AI as an industry has to win everything.” Stability, which had more than $100 million in the bank just a year and a half ago, is in a deep hole. Not only does it need more funding, it needs a viable business model — or a buyer with the vision and chops to make it successful in a fast-moving and highly competitive sector. At an all hands meeting this past Monday, Stability’s new leaders detailed a path forward. One point of emphasis: a plan to better manage resources and expenses, according to one person in attendance. It’s a start, but Mostaque’s meddling has left them with little runway to execute. His resignation, though, has given some employees hope. “A few people are 100% going to reconsider leaving after today,” said one current employee. “And the weird gloomy aura of hearing Emad talking nonsense for an hour is gone.” Shortly before Mostaque resigned, one current Stability executive told Forbes that they were optimistic his departure could make Stability appealing enough to receive a small investment or sale to a friendly party. “There are companies that have raised hundreds of millions of dollars that have much less intrinsic value than Stability,” the person said. “A white knight may still appear.”

[N] TheSequence Scope: When it comes to machine learning, size matters: Microsoft's DeepSpeed framework, which can train a model with up to a trillion parameters
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score1
KseniaseThis week

[N] TheSequence Scope: When it comes to machine learning, size matters: Microsoft's DeepSpeed framework, which can train a model with up to a trillion parameters

Hi there! Offering to your attention the latest edition of a weekly ML-newsletter that focusing on three things: impactful ML research papers, cool ML tech solutions, and ML use cases supported by investors. Please, see it below. Reddit is a new thing for me, and I've been struggling a bit with it, so please don't judge me too harsh for this promotion. This weekly digest is free and I hope you'd find the format convenient for you. Your feedback is very appreciated, and please feel free to sign up if you like it. 📝 Editorial  The recent emergence of pre-trained language models and transformer architectures pushed the creation of larger and larger machine learning models. Google’s BERT presented attention mechanism and transformer architecture possibilities as the “next big thing” in ML, and the numbers seem surreal. OpenAI’s GPT-2 set a record by processing 1.5 billion parameters, followed by Microsoft’s Turing-NLG, which processed 17 billion parameters just to see the new GPT-3 processing an astonishing 175 billion parameters. To not feel complacent, just this week Microsoft announced a new release of its DeepSpeed framework (which powers Turing-NLG), which can train a model with up to a trillion parameters. That sounds insane but it really isn’t.   What we are seeing is a consequence of several factors. First, computation power and parallelization techniques have evolved to a point where it is relatively easy to train machine learning models in large clusters of machines. Second and most importantly, in the current state of machine learning, larger models have regularly outperformed smaller and more specialized models. Knowledge reusability methods like transfer learning are still in very nascent stages. As a result, it’s really hard to build small models that can operate in uncertain environments. Furthermore, as models like GPT-3 and Turing-NLG have shown, there is some unexplainable magic that happens after models go past a certain size. Many of the immediate machine learning problems might be solved by scaling the current generation of neural network architectures. Plain and simple, when it comes to machine learning, size matters.   We would love to hear your opinions about the debate between broader-larger vs. smaller and more specialized models.   Leave a comment Now, to the most important developments in the AI industry this week 🔎 ML Research GPT-3 Falls Short in Machine Comprehension Proposed by researchers from a few major American universities, a 57-task test to measure models’ ability to reason poses challenges even for sophisticated models like GPT-3 ->read more in the original paper Better Text Summarization OpenAI published a paper showing a reinforcement learning with human feedback technique that can surpass supervised models ->read more on OpenAI blog Reinforcement Learning with Offline Datasets Researchers from the Berkeley AI Research (BAIR) Lab published a paper unveiling a method that uses offline datasets to improve reinforcement learning models->read more on BAIR blog 🤖 Cool AI Tech Releases New Version of DeepSpeed Microsoft open-sourced a new version of DeepSpeed, an open-source library for parallelizable training that can scale up to models with 1 trillion parameters->read more on Microsoft Research blog 💸 Money in AI AI-powered customer experience management platform Sprinklr has raised $200 million (kudos to our subscribers from Sprinklr 👏). Sprinklr's “AI listening processing” solution allows companies to get structured and meaningful sentiments and insights from unstructured customer data that comes from public conversations on different websites and social platforms. Xometry, an on-demand industrial parts marketplace, raises $75 million in Series E funding. The company provides a digital way of creating the right combination of buyers and manufacturers. Another example of AI implementation into matching two sides for a deal. Real estate tech company Orchard raises $69 million in its recent funding round. Orchard aims to digitize the whole real estate market, by developing a solution that combines machine learning and rapid human assistance to smooth the search, match the right deal, and simplify buying and selling relationships. Cybersecurity startup Pcysys raised $25 million in its funding round. Pcysys’ platform, which doesn’t require installation or network reconfiguration, uses algorithms to scan and “ethically” attack enterprise networks. Robotics farming company Iron Ox raised $20 million in a funding round. The system of farming robots is still semi-autonomous, the company’s goal is to become fully autonomous.  Insurtech company Descartes Underwriting raised $18.5 million. The company applies AI and machine learning technologies to climate risk predicting and insurance underwriting. Legaltech startup ThoughtRiver raised $10 million in its Series A round. Its AI solution applied to contract pre-screening aims to boost operational efficiency. Medtech startup Skin Analytics raised $5.1 million in Series A funding. Skin Analytics has developed a clinically validated AI system that can identify not only the important skin cancers but also precancerous lesions that can be treated, as well as a range of lesions that are benign. Amazon, along with several government organizations and three other industry partners, helped fund the National Science Foundation, a high-priority AI research initiative. The amount of funding is not disclosed. The content of TheSequence is written by Jesus Rodriguez, one of the most-read contributors to KDNuggets and TDS. You can check his Medium here.

[N] Montreal-based Element AI sold for $230-million as founders saw value mostly wiped out
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score1
sensetimeThis week

[N] Montreal-based Element AI sold for $230-million as founders saw value mostly wiped out

According to Globe and Mail article: Element AI sold for $230-million as founders saw value mostly wiped out, document reveals Montreal startup Element AI Inc. was running out of money and options when it inked a deal last month to sell itself for US$230-milion to Silicon Valley software company ServiceNow Inc., a confidential document obtained by the Globe and Mail reveals. Materials sent to Element AI shareholders Friday reveal that while many of its institutional shareholders will make most if not all of their money back from backing two venture financings, employees will not fare nearly as well. Many have been terminated and had their stock options cancelled. Also losing out are co-founders Jean-François Gagné, the CEO, his wife Anne Martel, the chief administrative officer, chief science officer Nick Chapados and Yoshua Bengio, the University of Montreal professor known as a godfather of “deep learning,” the foundational science behind today’s AI revolution. Between them, they owned 8.8 million common shares, whose value has been wiped out with the takeover, which goes to a shareholder vote Dec 29 with enough investor support already locked up to pass before the takeover goes to a Canadian court to approve a plan of arrangement with ServiceNow. The quartet also owns preferred shares worth less than US$300,000 combined under the terms of the deal. The shareholder document, a management proxy circular, provides a rare look inside efforts by a highly hyped but deeply troubled startup as it struggled to secure financing at the same time as it was failing to live up to its early promises. The circular states the US$230-million purchase price is subject to some adjustments and expenses which could bring the final price down to US$195-million. The sale is a disappointing outcome for a company that burst onto the Canadian tech scene four years ago like few others, promising to deliver AI-powered operational improvements to a range of industries and anchor a thriving domestic AI sector. Element AI became the self-appointed representative of Canada’s AI sector, lobbying politicians and officials and landing numerous photo ops with them, including Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. It also secured $25-million in federal funding – $20-million of which was committed earlier this year and cancelled by the government with the ServiceNow takeover. Element AI invested heavily in hype and and earned international renown, largely due to its association with Dr. Bengio. It raised US$102-million in venture capital in 2017 just nine months after its founding, an unheard of amount for a new Canadian company, from international backers including Microsoft Corp., Intel Corp., Nvidia Corp., Tencent Holdings Ltd., Fidelity Investments, a Singaporean sovereign wealth fund and venture capital firms. Element AI went on a hiring spree to establish what the founders called “supercredibility,” recruiting top AI talent in Canada and abroad. It opened global offices, including a British operation that did pro bono work to deliver “AI for good,” and its ranks swelled to 500 people. But the swift hiring and attention-seeking were at odds with its success in actually building a software business. Element AI took two years to focus on product development after initially pursuing consulting gigs. It came into 2019 with a plan to bring several AI-based products to market, including a cybersecurity offering for financial institutions and a program to help port operators predict waiting times for truck drivers. It was also quietly shopping itself around. In December 2018, the company asked financial adviser Allen & Co LLC to find a potential buyer, in addition to pursuing a private placement, the circular reveals. But Element AI struggled to advance proofs-of-concept work to marketable products. Several client partnerships faltered in 2019 and 2020. Element did manage to reach terms for a US$151.4-million ($200-million) venture financing in September, 2019 led by the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec and backed by the Quebec government and consulting giant McKinsey and Co. However, the circular reveals the company only received the first tranche of the financing – roughly half of the amount – at the time, and that it had to meet unspecified conditions to get the rest. A fairness opinion by Deloitte commissioned as part of the sale process estimated Element AI’s enterprises value at just US$76-million around the time of the 2019 financing, shrinking to US$45-million this year. “However, the conditions precedent the closing of the second tranche … were not going to be met in a timely manner,” the circular reads. It states “new terms were proposed” for a round of financing that would give incoming investors ranking ahead of others and a cumulative dividend of 12 per cent on invested capital and impose “other operating and governance constraints and limitations on the company.” Management instead decided to pursue a sale, and Allen contacted prospective buyers in June. As talks narrowed this past summer to exclusive negotiations with ServiceNow, “the company’s liquidity was diminishing as sources of capital on acceptable terms were scarce,” the circular reads. By late November, it was generating revenue at an annualized rate of just $10-million to $12-million, Deloitte said. As part of the deal – which will see ServiceNow keep Element AI’s research scientists and patents and effectively abandon its business – the buyer has agreed to pay US$10-million to key employees and consultants including Mr. Gagne and Dr. Bengio as part of a retention plan. The Caisse and Quebec government will get US$35.45-million and US$11.8-million, respectively, roughly the amount they invested in the first tranche of the 2019 financing.

