Techin' Geek

In European cities, vehicles are becoming more compact than before. Yet, as the demand for microcars in Europe has increased, the charming Italian ‘yoghurt pots’ have been mostly replaced by diminutive Chinese electric vehicles. Even Smart, the renowned ultra-compact car manufacturer, has shifted production to China.

Spanish startup Liux believes it can make its mark in a saturated market by introducing a petite electric vehicle centered around sustainability.

Taking inspiration from the Microlino out of Switzerland, Liux aims to establish a niche for itself with its forthcoming microcar, the Liux Big. The name “Big” is meant ironically. It is compact enough to park perpendicularly to the curb; however, the name also symbolizes the lofty aspirations of a team that often deviates from conventional paths.

“The concept of a European car is non-existent,” asserted Liux co-founder Antonio Espinosa de los Monteros during an interview with TechCrunch. This unexpected perspective from the CEO of a startup whose vehicles are already making news for being “made in Spain” reveals much about the company’s focus.

The batteries in Liux’s vehicles are not produced in Europe, but they can be recharged at home, even with energy generated from solar panels. The vehicle is also designed for easy maintenance to mitigate the rapid obsolescence often seen in contemporary cars. Notably, its fiber body is crafted from a unique linen-based biocomposite, allowing for the material to be reclaimed and recycled later.

“It is clear to both David and me that recycling goes beyond theoretical concepts. You can recycle nearly anything in a laboratory. The recyclability of a product is tied to its construction,” stated Espinosa. “When creating a product, one must strive to maintain the material and component integrity so that a second life can be achieved.”

“Genuine circularity” is where Espinosa’s experience lies; he previously co-founded Auara, a Spanish B Corp that sells natural mineral water in bottles that are both recycled and recyclable. Following a buyout of this successful brand by a larger entity, he and Sancho embarked on a new venture together.

In terms of vehicles, Sancho is at the wheel, focusing on minimizing emissions. His expertise involves engineering electric vehicles that can compete with gas-powered counterparts. Prior to Liux, he achieved notable success with the Bóreas, a hybrid supercar revealed at the 24 Hours of Le Mans in 2017. After parting ways with his previous partners, he collaborated with Espinosa to establish Liux.

Liux’s initial prototype, the Animal, merged their skills: The fully electric five-seater was constructed almost entirely from recycled or plant-based materials. However, after unveiling the SUV to the public in 2022, the co-founders decided to pivot. They recognized that their chances of obtaining homologation would be significantly improved with a smaller vehicle.

Fast forward to 2026, and Liux has obtained Europe-wide homologation for the Liux Big, which it anticipates launching in the first half of next year. Meanwhile, the company has expanded to 65 employees and is preparing to scale production across three plants in Spain.

These include the facility that TechCrunch visited in Azuqueca de Henares, situated roughly an hour’s drive from central Madrid.

Liux’s Azuqueca plant is compact as it employs Toyota’s “lean management” practices and handles only the final stages of production, according to its production head Beatriz Belda González, a Spanish engineer previously with BMW in Munich. However, its size should not be underestimated: Liux claims its production capacity could reach 20,000 vehicles annually by 2030.

It is still premature to evaluate market interest, but over 7,500 individuals have signed up for the waiting list for a Liux Big. Joining incurs no fee, but the list has provided the startup insights into its likely customers. The predominant demographic is urban residents aged 55 to 60, and Liux anticipates that the Liux Big will commonly serve as a secondary vehicle for households.

This might reduce expectations that microcars could rival conventional vehicle ownership, but as Espinosa stated, Liux must choose its challenges wisely. Instead of attempting to predict market trends and their pace, the startup remains open to collaborations with businesses managing B2B fleets and others that could facilitate the development of autonomous vehicles.

For Espinosa, the Liux Big has the potential to make a positive impact by delivering a more sustainable and affordable alternative. The startup has yet to finalize the price, but indicated it will be under €18,000 — approximately $21,000 — before any possible EV incentives. This positions it at the upper end of the microcar price spectrum, yet Liux aspires for it to exceed expectations — both in weight and performance.

Celso Fernández Llorens, head of R&D at Liux, noted that weight and size restrictions pose significant challenges in this sector. He believes most microcars share similar traits, even though European regulations distinguish ultralight L6e four-wheelers from slightly heavier L7e models. However, Liux has navigated these limitations to optimize its L7e homologation.

Through a series of thoughtful choices, the startup successfully incorporated a 260-liter trunk into the vehicle. However, a larger focus has been ensuring that users feel as though they are driving a car rather than a two-wheeled vehicle. This aspect is closely linked to safety, according to Sancho: one would not want a vehicle that is lightweight simply because its structure cannot endure an impact or that risks toppling during turns.