[N] How Stability AI’s Founder Tanked His Billion-Dollar Startup
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score0.667
milaworldThis week

[N] How Stability AI’s Founder Tanked His Billion-Dollar Startup

forbes article: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrickcai/2024/03/29/how-stability-ais-founder-tanked-his-billion-dollar-startup/ archive no paywall: https://archive.is/snbeV How Stability AI’s Founder Tanked His Billion-Dollar Startup Mar 29, 2024 Stability AI founder Emad Mostaque took the stage last week at the Terranea Resort in Palos Verdes, California to roaring applause and an introduction from an AI-generated Aristotle who announced him as “a modern Prometheus” with “the astuteness of Athena and the vision of Daedalus.” “Under his stewardship, AI becomes the Herculean force poised to vanquish the twin serpents of illness and ailment and extend the olive branch of longevity,” the faux Aristotle proclaimed. “I think that’s the best intro I’ve ever had,” Mostaque said. But behind Mostaque's hagiographic introduction lay a grim and fast metastasizing truth. Stability, once one of AI’s buzziest startups, was floundering. It had been running out of money for months and Mostaque had been unable to secure enough additional funding. It had defaulted on payments to Amazon whose cloud service undergirded Stability’s core offerings. The star research team behind its flagship text-to-image generator Stable Diffusion had tendered their resignations just three days before — as Forbes would first report — and other senior leaders had issued him an ultimatum: resign, or we walk too. Still, onstage before a massive audience of peers and acolytes, Mostaque talked a big game. “AI is jet planes for the mind,” he opined. “AI is our collective intelligence. It's the human Colossus.” He claimed a new, faster version of the Stable Diffusion image generator released earlier this month could generate “200 cats with hats per second.” But later, when he was asked about Stability’s financial model, Mostaque fumbled. “I can’t say that publicly,” he replied. “But it’s going well. We’re ahead of forecast.” Four days later, Mostaque stepped down as CEO of Stability, as Forbes first reported. In a post to X, the service formerly known as Twitter, he claimed he’d voluntarily abdicated his role to decentralize “the concentration of power in AI.” But sources told Forbes that was hardly the case. Behind the scenes, Mostaque had fought to maintain his position and control despite mounting pressure externally and internally to step down. Company documents and interviews with 32 current and former employees, investors, collaborators and industry observers suggest his abrupt exit was the result of poor business judgment and wild overspending that undermined confidence in his vision and leadership, and ultimately kneecapped the company. Mostaque, through his attorneys, declined to comment on record on a detailed list of questions about the reporting in this story. But in an email to Forbes earlier this week he broadly disputed the allegations. “Nobody tells you how hard it is to be a CEO and there are better CEOs than me to scale a business,” he said in a statement. “I am not sure anyone else would have been able to build and grow the research team to build the best and most widely used models out there and I’m very proud of the team there. I look forward to moving onto the next problem to handle and hopefully move the needle.” In an emailed statement, Christian Laforte and Shan Shan Wong, the interim co-CEOs who replaced Mostaque, said, "the company remains focused on commercializing its world leading technology” and providing it “to partners across the creative industries." After starting Stability in 2019, Mostaque built the company into an early AI juggernaut by seizing upon a promising research project that would become Stable Diffusion and funding it into a business reality. The ease with which the software generated detailed images from the simplest text prompts immediately captivated the public: 10 million people used it on any given day, the company told Forbes in early 2023. For some true believers, Mostaque was a crucial advocate for open-source AI development in a space dominated by the closed systems of OpenAI, Google and Anthropic. But his startup’s rise to one of the buzziest in generative AI was in part built on a series of exaggerations and misleading claims, as Forbes first reported last year (Mostaque disputed some points at the time). And they continued after he raised $100 million at a $1 billion valuation just days after launching Stable Diffusion in 2022. His failure to deliver on an array of grand promises, like building bespoke AI models for nation states, and his decision to pour tens of millions into research without a sustainable business plan, eroded Stability’s foundations and jeopardized its future. "He was just giving shit away,” one former employee told Forbes. “That man legitimately wanted to transform the world. He actually wanted to train AI models for kids in Malawi. Was it practical? Absolutely not." By October 2023, Stability would have less than $4 million left in the bank, according to an internal memo prepared for a board meeting and reviewed by Forbes. And mounting debt, including months of overdue Amazon Web Services payments, had already left it in the red. To avoid legal penalties for skipping Americans staff’s payroll, the document explained, the London-based startup was considering delaying tax payments to the U.K. government. It was Stability’s armada of GPUs, the wildly powerful and equally expensive chips undergirding AI, that were so taxing the company’s finances. Hosted by AWS, they had long been one of Mostaque’s bragging points; he often touted them as one of the world’s 10 largest supercomputers. They were responsible for helping Stability’s researchers build and maintain one of the top AI image generators, as well as break important new ground on generative audio, video and 3D models. “Undeniably, Stability has continued to ship a lot of models,” said one former employee. “They may not have profited off of it, but the broader ecosystem benefitted in a huge, huge way.” But the costs associated with so much compute were now threatening to sink the company. According to an internal October financial forecast seen by Forbes, Stability was on track to spend $99 million on compute in 2023. It noted as well that Stability was “underpaying AWS bills for July (by $1M)” and “not planning to pay AWS at the end of October for August usage ($7M).” Then there were the September and October bills, plus $1 million owed to Google Cloud and $600,000 to GPU cloud data center CoreWeave. (Amazon, Google and CoreWeave declined to comment.) With an additional $54 million allocated to wages and operating expenses, Stability’s total projected costs for 2023 were $153 million. But according to its October financial report, its projected revenue for the calendar year was just $11 million. Stability was on track to lose more money per month than it made in an entire year. The company’s dire financial position had thoroughly soured Stability’s current investors, including Coatue, which had invested tens of millions in the company during its $101 million funding round in 2022. In the middle of 2023, Mostaque agreed to an independent audit after Coatue raised a series of concerns, according to a source with direct knowledge of the matter. The outcome of the investigation is unclear. Coatue declined to comment. Within a week of an early October board meeting where Mostaque shared that financial forecast, Lightspeed Venture Partners, another major investor, sent a letter to the board urging them to sell the company. The distressing numbers had “severely undermined” the firm’s confidence in Mostaque’s ability to lead the company. “In particular, we are surprised and deeply concerned by a cash position just now disclosed to us that is inconsistent with prior discussions on this topic,” Lightspeed’s general counsel Brett Nissenberg wrote in the letter, a copy of which was viewed by Forbes. “Lightspeed believes that the company is not likely financeable on terms that would assure the company’s long term sound financial position.” (Lightspeed declined a request for comment.) The calls for a sale led Stability to quietly begin looking for a buyer. Bloomberg reported in November that Stability approached AI startups Cohere and Jasper to gauge their interest. Stability denied this, and Jasper CEO Timothy Young did the same when reached for comment by Forbes. A Cohere representative declined to comment. But one prominent AI company confirmed that Mostaque’s representatives had reached out to them to test the waters. Those talks did not advance because “the numbers didn’t add up,” this person, who declined to be named due to the confidential nature of the talks, told Forbes. Stability also tried to court Samsung as a buyer, going so far as to redecorate its office in advance of a planned meeting with the Korean electronics giant. (Samsung said that it invested in Stability in 2023 and that it does not comment on M&A discussions.) Coatue had been calling for Mostaque’s resignation for months, according to a source with direct knowledge. But it and other investors were unable to oust him because he was the company’s majority shareholder. When they tried a different tact by rallying other investors to offer him a juicy equity package to resign, Mostaque refused, said two sources. By October, Coatue and Lightspeed had had enough. Coatue left the board and Lightspeed resigned its observer seat. “Emad infuriated our initial investors so much it’s just making it impossible for us to raise more money under acceptable terms,” one current Stability executive told Forbes. The early months of 2024 saw Stability’s already precarious position eroding further still. Employees were quietly laid off. Three people in a position to know estimated that at least 10% of staff were cut. And cash reserves continued to dwindle. Mostaque mentioned a lifeline at the October board meeting: $95 million in tentative funding from new investors, pending due diligence. But in the end, only a fraction of it was wired, two sources say, much of it from Intel, which Forbes has learned invested $20 million, a fraction of what was reported. (Intel did not return a request for comment by publication time.) Two hours after Forbes broke the news of Mostaque’s plans to step down as CEO, Stability issued a press release confirming his resignation. Chief operating officer Wong and chief technology officer Laforte have taken over in the interim. Mostaque, who said on X that he still owns a majority of the company, also stepped down from the board, which has now initiated a search for a permanent CEO. There is a lot of work to be done to turn things around, and very little time in which to do it. Said the current Stability executive, “There’s still a possibility of a turnaround story, but the odds drop by the day.” In July of 2023, Mostaque still thought he could pull it off. Halfway through the month, he shared a fundraising plan with his lieutenants. It was wildly optimistic, detailing the raise of $500 million in cash and another $750 million in computing facilities from marquee investors like Nvidia, Google, Intel and the World Bank (Nvidia and Google declined comment. Intel did not respond. The World Bank said it did not invest in Stability). In a Slack message reviewed by Forbes, Mostaque said Google was “willing to move fast” and the round was “likely to be oversubscribed.” It wasn’t. Three people with direct knowledge of these fundraising efforts told Forbes that while there was some interest in Stability, talks often stalled when it came time to disclose financials. Two of them noted that earlier in the year, Mostaque had simply stopped engaging with VCs who asked for numbers. Only one firm invested around that time: actor Ashton Kutcher’s Sound Ventures, which invested $35 million in the form of a convertible SAFE note during the second quarter, according to an internal document. (Sound Ventures did not respond to a request for comment.) And though he’d managed to score a meeting with Nvidia and its CEO Jensen Huang, it ended in disaster, according to two sources. “Under Jensen's microscopic questions, Emad just fell apart,” a source in position to know told Forbes. Huang quickly concluded Stability wasn’t ready for an investment from Nvidia, the sources said. Mostaque told Forbes in an email that he had not met with Huang since 2022, except to say “hello and what’s up a few times after.” His July 2023 message references a plan to raise $150 million from Nvidia. (Nvidia declined to comment.) After a June Forbes investigation citing more than 30 sources revealed Mostaque’s history of misleading claims, Mostaque struggled to raise funding, a Stability investor told Forbes. (Mostaque disputed the story at the time and called it "coordinated lies" in his email this week to Forbes). Increasingly, investors scrutinized his assertions and pressed for data. And Young, now the CEO of Jasper, turned down a verbal offer to be Stability’s president after reading the article, according to a source with direct knowledge of the matter. The collapse of the talks aggravated the board and other executives, who had hoped Young would compensate for the sales and business management skills that Mostaque lacked, according to four people in a position to know. (Young declined to comment.) When Stability’s senior leadership convened in London for the CogX conference in September, the financing had still not closed. There, a group of executives confronted Mostaque asking questions about the company’s cash position and runway, according to three people with direct knowledge of the incident. They did not get the clarity they’d hoped for. By October, Mostaque had reduced his fundraising target by more than 80%. The months that followed saw a steady drumbeat of departures — general counsel Adam Avrunin, vice presidents Mike Melnicki, Ed Newton-Rex and Joe Penna, chief people officer Ozden Onder — culminating in the demoralizing March exit of Stable Diffusion’s primary developers Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Patrick Esser and Dominik Lorenz. Rombach, who led the team, had been angling to leave for months, two sources said, first threatening to resign last summer because of the fundraising failures. Others left over concerns about cash flow, as well as liabilities — including what four people described as Mostaque’s lax approach to ensuring that Stability products could not be used to produce child sexual abuse imagery. “Stability AI is committed to preventing the misuse of AI and prohibits the use of our image models and services for unlawful activity, including attempts to edit or create CSAM,” Ella Irwin, senior vice president of integrity, said in a statement. Newton-Rex told Forbes he resigned because he disagreed with Stability’s position that training AI on copyrighted work without consent is fair use. Melnicki and Penna declined to comment. Avrunin and Onder could not be reached for comment. None of the researchers responded to requests for comment. The Stable Diffusion researchers’ departure as a cohort says a lot about the state of Stability AI. The company’s researchers were widely viewed as its crown jewels, their work subsidized with a firehose of pricey compute power that was even extended to people outside the company. Martino Russi, an artificial intelligence researcher, told Forbes that though he was never formally employed by Stability, the company provided him a “staggering” amount of compute between January and April 2023 to play around with developing an AI video generator that Stability might someday use. “It was Candy Land or Coney Island,” said Russi, who estimates that his experiment, which was ultimately shelved, cost the company $2.5 million. Stable Diffusion was simultaneously Stability’s marquee product and its existential cash crisis. One current employee described it to Forbes as “a giant vacuum that absorbed everything: money, compute, people.” While the software was widely used, with Mostaque claiming downloads reaching into the hundreds of millions, Stability struggled to translate that wild success into revenue. Mostaque knew it could be done — peers at Databricks, Elastic and MongoDB had all turned a free product into a lucrative business — he just couldn’t figure out how. His first attempt was Stability’s API, which allowed paying customers to integrate Stable Diffusion into their own products. In early 2023, a handful of small companies, like art generator app NightCafe and presentation software startup Tome, signed on, according to four people with knowledge of the deals. But Stability’s poor account management services soured many, and in a matter of months NightCafe and Tome canceled their contracts, three people said. NightCafe founder Angus Russell told Forbes that his company switched to a competitor which “offered much cheaper inference costs and a broader service.” Tome did not respond to a request for comment. Meanwhile, Mostaque’s efforts to court larger companies like Samsung and Snapchat were failing, according to five people familiar with the effort. Canva, which was already one of the heaviest users of open-sourced Stable Diffusion, had multiple discussions with Stability, which was angling for a contract it hoped would generate several millions in annual revenue. But the deal never materialized, four sources said. “These three companies wanted and needed us,” one former employee told Forbes. “They would have been the perfect customers.” (Samsung, Snap and Canva declined to comment.) “It’s not that there was not an appetite to pay Stability — there were tons of companies that would have that wanted to,” the former employee said. “There was a huge opportunity and demand, but just a resistance to execution.” Mostaque’s other big idea was to provide governments with bespoke national AI models that would invigorate their economies and citizenry. “Emad envisions a world where AI through 100 national models serves not as a tool of the few, but as a benefactor to all promising to confront great adversaries, cancer, autism, and the sands of time itself,” the AI avatar of Aristotle said in his intro at the conference. Mostaque told several prospective customers that he could deliver such models within 60 days — an untenable timeline, according to two people in position to know. Stability attempted to develop a model for the Singaporean government over the protestation of employees who questioned its technical feasibility, three sources familiar with the effort told Forbes. But it couldn’t pull it off and Singapore never became a customer. (The government of Singapore confirmed it did not enter into a deal with Stability, but declined to answer additional questions.) As Stability careened from one new business idea to another, resources were abruptly reallocated and researchers reassigned. The whiplash shifts in a largely siloed organization demoralized and infuriated employees. “There were ‘urgent’ things, ‘urgent urgent’ things and ‘most urgent,’” one former employee complained. “None of these things seem important if everything is important.” Another former Stability executive was far more pointed in their assessment. “Emad is the most disorganized leader I have ever worked with in my career,” this person told Forbes. “He has no vision, and changes directions every week, often based on what he sees on Twitter.” In a video interview posted shortly before this story was published, Mostaque explained his leadership style: “I'm particularly great at taking creatives, developers, researchers, others, and achieving their full potential in designing systems. But I should not be dealing with, you know, HR and operations and business development and other elements. There are far better people than me to do that.” By December 2023, Stability had partially abandoned its open-source roots and announced that any commercial use of Stable Diffusion would cost customers at least $20 per month (non-commercial and research use of Stable Diffusion would remain free). But privately, Stability was considering a potentially more lucrative source of revenue: reselling the compute it was leasing from providers like AWS, according to six people familiar with the effort. Though it was essentially GPU arbitrage, Stability framed the strategy to investors as a “managed services” offering. Its damning October financial report projected optimistically that such an offering would bring in $139 million in 2024 — 98% of its revenue. Multiple employees at the time told Forbes they feared reselling compute, even if the company called it “managed services,” would violate the terms of Stability’s contract with AWS. Amazon declined to comment. “The line internally was that we are not reselling compute,” one former employee said. “This was some of the dirtiest feeling stuff.” Stability also discussed reselling a cluster of Nvidia A100 chips, leased via CoreWeave, to the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, three sources said. “It was under the guise of managed services, but there wasn’t any management happening,” one of these people told Forbes. Andreessen Horowitz and CoreWeave declined to comment. Stability did not respond to questions about if it plans to continue this strategy now that Mostaque is out of the picture. Regardless, interim co-CEOs Wong and Laforte are on a tight timeline to clean up his mess. Board chairman Jim O’Shaughnessy said in a statement that he was confident the pair “will adeptly steer the company forward in developing and commercializing industry-leading generative AI products.” But burn continues to far outpace revenue. The Financial Times reported Friday that the company made $5.4 million of revenue in February, against $8 million in costs. Several sources said there are ongoing concerns about making payroll for the roughly 150 remaining employees. Leadership roles have gone vacant for months amid the disarray, leaving the company increasingly directionless. Meanwhile, a potentially catastrophic legal threat looms over the company: A trio of copyright infringement lawsuits brought by Getty Images and a group of artists in the U.S. and U.K., who claim Stability illegally used their art and photography to train the AI models powering Stable Diffusion. A London-based court has already rejected the company’s bid to throw out one of the lawsuits on the basis that none of its researchers were based in the U.K. And Stability’s claim that Getty’s Delaware lawsuit should be blocked because it's a U.K.-based company was rejected. (Stability did not respond to questions about the litigation.) AI-related copyright litigation “could go on for years,” according to Eric Goldman, a law professor at Santa Clara University. He told Forbes that though plaintiffs suing AI firms face an uphill battle overcoming the existing legal precedent on copyright infringement, the quantity of arguments available to make are virtually inexhaustible. “Like in military theory, if there’s a gap in your lines, that’s where the enemy pours through — if any one of those arguments succeeds, it could completely change the generative AI environment,” he said. “In some sense, generative AI as an industry has to win everything.” Stability, which had more than $100 million in the bank just a year and a half ago, is in a deep hole. Not only does it need more funding, it needs a viable business model — or a buyer with the vision and chops to make it successful in a fast-moving and highly competitive sector. At an all hands meeting this past Monday, Stability’s new leaders detailed a path forward. One point of emphasis: a plan to better manage resources and expenses, according to one person in attendance. It’s a start, but Mostaque’s meddling has left them with little runway to execute. His resignation, though, has given some employees hope. “A few people are 100% going to reconsider leaving after today,” said one current employee. “And the weird gloomy aura of hearing Emad talking nonsense for an hour is gone.” Shortly before Mostaque resigned, one current Stability executive told Forbes that they were optimistic his departure could make Stability appealing enough to receive a small investment or sale to a friendly party. “There are companies that have raised hundreds of millions of dollars that have much less intrinsic value than Stability,” the person said. “A white knight may still appear.”

If only someone told me this before my first startup
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score0.625
johnrushxThis week

If only someone told me this before my first startup

If only someone told me this before my first startup: Validate idea first. I wasted a decade building stuff nobody needed. Incubators and VCs served to me as a validation, but I was so wrong. Kill my EGO. It’s not about me, but the user. I must want what the user wants, not what I want. My taste isn't important. The user has expectations, and I must fulfill them. Don’t chaise investors. Chase users, and then investors will be chasing me. I've never had more incoming interest from VC than now when I'm the least interested in them. Never hire managers. Only hire doers until PMF. So many people know how to manage people and so few can actually get sh\*t done barehand. Landing page is the least important thing in a startup. Pick a simple template, edit texts with a no-code website builder in less than an hour and that's it! At the early stage, I win traffic outside of my website, people are already interested, so don't make them search for the signup button among the texts! Focus on conversion optimization only when the traffic is consistent. Keep it to one page. Nobody gonna browse this website. Hire only fullstack devs. There is nothing less productive in this world than a team of developers for an early-stage product. One full stack dev building the whole product. That’s it. Chase global market from day 1. If the product and marketing are good, it will work on the global market too, if it’s bad, it won’t work on the local market too. So better go global from day 1, so that if it works, the upside is 100x bigger. I launched all startups for the Norwegian market, hoping we will scale to international at some point. I wish I launched to international from day 1 as I do now. The size of the market is 10000x bigger. I can validate and grow products in days, not in years as it used to be. Do SEO from day 2. As early as I can. I ignored this for 14 years. It’s my biggest regret. It takes just 5 minutes to get it done on my landing page. I go to Google Keyword Planner, enter a few keywords around my product, sort them by traffic, filter out high competition kws, pick the top 10, and place them natively on my home page and meta tags. Add one blog article every week. Either manually or by paying for an AI blogging tool. Sell features, before building them. Ask existing users if they want this feature. I run DMs with 10-20 users every day, where I chat about all my ideas and features I wanna add. I clearly see what resonates with me most and only go build those. If I don't have followers, try HN, Reddit, or just search on X for posts and ask it in the replies. People are helpful, they will reply if the question is easy to understand. Hire only people I would wanna hug. My cofounder, an old Danish man said this to me in 2015. And it was a big shift. I realized that if I don’t wanna hug the person, it means I dislike them on a chemical/animal level. Even if I can’t say why, but that’s the fact. Sooner or later, we would have a conflict and eventually break up. It takes up to 10 years to build a startup, make sure I do it with people I have this connection with. Invest all money into my startups and friends. Not crypt0, not stockmarket, not properties. I did some math, if I kept investing all my money into all my friends’ startups, that would be about 70 investments. 3 of them turned into unicorns eventually. Even 1 would have made the bank. Since 2022, I have invested all my money into my products, friends, and network. If I don't have friends who do startups, invest it in myself. Post on Twitter daily. I started posting here in March last year. It’s my primary source of new connections and growth. I could have started it earlier, I don't know why I didn't. Don’t work/partner with corporates. Corporations always seem like an amazing opportunity. They’re big and rich, they promise huge stuff, millions of users, etc. But every single time none of this happens. Because I talk to a regular employees there. They waste my time, destroy focus, shift priorities, and eventually bring in no users/money. Don’t get ever distracted by hype e.g. crypt0. I lost 1.5 years of my life this way. I met the worst people along the way. Fricks, scammers, thieves. Some of my close friends turned into thieves along the way, just because it was so common in that space. I wish this didn’t happen to me. I wish I was stronger and stayed on my mission. Don’t build consumer apps. Only b2b. Consumer apps are so hard, like a lottery. It’s just 0.00001% who make it big. The rest don’t. Even if I got many users, then there is a monetization challenge. I’ve spent 4 years in consumer apps and regret it. Don’t hold on bad project for too long, max 1 year. Some projects just don’t work. In most cases, it’s either the idea that’s so wrong that I can’t even pivot it or it’s a team that is good one by one but can’t make it as a team. Don’t drag this out for years. Tech conferences are a waste of time. They cost money, take energy, and time and I never really meet anyone there. Most people there are the “good” employees of corporations who were sent there as a perk for being loyal to the corporation. Very few fellow makers. Scrum is a Scam. For small teams and bootstrapped teams. If I had a team that had to be nagged every morning with questions as if they were children in kindergarten, then things would eventually fail. The only good stuff I managed to do happened with people who were grownups and could manage their stuff on their own. We would just do everything over chat as a sync on goals and plans. Outsource nothing at all until PMF. In a startup, almost everything needs to be done in a slightly different way, more creative, and more integrated into the vision. When outsourcing, the external members get no love and no case for the product. It’s just yet another assignment in their boring job. Instead of coming up with great ideas for my project they will be just focusing on ramping up their skills to get a promotion or a better job offer. Bootstrap. I spent way too much time raising money. I raised more than 10 times, preseed, seeded, and series A. But each time it was a 3-9 month project, meetings every week, and lots of destruction. I could afford to bootstrap, but I still went the VC-funded way, I don’t know why. To be honest, I didn’t know bootstrapping was a thing I could do or anyone does. It may take a decade. When I was 20, I was convinced it takes a few years to build and succeed with a startup. So I kept pushing my plans forward, to do it once I exited. Family, kids. I wish I married earlier. I wish I had kids earlier. No Free Tier. I'd launch a tool with a free tier, and it'd get sign-ups, but very few would convert. I'd treat free sign-ups as KPIs and run on it for years. I'd brag about signups and visitors. I'd even raise VC money with these stats. But eventually, I would fail to reach PMF. Because my main feedback would come from free users and the product turned into a perfect free product. Once I switched to "paid only" until I validated the product, things went really well. Free and paid users often need different products. Don't fall into this trap as I did. Being To Cheap. I always started by checking all competitors and setting the lowest price. I thought this would be one of the key advantages of my product. But no, I was wrong. The audience on $5 and $50 are totally different. $5: pain in the \*ss, never happy, never recommend me to a friend, leave in 4 months. $50: polite, give genuine feedback, happy, share with friends, become my big fan if I solve their request. I will fail. When I started my first startup. I thought if I did everything right, it would work out. But it turned out that almost every startup fails. I wish I knew that and I tried to fail faster, to get to the second iteration, then to the third, and keep going on, until I either find out nothing works or make it work. Use boilerplates. I wasted years of dev time and millions of VC money to pay for basic things. To build yet another sidebar, yet another dashboard, and payment integration... I had too much pride, I couldn't see myself taking someone else code as a basis for my product. I wanted it to be 100% mine, original, from scratch. Because my product seems special to me. Spend more time with Family & Friends. I missed the weddings of all my best friends and family. I was so busy. I thought if I didn't do it on time, the world would end. Looking back today, it was so wrong. I meet my friends and can't share those memories with them, which makes me very sad. I realized now, that spending 10% of my time with family and friends would practically make no negative impact on my startups. Build Products For Audiences I Love. I never thought of this. I'd often build products either for corporates, consumers, or for developers. It turns out I have no love for all 3. But I deeply love indie founders. Because they are risk-takers and partly kids in their hearts. Once I switched the focus to indie makers on my products, my level of joy increased by 100x for me. Ignore Badges and Awards I was chasing those awards just like everyone else. Going to ceremonies, signing up for events and stuff. I've won tons of awards, but none of those were eventually useful to my business. I better focused on my business and users. Write Every Single Day. When I was a kid, I loved writing stories. In school, they would give an assignment, and I'd often write a long story for it, however, the teacher would put an F on it. The reason was simple, I had an issue with the direction of the letters and the sequence of letters in the words. I still have it, it's just the Grammarly app helping me to correct these issues. So the teacher would fail my stories because almost every sentence had a spelling mistake that I couldn't even see. It made me think I'm made at writing. So I stopped, for 15 years. But I kept telling stories all these years. Recently I realized that in any group, the setup ends up turning into me telling stories to everyone. So I tried it all again, here on X 10 months ago. I love it, the process, the feedback from people. I write every day. I wish I had done it all these years. The End. \ this is an updated version of my post on the same topic from 2 months ago. I've edited some of the points and added 9 new ones.* \\ This is not advice, it's my self-reflection that might help you avoid same mistakes if you think those were mistakes

How a founder built a B2B AI startup to serve with 65+ global brands (including Fortune500 companies)
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score1
Royal_Rest8409This week

How a founder built a B2B AI startup to serve with 65+ global brands (including Fortune500 companies)

AI Palette is an AI-driven platform that helps food and beverage companies predict emerging product trends. I had the opportunity recently to sit down with the founder to get his advice on building an AI-first startup, which he'll be going through in this post. About AI Palette: Co-founders: >!2 (Somsubhra GanChoudhuri, Himanshu Upreti)!!100+!!$12.7M USD!!AI-powered predictive analytics for the CPG (Consumer Packaged Goods) industry!!Signed first paying customer in the first year!!65+ global brands, including Cargill, Diageo, Ajinomoto, Symrise, Mondelez, and L’Oréal, use AI Palette!!Every new product launched has secured a paying client within months!!Expanded into Beauty & Personal Care (BPC), onboarding one of India’s largest BPC companies within weeks!!Launched multiple new product lines in the last two years, creating a unified suite for brand innovation!Identify the pain points in your industry for ideas* When I was working in the flavour and fragrance industry, I noticed a major issue CPG companies faced: launching a product took at least one to two years. For instance, if a company decided today to launch a new juice, it wouldn’t hit the market until 2027. This long timeline made it difficult to stay relevant and on top of trends. Another big problem I noticed was that companies relied heavily on market research to determine what products to launch. While this might work for current consumer preferences, it was highly inefficient since the product wouldn’t actually reach the market for several years. By the time the product launched, the consumer trends had already shifted, making that research outdated. That’s where AI can play a crucial role. Instead of looking at what consumers like today, we realised that companies should use AI to predict what they will want next. This allows businesses to create products that are ahead of the curve. Right now, the failure rate for new product launches is alarmingly high, with 8 out of 10 products failing. By leveraging AI, companies can avoid wasting resources on products that won’t succeed, leading to better, more successful launches. Start by talking to as many industry experts as possible to identify the real problems When we first had the idea for AI Palette, it was just a hunch, a gut feeling—we had no idea whether people would actually pay for it. To validate the idea, we reached out to as many people as we could within the industry. Since our focus area was all about consumer insights, we spoke to professionals in the CPG sector, particularly those in the insights departments of CPG companies. Through these early conversations, we began to see a common pattern emerge and identified the exact problem we wanted to solve. Don’t tell people what you’re building—listen to their frustrations and challenges first. Going into these early customer conversations, our goal was to listen and understand their challenges without telling them what we were trying to build. This is crucial as it ensures that you can gather as much data about the problem to truly understand it and that you aren't biasing their answers by showing your solution. This process helped us in two key ways: First, it validated that there was a real problem in the industry through the number of people who spoke about experiencing the same problem. Second, it allowed us to understand the exact scale and depth of the problem—e.g., how much money companies were spending on consumer research, what kind of tools they were currently using, etc. Narrow down your focus to a small, actionable area to solve initially. Once we were certain that there was a clear problem worth solving, we didn’t try to tackle everything at once. As a small team of two people, we started by focusing on a specific area of the problem—something big enough to matter but small enough for us to handle. Then, we approached customers with a potential solution and asked them for feedback. We learnt that our solution seemed promising, but we wanted to validate it further. If customers are willing to pay you for the solution, it’s a strong validation signal for market demand. One of our early customer interviewees even asked us to deliver the solution, which we did manually at first. We used machine learning models to analyse the data and presented the results in a slide deck. They paid us for the work, which was a critical moment. It meant we had something with real potential, and we had customers willing to pay us before we had even built the full product. This was the key validation that we needed. By the time we were ready to build the product, we had already gathered crucial insights from our early customers. We understood the specific information they wanted and how they wanted the results to be presented. This input was invaluable in shaping the development of our final product. Building & Product Development Start with a simple concept/design to validate with customers before building When we realised the problem and solution, we began by designing the product, but not by jumping straight into coding. Instead, we created wireframes and user interfaces using tools like InVision and Figma. This allowed us to visually represent the product without the need for backend or frontend development at first. The goal was to showcase how the product would look and feel, helping potential customers understand its value before we even started building. We showed these designs to potential customers and asked for feedback. Would they want to buy this product? Would they pay for it? We didn’t dive into actual development until we found a customer willing to pay a significant amount for the solution. This approach helped us ensure we were on the right track and didn’t waste time or resources building something customers didn’t actually want. Deliver your solution using a manual consulting approach before developing an automated product Initially, we solved problems for customers in a more "consulting" manner, delivering insights manually. Recall how I mentioned that when one of our early customer interviewees asked us to deliver the solution, we initially did it manually by using machine learning models to analyse the data and presenting the results to them in a slide deck. This works for the initial stages of validating your solution, as you don't want to invest too much time into building a full-blown MVP before understanding the exact features and functionalities that your users want. However, after confirming that customers were willing to pay for what we provided, we moved forward with actual product development. This shift from a manual service to product development was key to scaling in a sustainable manner, as our building was guided by real-world feedback and insights rather than intuition. Let ongoing customer feedback drive iteration and the product roadmap Once we built the first version of the product, it was basic, solving only one problem. But as we worked closely with customers, they requested additional features and functionalities to make it more useful. As a result, we continued to evolve the product to handle more complex use cases, gradually developing new modules based on customer feedback. Product development is a continuous process. Our early customers pushed us to expand features and modules, from solving just 20% of their problems to tackling 50–60% of their needs. These demands shaped our product roadmap and guided the development of new features, ultimately resulting in a more complete solution. Revenue and user numbers are key metrics for assessing product-market fit. However, critical mass varies across industries Product-market fit (PMF) can often be gauged by looking at the size of your revenue and the number of customers you're serving. Once you've reached a certain critical mass of customers, you can usually tell that you're starting to hit product-market fit. However, this critical mass varies by industry and the type of customers you're targeting. For example, if you're building an app for a broad consumer market, you may need thousands of users. But for enterprise software, product-market fit may be reached with just a few dozen key customers. Compare customer engagement and retention with other available solutions on the market for product-market fit Revenue and the number of customers alone isn't always enough to determine if you're reaching product-market fit. The type of customer and the use case for your product also matter. The level of engagement with your product—how much time users are spending on the platform—is also an important metric to track. The more time they spend, the more likely it is that your product is meeting a crucial need. Another way to evaluate product-market fit is by assessing retention, i.e whether users are returning to your platform and relying on it consistently, as compared to other solutions available. That's another key indication that your solution is gaining traction in the market. Business Model & Monetisation Prioritise scalability Initially, we started with a consulting-type model where we tailor-made specific solutions for each customer use-case we encountered and delivered the CPG insights manually, but we soon realized that this wasn't scalable. The problem with consulting is that you need to do the same work repeatedly for every new project, which requires a large team to handle the workload. That is not how you sustain a high-growth startup. To solve this, we focused on building a product that would address the most common problems faced by our customers. Once built, this product could be sold to thousands of customers without significant overheads, making the business scalable. With this in mind, we decided on a SaaS (Software as a Service) business model. The benefit of SaaS is that once you create the software, you can sell it to many customers without adding extra overhead. This results in a business with higher margins, where the same product can serve many customers simultaneously, making it much more efficient than the consulting model. Adopt a predictable, simplistic business model for efficiency. Look to industry practices for guidance When it came to monetisation, we considered the needs of our CPG customers, who I knew from experience were already accustomed to paying annual subscriptions for sales databases and other software services. We decided to adopt the same model and charge our customers an annual upfront fee. This model worked well for our target market, aligning with industry standards and ensuring stable, recurring revenue. Moreover, our target CPG customers were already used to this business model and didn't have to choose from a huge variety of payment options, making closing sales a straightforward and efficient process. Marketing & Sales Educate the market to position yourself as a thought leader When we started, AI was not widely understood, especially in the CPG industry. We had to create awareness around both AI and its potential value. Our strategy focused on educating potential users and customers about AI, its relevance, and why they should invest in it. This education was crucial to the success of our marketing efforts. To establish credibility, we adopted a thought leadership approach. We wrote blogs on the importance of AI and how it could solve problems for CPG companies. We also participated in events and conferences to demonstrate our expertise in applying AI to the industry. This helped us build our brand and reputation as leaders in the AI space for CPG, and word-of-mouth spread as customers recognized us as the go-to company for AI solutions. It’s tempting for startups to offer products for free in the hopes of gaining early traction with customers, but this approach doesn't work in the long run. Free offerings don’t establish the value of your product, and customers may not take them seriously. You should always charge for pilots, even if the fee is minimal, to ensure that the customer is serious about potentially working with you, and that they are committed and engaged with the product. Pilots/POCs/Demos should aim to give a "flavour" of what you can deliver A paid pilot/POC trial also gives you the opportunity to provide a “flavour” of what your product can deliver, helping to build confidence and trust with the client. It allows customers to experience a detailed preview of what your product can do, which builds anticipation and desire for the full functionality. During this phase, ensure your product is built to give them a taste of the value you can provide, which sets the stage for a broader, more impactful adoption down the line. Fundraising & Financial Management Leverage PR to generate inbound interest from VCs When it comes to fundraising, our approach was fairly traditional—we reached out to VCs and used connections from existing investors to make introductions. However, looking back, one thing that really helped us build momentum during our fundraising process was getting featured in Tech in Asia. This wasn’t planned; it just so happened that Tech in Asia was doing a series on AI startups in Southeast Asia and they reached out to us for an article. During the interview, they asked if we were fundraising, and we mentioned that we were. As a result, several VCs we hadn’t yet contacted reached out to us. This inbound interest was incredibly valuable, and we found it far more effective than our outbound efforts. So, if you can, try to generate some PR attention—it can help create inbound interest from VCs, and that interest is typically much stronger and more promising than any outbound strategies because they've gone out of their way to reach out to you. Be well-prepared and deliberate about fundraising. Keep trying and don't lose heart When pitching to VCs, it’s crucial to be thoroughly prepared, as you typically only get one shot at making an impression. If you mess up, it’s unlikely they’ll give you a second chance. You need to have key metrics at your fingertips, especially if you're running a SaaS company. Be ready to answer questions like: What’s your retention rate? What are your projections for the year? How much will you close? What’s your average contract value? These numbers should be at the top of your mind. Additionally, fundraising should be treated as a structured process, not something you do on the side while juggling other tasks. When you start, create a clear plan: identify 20 VCs to reach out to each week. By planning ahead, you’ll maintain momentum and speed up the process. Fundraising can be exhausting and disheartening, especially when you face multiple rejections. Remember, you just need one investor to say yes to make it all worthwhile. When using funds, prioritise profitability and grow only when necessary. Don't rely on funding to survive. In the past, the common advice for startups was to raise money, burn through it quickly, and use it to boost revenue numbers, even if that meant operating at a loss. The idea was that profitability wasn’t the main focus, and the goal was to show rapid growth for the next funding round. However, times have changed, especially with the shift from “funding summer” to “funding winter.” My advice now is to aim for profitability as soon as possible and grow only when it's truly needed. For example, it’s tempting to hire a large team when you have substantial funds in the bank, but ask yourself: Do you really need 10 new hires, or could you get by with just four? Growing too quickly can lead to unnecessary expenses, so focus on reaching profitability as soon as possible, rather than just inflating your team or burn rate. The key takeaway is to spend your funds wisely and only when absolutely necessary to reach profitability. You want to avoid becoming dependent on future VC investments to keep your company afloat. Instead, prioritize reaching break-even as quickly as you can, so you're not reliant on external funding to survive in the long run. Team-Building & Leadership Look for complementary skill sets in co-founders When choosing a co-founder, it’s important to find someone with a complementary skill set, not just someone you’re close to. For example, I come from a business and commercial background, so I needed someone with technical expertise. That’s when I found my co-founder, Himanshu, who had experience in machine learning and AI. He was a great match because his technical knowledge complemented my business skills, and together we formed a strong team. It might seem natural to choose your best friend as your co-founder, but this can often lead to conflict. Chances are, you and your best friend share similar interests, skills, and backgrounds, which doesn’t bring diversity to the table. If both of you come from the same industry or have the same strengths, you may end up butting heads on how things should be done. Having diverse skill sets helps avoid this and fosters a more collaborative working relationship. Himanshu (left) and Somsubhra (right) co-founded AI Palette in 2018 Define roles clearly to prevent co-founder conflict To avoid conflict, it’s essential that your roles as co-founders are clearly defined from the beginning. If your co-founder and you have distinct responsibilities, there is no room for overlap or disagreement. This ensures that both of you can work without stepping on each other's toes, and there’s mutual respect for each other’s expertise. This is another reason as to why it helps to have a co-founder with a complementary skillset to yours. Not only is having similar industry backgrounds and skillsets not particularly useful when building out your startup, it's also more likely to lead to conflicts since you both have similar subject expertise. On the other hand, if your co-founder is an expert in something that you're not, you're less likely to argue with them about their decisions regarding that aspect of the business and vice versa when it comes to your decisions. Look for employees who are driven by your mission, not salary For early-stage startups, the first hires are crucial. These employees need to be highly motivated and excited about the mission. Since the salary will likely be low and the work demanding, they must be driven by something beyond just the paycheck. The right employees are the swash-buckling pirates and romantics, i.e those who are genuinely passionate about the startup’s vision and want to be part of something impactful beyond material gains. When employees are motivated by the mission, they are more likely to stick around and help take the startup to greater heights. A litmus test for hiring: Would you be excited to work with them on a Sunday? One of the most important rounds in the hiring process is the culture fit round. This is where you assess whether a candidate shares the same values as you and your team. A key question to ask yourself is: "Would I be excited to work with this person on a Sunday?" If there’s any doubt about your answer, it’s likely not a good fit. The idea is that you want employees who align with the company's culture and values and who you would enjoy collaborating with even outside of regular work hours. How we structure the team at AI Palette We have three broad functions in our organization. The first two are the big ones: Technical Team – This is the core of our product and technology. This team is responsible for product development and incorporating customer feedback into improving the technology Commercial Team – This includes sales, marketing, customer service, account managers, and so on, handling everything related to business growth and customer relations. General and Administrative Team – This smaller team supports functions like finance, HR, and administration. As with almost all businesses, we have teams that address the two core tasks of building (technical team) and selling (commercial team), but given the size we're at now, having the administrative team helps smoothen operations. Set broad goals but let your teams decide on execution What I've done is recruit highly skilled people who don't need me to micromanage them on a day-to-day basis. They're experts in their roles, and as Steve Jobs said, when you hire the right person, you don't have to tell them what to do—they understand the purpose and tell you what to do. So, my job as the CEO is to set the broader goals for them, review the plans they have to achieve those goals, and periodically check in on progress. For example, if our broad goal is to meet a certain revenue target, I break it down across teams: For the sales team, I’ll look at how they plan to hit that target—how many customers they need to sell to, how many salespeople they need, and what tactics and strategies they plan to use. For the technical team, I’ll evaluate our product offerings—whether they think we need to build new products to attract more customers, and whether they think it's scalable for the number of customers we plan to serve. This way, the entire organization's tasks are cascaded in alignment with our overarching goals, with me setting the direction and leaving the details of execution to the skilled team members that I hire.

5 Habits to go from Founder to CEO
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score0.6
FalahilThis week

5 Habits to go from Founder to CEO

Over the years, I've gathered some knowledge about transitioning from a startup founder to a CEO. I started my company 7 years ago. We are now not super big (65 people), but we have learned a lot. We raised $19M in total and we are now profitable. The transition from Founder to CEO was crucial. Your startup begins to mature and scale and you need to scale with it. It's often a challenging phase, but I've managed to summarize it into five habbits. Say no to important things every day Being able to say "no" to important tasks every day is an essential practice for a growing leader. It's a reality that as the magnitude of your company or ideas expands, so does the influx of good ideas and opportunities. However, to transform from a mere hustler to a true leader, you have to become selective. This means learning to refuse good ideas, which is crucial if you want to consistently execute the outstanding ones. The concept that "Startups don't starve, they drown" resonates deeply because it underlines how challenging it can be to reject opportunities. A key strategy to develop this skill is time-constraining your to-do list. Here's how you can do it: Weekly: Formulate a weekly to-do list, including only those tasks that you're sure to complete within the week. Leave some buffer room for unexpected issues. If there's any doubt about whether you'll have time for a certain task, it should not feature on your weekly list. I use Todoist and Notion for task management. Daily: Apply the same rule while creating your daily to-do list. Only include tasks that you're confident about accomplishing that day. If a task seems too big to fit into one day, break it down into manageable chunks. Journaling Journaling is a powerful strategy that can help an individual transition from a reactive approach to a proactive one. As founders, we often find ourselves caught up in a cycle of endless tasks, akin to chopping trees in a dense forest. However, to ensure sustainable growth, it is crucial to develop an ability to "zoom out", or to view the bigger picture. I use The Morning Pages method, from Julia Cameron. It consists of writing each morning about anything that comes to mind. The act of writing effectively combines linear, focused thinking with the benefits of a thoughtful conversation. If you just want to journal, you can use Day One app (The free version will be enough). If you want to go a bit deeper, you can try a coaching app. I use Wave.ai and I also hired it for the managers in the company because it combines both journaling with habit building. ​ Building Robust Systems and Processes (I know, it is boring and founders hate this) As a founder, you often need to wear multiple hats and juggle various roles. But as a CEO, it's vital to establish strong systems and processes that enable the business to function smoothly, even without your direct involvement. This includes: Implementing project management systems. Establishing clear lines of communication and accountability. Designing efficient workflows and procedures. To many founders, developing these systems might seem monotonous or even tedious. After all, the allure of envisioning the next big idea often proves more exciting. I experienced the same predicament. In response, I brought onboard a competent COO who excelled in systematizing processes. This strategy allowed me to kickstart initiatives and explore them in a flexible, less structured manner. Once an idea showed signs of gaining traction, my COO stepped in to streamline it, crafting a process that turned the fledgling idea into a consistent business operation. ​ Meditating Meditation is about reprogramming unconscious mental processes by repeatedly performing fundamental tasks with a distinct intention. This practice can be even more crucial to leadership than acquiring a business school education. Because meditation provides the most direct route to understanding your mind's workings and thus, forms the most effective basis for transforming it. To transition from a founder to a CEO, a significant shift in your mindset is required. This shift involves moving from a hustle mentality to precision, from acting as a superhero solving problems to consciously stepping back, thereby providing room for your team members to discover their own superpowers. It's about shifting your success indicators - from individual achievements to the triumphs of your team. This transformation might not feel comfortable initially, and your instincts, shaped by your scrappy founder phase, might resist this change. However, with consistent practice, you can align your instincts with the stage of your company, promoting more effective leadership. This is where the value of meditation truly shines. It allows you to identify your distinct thought patterns in real time and, over time, modify them. I use Headspace a lot, and I also encourage the employees to use it. The company pays the subscription as a perk. ​ Balancing the Macro and the Micro As the CEO, your primary focus should be on the big picture – your company's vision and strategy. However, you also need to keep an eye on the details, as these can make or break your execution. It's all about balance: Delegate the details but stay informed. Prioritize strategic planning but be ready to dive into the trenches when needed. Keep your eye on your long-term vision but adapt to short-term realities. The transition from founder to CEO isn't about giving up what made you successful initially but augmenting it with additional skills, perspectives, and practices. It's a personal and professional evolution that can lead to greater success for both you and your business. Every great CEO was once a founder. It's just about taking the next step. I’d love to hear your experiences or any tips you might have for this transition. In which step of your journey are you right now? Do you have employees already? What are your main challenges right now?

26 Ways to Make Money as a Startup Founder (for coders & noncoders)
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score1
johnrushxThis week

26 Ways to Make Money as a Startup Founder (for coders & noncoders)

I've launched 24 projects (here is the proof johnrush.me). None of my projects is making millions a month, but many of them make over $1k a month, some do over $10k, and few do even more. I'd not recommend anyone to start by trying to build a unicorn. Better start simple. Aim for $2-4k a month first. Once you get there, either scale it or start a new project with large TAM. From my own experience, the 26 Ways to Make Money as a Startup Founder: One-Feature SaaS. Extract a feature from a popular tool and build a micro SaaS around it. Idea: A SaaS that only offers automated email follow-ups. Launchpads. Develop a launch platform for a specific industry. Idea: A launchpad for growth tools. SEO Tools. Create a tool that focuses on a single aspect of SEO. Idea: A tool that generates alt texts for images. Productized Services. Offer standardized services that are repeatable. Idea: design, coding or social media management. Marketplace Platforms. Create a platform that connects buyers and sellers, earning transaction fees. Idea: An online marketplace for domains. Membership Sites. A subscription-based site with exclusive content. Idea: A founder 0-to-1 site. White Labeling. A product that other businesses can rebrand as their own. Idea: A white-labeled website builder. Selling Data. Provide anonymized data insights to companies. Idea: Selling user behavior data. Affiliate Marketing. Promote products/services and earn commissions on sales. Idea: Recommending hosting services on a tech blog. Selling Leads. Generate and sell business leads. Idea: Selling leads who raised a fresh seed round. Niche Social Networks. Create a paid community around a specific interest. Idea: A network for SEO experts. Sell Domains. Buy and sell domain names for profit. Virtual Products. Sell digital products like templates or graphics. Idea: Website themes for nextjs or boilerplates. On-Demand Services. Build a platform for gigs like delivery or tutoring. Idea: An app for freelance tutors. Niche Job Boards. Start a job board focused on a specific industry. Idea: A job board for remote tech jobs. Crowdsourced Content. Create a user-generated content platform and monetize through ads. Idea: Site to share startup hacks. Buy and Flip Businesses. Purchase underperforming businesses, improve them, and sell for profit. Idea: Acquiring a low-traffic blog, optimizing it, and selling. AI-Powered agents. Develop AI tools that solve specific business problems. Idea: An AI tool that automates customer support. Microservices. Offer small, specialized tools, sdks or APIs. Idea: An api for currency conversion. Influencer Platforms. Create a platform connecting influencers with brands. Idea: Connect AI influencers with AI founders. Niche Directories. Build a paid directory for a specific industry. Idea: A directory of developers who can train models. E-Learning Platforms. Build a platform for educators to sell courses. Idea: A site where AI experts sell AI courses. Virtual assistants. Hire them and sell on subscription. No-Code Tools. Create tools that allow non-technical users to build things. Idea: A no-code website builder for bakeries. Labor arbitrage. Idea: Connect support agents from Portugal with US clients and charge commission.

Seeking co-founder to build LinkedIn’s biggest rival(curated version)
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score1
ItzdreeThis week

Seeking co-founder to build LinkedIn’s biggest rival(curated version)

How do you connect with likeminded people? You see the polished wins everywhere, but what about the messy drafts , the awkward pitches and the moments you’re not sure you’ve got it right? Problem: The whole idea of founding and starting a business can be super intimidating for some people, specially those who don’t know any founders personally, those who don’t have a large network, those who don’t have rich parents with large networks, those not inserted in an entrepreneurial culture like in the US for example (which is my case). Sometimes all you need is the right support network, and too see others do what you want, to know that it’s possible! Everyone has an “ultimate guide” to make 7 figures or build a business on YouTube but NO ONE shoes you the HOW, just the results… I’ve tried joining founder communities, LinkedIn ,Reddit … you name it. Most of these founder communities are inaccessible for regular people and often ask for you to have an already existing business with a min ARR… or their simply geography based and if you’re not in a certain area you can’t really participate… As of LinkedIn… full of empty AI generated posts about how some random dude raised $10m in 7 days. Okay Jonathan, but what about the HOW?? How did you write your first pitch? How many rejection calls did you get? What is an MVP? There simply isn’t a platform out there to document your founding journey and find inspiration within a community of people who are doing the same as you. What better way to feel motivated then to see someone actually document their process? Solution: I’m working on building a social media platform for aspiring/founders to connect through the RAW, UNFILTERED process of turning ideas into reality in REAL time. It’s all gonna be around the “building in public “ concept and content creation. Picture an instagram/tiktok profile where instead of seeing someone’s dog you see them documenting their founding process—from the moment they had the idea, to the moment they launched, you’re going to see the successes, the fails, the rejected calls, all documented through actual content and not some AI generated LinkedIn post. Imagine if you wanted to learn about how Steve Jobs started Apple , you could simply go through his profile on this app—exactly. To make sure all interactions are meaningful people would have to apply. It’s a truly curated community, with REAL people, building REAL things in REAL time, and not just tell us the story of how they did it… Audience: I’m targeting people who have a burning desire of building a business and early stage founders starting their founder journeys, that don’t have a support network and simply don’t know where to start. People who are tired of watching 30 min “ultimate guides “ on how to make it on YouTube from “business gurus” selling courses. People who haven’t reached the min ARR required to join an “exclusive “ founder a community. People who can’t simply just move to the US to get into the “exclusive” YC combinator. People who want to connect with real people building real things and not anonymous people on Reddit, or LinkedIn influencers again trying to promote their services. I believe in the idea because I’m also part of my audience. Have always wanted to start my own thing just never knew how to and where to find a community of likeminded people . I don’t know any founders myself, I come from a non-entrepreneurial society and I’d pay good money to access a community of REAL passionate founders building REAL things, in REAL time. This would be my first ever business, and I want to share my journey building it and hopefully inspire others to just start so I’ve created a mailing list to keep anyone interested in the project updated on my fails , learnings and successes. I’m not worried about “making it” but just “starting” and hopefully reach the right audience and inspire anyone to start whatever they have marinating in their thoughts. If you’re a founder struggling with staying consistent or an aspiring founder with an insane desire of starting and don’t know how to start, I’d love to get your feedback on what’s stopping you, your challenges starting out and what you’d find useful in such platform. And finally would this be something that interests you?? PS: casually looking for a technical co-founder

Why the value of writing code and other digital services is going to zero
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score1
BalloonWheelieThis week

Why the value of writing code and other digital services is going to zero

I must preface this with a trigger warning because I make some statements in this post that might be upsetting to some. This post discusses my experience building in the new era of entrepreneurship, which is one where the founder is the center of the universe, and the consultants, overpriced SaaS, and corporate swamp creatures are replaced by single-user custom software, bots, and self-hosted automations. If you work in the legacy economy, I really don't intend to stress you out or say things you are doing are quickly becoming irrelevant, but I must share the reality of how I am operating, because I would like to hear from others who are doing the same, or desire to do the same. I am currently operating with the belief that AI-powered tools are going to make 1-person million dollar businesses much more common. Building anything digital is becoming extremely easy, cheap, and quick to implement. The value of code and digital tools is approaching zero, or at most 5% of what it currently is. Right now, the most powerful AI tools are aimed at developers, so folks who have some technical and business ability basically have nothing holding them back aside from the speed of their brain right now. I happen to be a part of the cohort, and am building like there is no tomorrow, but I don't believe this cohort is actually all that big. The next hurdle to unlock the new era of entrepreneurship is empowering every entrepreneur to build at the same pace that is currently locked behind having technical ability. This cohort is huge (millions, if the number of people in this sub is any indication). This post is aimed at them (you?). If you are part of this cohort, what is holding you back from launching a new product for near-zero cost? What is too complicated, too expensive, too unknown for you to be able to build your new/current business at maximum speed? I look forward to seeing the replies, I hope some insights shared can help the community, and be a catalyst for more tools to enable non-technical founders to launch. I will now share some of how I am testing, launching, and selling as a one-man-show. This will be a little bit technical, but if the output of any layer of my stack is something you want, please comment because maybe someone will build a cheap way of accessing it without needing to manage the code yourself. \#1 BOTS I cannot overstate how much leverage bots have created for me. I run all of my bots locally and interface with with via Telegram. Bots do things like: \- watch social media pages, forums, subreddits, etc related to my customers and notify me of what is going on, and suggest SEO blog posts that could be published to capture traffic related to the topic. with a single message, my bot will generate a blog post, send it to me for review, apply edits i suggest, and then publish it live, all from within telegram \- pay attention to all my key metrics/analytics, and attempt to find insights/corrolations (ex. there is a lot of traffic on this page, blog post, video, etc. here's why, and how we can take advantage of it to drive business goals) \- repurposing content. i have dozens of social media profiles that are 100% run by bots, they are all related to my customer niches and will do things like post news, snippets from my blogs, interact with human creators in the niche, etc. this builds my audience automatically which I can then advertise to/try to convert into paying customers, since they are interested in the things my bot is posting and become followers, it's like automated qualified lead gen 24/7 across every social platform and every niche I care about. you may be thinking by now that this post is made by a bot, but you will have to trust me that this is 100% hand-written by my sleep-deprived brain. let's continue: \#2 replacing every SaaS with a shitty version of it designed for what i need out of it it's absurd that we pay ten's of dollars per seat per month for basic digital functions like chat (slack), CRM (active camppaign, sales force, hubspot, etc), email stuff (mailchip, etc), link sharing (linktree, etc), website builders (wix, squarespace, etc), etc. all of these SaaS tools are overpriced and overbuilt. I believe many of them are going to be caught in the innovators dilemma and will go to 0. I don't use any of these anymore, I build and self-host my own shitty version of each of them that does only what i need out of the tool. for example, my CRM doesn't have a fancy drag and drop email builder and 10000 3rd party plugins, because i dont need any of that shit I just need to segment and communicate with my customers. if i need more features, i can generate them on the fly. \#3 working alone I have worked with cofounders in the past, raised money from investors, hired consultants, burned money and time, suffered sleepless nights from stress caused by other people not delivering, trying to convince others they are wrong, or they are pushing the company off a cliff, waste waste waste. no more of that. In the new age of entrepreneurship, the BUILDER (you and I) are the ones creating the value, and AI empowers us to do it alone. this might seem daunting, but there is no business problem that can't be solved with a detailed discussion sesh with chatgpt, no facts that can't be found with perplexity, and no task that can't be automated with claude. there is no need for anymore swamp creatures. you are the start and the end point, you don't need to rely on anyone else for anything. this may sound ignorant, but this is the conclusion I have come to believe, and it continues to be proven every day my businesses progress with me being the only human involved. This is getting quite long so I'll cut it here. I look forward to hearing about how you are operating in this new era and hopefully getting inspired/learning some new ideas to add to my current stack.

Why the value of writing code and other digital services is going to zero
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score1
BalloonWheelieThis week

Why the value of writing code and other digital services is going to zero

I must preface this with a trigger warning because I make some statements in this post that might be upsetting to some. This post discusses my experience building in the new era of entrepreneurship, which is one where the founder is the center of the universe, and the consultants, overpriced SaaS, and corporate swamp creatures are replaced by single-user custom software, bots, and self-hosted automations. If you work in the legacy economy, I really don't intend to stress you out or say things you are doing are quickly becoming irrelevant, but I must share the reality of how I am operating, because I would like to hear from others who are doing the same, or desire to do the same. I am currently operating with the belief that AI-powered tools are going to make 1-person million dollar businesses much more common. Building anything digital is becoming extremely easy, cheap, and quick to implement. The value of code and digital tools is approaching zero, or at most 5% of what it currently is. Right now, the most powerful AI tools are aimed at developers, so folks who have some technical and business ability basically have nothing holding them back aside from the speed of their brain right now. I happen to be a part of the cohort, and am building like there is no tomorrow, but I don't believe this cohort is actually all that big. The next hurdle to unlock the new era of entrepreneurship is empowering every entrepreneur to build at the same pace that is currently locked behind having technical ability. This cohort is huge (millions, if the number of people in this sub is any indication). This post is aimed at them (you?). If you are part of this cohort, what is holding you back from launching a new product for near-zero cost? What is too complicated, too expensive, too unknown for you to be able to build your new/current business at maximum speed? I look forward to seeing the replies, I hope some insights shared can help the community, and be a catalyst for more tools to enable non-technical founders to launch. I will now share some of how I am testing, launching, and selling as a one-man-show. This will be a little bit technical, but if the output of any layer of my stack is something you want, please comment because maybe someone will build a cheap way of accessing it without needing to manage the code yourself. \#1 BOTS I cannot overstate how much leverage bots have created for me. I run all of my bots locally and interface with with via Telegram. Bots do things like: \- watch social media pages, forums, subreddits, etc related to my customers and notify me of what is going on, and suggest SEO blog posts that could be published to capture traffic related to the topic. with a single message, my bot will generate a blog post, send it to me for review, apply edits i suggest, and then publish it live, all from within telegram \- pay attention to all my key metrics/analytics, and attempt to find insights/corrolations (ex. there is a lot of traffic on this page, blog post, video, etc. here's why, and how we can take advantage of it to drive business goals) \- repurposing content. i have dozens of social media profiles that are 100% run by bots, they are all related to my customer niches and will do things like post news, snippets from my blogs, interact with human creators in the niche, etc. this builds my audience automatically which I can then advertise to/try to convert into paying customers, since they are interested in the things my bot is posting and become followers, it's like automated qualified lead gen 24/7 across every social platform and every niche I care about. you may be thinking by now that this post is made by a bot, but you will have to trust me that this is 100% hand-written by my sleep-deprived brain. let's continue: \#2 replacing every SaaS with a shitty version of it designed for what i need out of it it's absurd that we pay ten's of dollars per seat per month for basic digital functions like chat (slack), CRM (active camppaign, sales force, hubspot, etc), email stuff (mailchip, etc), link sharing (linktree, etc), website builders (wix, squarespace, etc), etc. all of these SaaS tools are overpriced and overbuilt. I believe many of them are going to be caught in the innovators dilemma and will go to 0. I don't use any of these anymore, I build and self-host my own shitty version of each of them that does only what i need out of the tool. for example, my CRM doesn't have a fancy drag and drop email builder and 10000 3rd party plugins, because i dont need any of that shit I just need to segment and communicate with my customers. if i need more features, i can generate them on the fly. \#3 working alone I have worked with cofounders in the past, raised money from investors, hired consultants, burned money and time, suffered sleepless nights from stress caused by other people not delivering, trying to convince others they are wrong, or they are pushing the company off a cliff, waste waste waste. no more of that. In the new age of entrepreneurship, the BUILDER (you and I) are the ones creating the value, and AI empowers us to do it alone. this might seem daunting, but there is no business problem that can't be solved with a detailed discussion sesh with chatgpt, no facts that can't be found with perplexity, and no task that can't be automated with claude. there is no need for anymore swamp creatures. you are the start and the end point, you don't need to rely on anyone else for anything. this may sound ignorant, but this is the conclusion I have come to believe, and it continues to be proven every day my businesses progress with me being the only human involved. This is getting quite long so I'll cut it here. I look forward to hearing about how you are operating in this new era and hopefully getting inspired/learning some new ideas to add to my current stack.

This founder was about to shut down his business and open a restaurant. He pivoted the business and grew it to $45m ARR in 12 months. What other businesses can scale like this?
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score1
CountryPitifulThis week

This founder was about to shut down his business and open a restaurant. He pivoted the business and grew it to $45m ARR in 12 months. What other businesses can scale like this?

I heard that Jasper scaled to $45m ARR in 12 months...with a team of 8. For context, they are one of the fastest-growing companies ever. Grew from $0 to $45m ARR in 12 months (then raised $125m at a $1.5b valuation). As a fellow founder, their story is really inspiring to me (curious about what others think): In December 2020, Dave Rogenmoser and his co-founders were on the brink of shutting down their business. They'd spent 3+ years building a conversion optimization software called Proof...and it was flatlining. A few weeks prior they had to make the painful decision to let go of half their team. Competition and churn had completely eroded growth. Things were painful. 8 years of work left them with a string of startups that never quite made it: 2 failed software businesses (couldn't make money*) A SMB marketing agency (maxed out at $25k/mo*) An online course company (hard to get big*) The Pivot: In January 2021, they had an idea to use Chat GPT-3, the generative AI model released 6 months earlier, to write high-converting Facebook ads. Within 30 days, they launched the business. With the skeleton crew remaining from the last startup, they scaled the business to $45m ARR and 70,000+ customers without hiring a single new person. Soon after, they raised $125m at a $1.5b valuation. Dave Rogenmoser, CEO at Jasper, had some great one-liners in a few podcasts I listened to on the business. Here are some of his learnings: Right Skill, Wrong Vehicle: He spent 8 years building marketing businesses which gave this team the knowledge and confidence to spend $1m/mo on sales and marketing to scale the business to $45m ARR in year 1. Launch Fast & Iterate Quickly: The team agreed that if the business didn't work in 30 days, they'd shut it down. Dave says, "If you have been working on a problem for more than 18 months and haven't found Product market fit (PMF), odds are you won't...Make the hard pivot."* Ride A Big Wave: Generative AI technology is a new technology that is changing the way we work. But it's not just text. It's images, voice, etc. Identify new customer segments (e.g., Municipalities, Banks, Lawyers, etc.), learn their problems, and apply this novel technology to solve them. What other businesses have you seen scale like this? I've never seen a SaaS business grow that fast. I meet interesting founders 2x per week and share the learnings here.

This founder was about to shut down his startup and open a restaurant. He pivoted the business and grew it to $45m ARR in 12 months. What else have you seen grow that fast?
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score1
CountryPitifulThis week

This founder was about to shut down his startup and open a restaurant. He pivoted the business and grew it to $45m ARR in 12 months. What else have you seen grow that fast?

I heard that Jasper scaled to $45m ARR in 12 months...with a team of 8. For context, they are one of the fastest-growing companies ever. Grew from $0 to $45m ARR in 12 months (then raised $125m at a $1.5b valuation). As a fellow founder, their story is really inspiring to me (curious about what others think): In December 2020, Dave Rogenmoser and his co-founders were on the brink of shutting down their business. They'd spent 3+ years building a conversion optimization software called Proof...and it was flatlining. A few weeks prior they had to make the painful decision to let go of half their team. Competition and churn had completely eroded growth. Things were painful. 8 years of work left them with a string of startups that never quite made it: 2 failed software businesses (couldn't make money*) A SMB marketing agency (maxed out at $25k/mo*) An online course company (hard to get big*) The Pivot: In January 2021, they had an idea to use Chat GPT-3, the generative AI model released 6 months earlier, to write high-converting Facebook ads. Within 30 days, they launched the business. With the skeleton crew remaining from the last startup, they scaled the business to $45m ARR and 70,000+ customers without hiring a single new person. Soon after, they raised $125m at a $1.5b valuation. Dave Rogenmoser, CEO at Jasper, had some great one-liners in a few podcasts I listened to on the business. Here are some of his learnings: Right Skill, Wrong Vehicle: He spent 8 years building marketing businesses which gave this team the knowledge and confidence to spend $1m/mo on sales and marketing to scale the business to $45m ARR in year 1. Launch Fast & Iterate Quickly: The team agreed that if the business didn't work in 30 days, they'd shut it down. Dave says, "If you have been working on a problem for more than 18 months and haven't found Product market fit (PMF), odds are you won't...Make the hard pivot."* Ride A Big Wave: Generative AI technology is a new technology that is changing the way we work. But it's not just text. It's images, voice, etc. Identify new customer segments (e.g., Municipalities, Banks, Lawyers, etc.), learn their problems, and apply this novel technology to solve them. What other businesses have you seen scale like this? I've never seen a SaaS business grow that fast. I meet interesting founders 2x per week and share the learnings here.

Looking for a co-founder for a B2B AI startup. I have a development team and funds for at least a year of operations.
reddit
LLM Vibe Score0
Human Vibe Score0.5
cheech123456This week

Looking for a co-founder for a B2B AI startup. I have a development team and funds for at least a year of operations.

Hello, As the title said I'm looking for a co-founder. I built with my team a few ventures that generate revenues but I don't believe that any of them has a future. I have 15 years of experience in Software Engineering and AI. Worked in various industries, but always in data-driven applications. I spent the last 3 years as an entrepreneur and raised successfully money from VCs. ​ A few preconceptions I have: \- B2C is extremely hard. Very quickly you realize that you need to spend all your resources on marketing. \- B2B is extremely hard - but for different reasons. Sales cycles take months. If you want to reach serious buyers and decision-makers, you need to have an amazing network. Even then, companies will prioritize 90% of the time to do things internally rather than paying for anything. \- I hate when people say that "ideas are garbage", and I think that execution is overhyped. Execution is a matter of finding the right people, and paying them (I am confident to say that I can guarantee good execution). Ideas are not garbage, ideas need validation, and garbage "entrepreneurs" are too lazy to validate anything. ​ Your ideal profile: \- You have a great idea, something that has been brewing for some time but you lack resources or technical experience to execute by yourself. \- You have domain expertise, experience, and a network. If we build an MVP in 3 months, you can get 20 interviews with industry people to validate the solution. Once the MVP is built you can put it in front of another 40 people. \- You are a product person. \- You can do efficient sales calls. (Bonus: You are a sales person) If you are an ideal profile, please reach out.

voicefilter
github
LLM Vibe Score0.496
Human Vibe Score0.029786815978503328
maum-aiMar 24, 2025

voicefilter

VoiceFilter Note from Seung-won (2020.10.25) Hi everyone! It's Seung-won from MINDs Lab, Inc. It's been a long time since I've released this open-source, and I didn't expect this repository to grab such a great amount of attention for a long time. I would like to thank everyone for giving such attention, and also Mr. Quan Wang (the first author of the VoiceFilter paper) for referring this project in his paper. Actually, this project was done by me when it was only 3 months after I started studying deep learning & speech separation without a supervisor in the relevant field. Back then, I didn't know what is a power-law compression, and the correct way to validate/test the models. Now that I've spent more time on deep learning & speech since then (I also wrote a paper published at Interspeech 2020 😊), I can observe some obvious mistakes that I've made. Those issues were kindly raised by GitHub users; please refer to the Issues and Pull Requests for that. That being said, this repository can be quite unreliable, and I would like to remind everyone to use this code at their own risk (as specified in LICENSE). Unfortunately, I can't afford extra time on revising this project or reviewing the Issues / Pull Requests. Instead, I would like to offer some pointers to newer, more reliable resources: VoiceFilter-Lite: This is a newer version of VoiceFilter presented at Interspeech 2020, which is also written by Mr. Quan Wang (and his colleagues at Google). I highly recommend checking this paper, since it focused on a more realistic situation where VoiceFilter is needed. List of VoiceFilter implementation available on GitHub: In March 2019, this repository was the only available open-source implementation of VoiceFilter. However, much better implementations that deserve more attention became available across GitHub. Please check them, and choose the one that meets your demand. PyTorch Lightning: Back in 2019, I could not find a great deep-learning project template for myself, so I and my colleagues had used this project as a template for other new projects. For people who are searching for such project template, I would like to strongly recommend PyTorch Lightning. Even though I had done a lot of effort into developing my own template during 2019 (VoiceFilter -> RandWireNN -> MelNet -> MelGAN), I found PyTorch Lightning much better than my own template. Thanks for reading, and I wish everyone good health during the global pandemic situation. Best regards, Seung-won Park Unofficial PyTorch implementation of Google AI's: VoiceFilter: Targeted Voice Separation by Speaker-Conditioned Spectrogram Masking. Result Training took about 20 hours on AWS p3.2xlarge(NVIDIA V100). Audio Sample Listen to audio sample at webpage: http://swpark.me/voicefilter/ Metric | Median SDR | Paper | Ours | | ---------------------- | ----- | ---- | | before VoiceFilter | 2.5 | 1.9 | | after VoiceFilter | 12.6 | 10.2 | SDR converged at 10, which is slightly lower than paper's. Dependencies Python and packages This code was tested on Python 3.6 with PyTorch 1.0.1. Other packages can be installed by: Miscellaneous ffmpeg-normalize is used for resampling and normalizing wav files. See README.md of ffmpeg-normalize for installation. Prepare Dataset Download LibriSpeech dataset To replicate VoiceFilter paper, get LibriSpeech dataset at http://www.openslr.org/12/. train-clear-100.tar.gz(6.3G) contains speech of 252 speakers, and train-clear-360.tar.gz(23G) contains 922 speakers. You may use either, but the more speakers you have in dataset, the more better VoiceFilter will be. Resample & Normalize wav files First, unzip tar.gz file to desired folder: Next, copy utils/normalize-resample.sh to root directory of unzipped data folder. Then: Edit config.yaml Preprocess wav files In order to boost training speed, perform STFT for each files before training by: This will create 100,000(train) + 1000(test) data. (About 160G) Train VoiceFilter Get pretrained model for speaker recognition system VoiceFilter utilizes speaker recognition system (d-vector embeddings). Here, we provide pretrained model for obtaining d-vector embeddings. This model was trained with VoxCeleb2 dataset, where utterances are randomly fit to time length [70, 90] frames. Tests are done with window 80 / hop 40 and have shown equal error rate about 1%. Data used for test were selected from first 8 speakers of VoxCeleb1 test dataset, where 10 utterances per each speakers are randomly selected. Update: Evaluation on VoxCeleb1 selected pair showed 7.4% EER. The model can be downloaded at this GDrive link. Run After specifying traindir, testdir at config.yaml, run: This will create chkpt/name and logs/name at base directory(-b option, . in default) View tensorboardX Resuming from checkpoint Evaluate Possible improvments Try power-law compressed reconstruction error as loss function, instead of MSE. (See #14) Author Seungwon Park at MINDsLab (yyyyy@snu.ac.kr, swpark@mindslab.ai) License Apache License 2.0 This repository contains codes adapted/copied from the followings: utils/adabound.py from https://github.com/Luolc/AdaBound (Apache License 2.0) utils/audio.py from https://github.com/keithito/tacotron (MIT License) utils/hparams.py from https://github.com/HarryVolek/PyTorchSpeakerVerification (No License specified) utils/normalize-resample.sh from https://unix.stackexchange.com/a/216475

business-document-processing
github
LLM Vibe Score0.341
Human Vibe Score0.023080316664879252
SAPMar 21, 2025

business-document-processing

Python Client Library for the SAP AI Business Services: Document Classification and Document Information Extraction This repository contains the source code of a Python client library to facilitate the use of the SAP AI Business Services: Document Classification and Document Information Extraction. The client library provides two API Client classes that contain convenient methods to access these services and issue calls to the Document Classification REST API and Document Information Extraction REST API respectively. To use the library you need to have access to SAP Business Technology Platform. Check out the usage examples, they are very useful to get started with the services. Have a look at API documentation in order to use the library. Notes for users of the sap-document-classification-client library This library includes all the capabilities of the sap-document-classification-client, which will not be developed further. However, the code is still available here. If you want to switch to this library, you have to be aware of the following changes: The DCApiClient can now be imported directly from the top module via: The functions , , now return an iterator instead of a list. You can either analyze individual results using with within a try-catch block (e.g. to handle each failed document) or use to turn it to a list. The latter will raise an error if at least one document failed. The function now returns a list which is the "dataset" part of the API response json. (You just need to delete the \["dataset"\] from the response to work with it as until now) The function now returns a list which is the "results" part of the API response json. The function now returns a list which is the "models" part of the API response json. The function now returns a list which is the "deployments" part of the API response json. The library now raises the following custom exceptions: BDPApiException: Base exception for all exceptions of this library. Raise when no other exception is applicable. BDPClientException: Raised when an HTTP response with status code between 400 and 500 is returned. Usually means incorrect user input. (Replaces some HTTPErrors) BDPServerException: Raised when an HTTP response with status code between 500 and 600 is returned. Usually means that the server had some internal error. (Replaces some HTTPErrors) BDPUnauthorizedException: Raised when an HTTP response with status code 401 is returned. Usually means that a wrong OAuth credentials were provided. BDPFailedAsynchronousOperationException: Raised when an asynchronous job failed during processing. (Replaces FailedCallException) BDPPollingTimeoutException: Raised when an asynchronous job exceeds the set pollingmaxattempts. (Replaces PollingTimeoutException) The function now doesnt expect an 'url' and 'payload' parameters, but 'path' and 'json' parameters instead. Requirements This library requires properly setup Python 3.6 (or higher version) environment. Download and Installation This Python library should be consumed in the standard way by running or adding the library as a dependency of your code in requirements.txt` file. Demo usage Prerequisites: Get a Free Account on SAP BTP Trial Create Service Instance for Document Classification with Trial Account Create Service Instance for Document Information Extraction Document Classification To try out the Document classification service using the document classification client library you can also run the two demo links below: Try out classification using default model demo Try out training and classification using custom model demo (requires an enterprise account, trial account is not sufficient) Document Information Extraction Try out the Document Information Extraction service with this showcase Exercises Exercise 1 - Set up Document Information Extraction Service and UI Exercise 2 - Upload a document for extraction using UI application Exercise 3 - Visualize, correct extraction results and confirm document using UI application Exercise 4 - Get Auth token to use Document Information Extraction Rest API Exercise 5 - Get extraction results of document using Rest API Exercise 6 - Upload supplier Data for matching Exercise 7 - Upload document through Rest API to enrich the extraction Results with supplier data Known Issues Please see the issues section. How to obtain support In case you would like to contribute to this project, ask any questions or get support, please open an issue containing the description of your question or planned contribution in GitHub and we will get in touch. Licensing Please see our LICENSE for copyright and license information. Detailed information including third-party components and their licensing/copyright information is available via the REUSE tool.