With this perspective, even though its category does not demand crash tests, Liux has been rigorously testing and demonstrating the Liux Big’s abilities to navigate slaloms, brake, and execute various maneuvers. The startup showcased some of these functionalities to TechCrunch during a short ride and test drive of its forthcoming off-road model.

Currently, its primary model will be available in two variants: 15 kWh and 20 kWh. A cargo version is also in the pipeline, and with Sancho aboard, the inclination to develop a supercar is always present. In a LinkedIn update, the company mentioned it does not aim to be “a one-car brand.”

First, however, Liux plans to utilize the €16 million it has raised so far (about $18.5 million, including European grants) to launch the urban variant of the Liux Big in collaboration with car dealerships throughout Europe.

The showroom where we convened also serves as a precursor to Liux’s future customer interaction experience, according to head of brand Ana Terrado Leyva. She pointed out features such as textile screens, 3D displays illustrating the Liux Big’s three color options — which is two more than the Ford T — and a linoleum floor as a tribute to linen. These design choices, she explained, signify another way Liux hopes to differentiate itself from its Chinese rivals.

Perhaps the notion of a European car truly does exist.

Elon Musk claims he has discovered a method to resolve one of AI’s major obstacles by personally creating a challenging-to-produce turbine component.

On Saturday, Musk validated the purpose of a clandestine facility SpaceX has been erecting in Bastrop, Texas, appearing in response to a report that was already narrowing in on the specifics. Earlier that day, The Information released a story referencing job postings that clearly mention a “blades and vanes foundry,” alongside information from Corey Trinetti, a diligence expert who provides comprehensive evaluations of AI infrastructure sites in his newsletter, reporting that SpaceX acquired approximately 830 acres adjacent to its existing Starlink factory in Bastrop between March and June.

“SpaceX and Tesla are each rapidly constructing 100GW/year of solar generation capacity,” Musk stated on X on Saturday, “but natural gas will still be essential to support and initiate solar for several years. The limiting element for natural gas turbine production is the casting of the blades & vanes. By conducting in-house casting at SpaceX, we can expedite the availability of natural gas turbines by as much as 18 months, which is a significant game-changer.”

The rationale behind all this relates to one of the most substantial hurdles currently confronting the AI sector. GPU shortages remain problematic — for instance, Nvidia’s latest Blackwell chips still face lead times stretching several months — but an additional limitation has arisen, specifically regarding the physical power grid. The International Energy Agency anticipates that electricity consumption in global data centers will approximately double by 2030, and gas turbine manufacturer GE Vernova indicates that it has effectively exhausted its production capacity through 2030, primarily due to the demands of AI infrastructure.

This scarcity is prompting hyperscalers, like Amazon, Google, Meta, OpenAI, and Microsoft, to develop private gas-fired plants adjacent to data centers, rather than relying on the grid. After years of focusing on wind and solar, they are all now investing in natural gas to bring data centers online more rapidly.

Regarding the casting bottleneck itself, as reported by The Information, the blades within a gas turbine’s hottest section operate at temperatures around 3,000 to 3,600 degrees Fahrenheit, which is approximately 800 degrees higher than the melting point of the metal alloy from which they are constructed. This is feasible only because of the blades’ internal cooling channels and thermal-barrier coatings, in addition to the specialized method employed for casting each blade. Merely four companies worldwide have acquired enough expertise in the casting process to manufacture them on an industrial scale, and all of them are currently at capacity.

What complicates matters further is that each blade must be cast as a single, uninterrupted crystal, cultivated slowly within a vacuum furnace, devoid of microscopic seams that allow regular cast metal to fracture under pressure. This process is already intricate for smaller blades utilized in jet engines; the blades in power-plant turbines are significantly larger, making defect-free production at that scale even more challenging.

Should SpaceX succeed in this endeavor — and it is undoubtedly easier said than done — it would imply that a Musk-controlled organization possesses a manufacturing capacity that all other AI infrastructure builders are currently reliant on a small oligopoly for, giving SpaceXAI a competitive advantage that is hard for any well-funded yet non-manufacturing rival to replicate quickly.

However, this would also mean an increase in gas turbines being deployed swiftly, and existing turbines are already facing federal lawsuits and peer-reviewed health studies regarding the pollution they release.

In Memphis, where SpaceXAI has been operating gas turbines to power its Colossus data centers since 2024, the NAACP has consistently accused the corporation of running turbines without the necessary permits or pollution controls mandated by federal regulations. The organization is concerned that such turbines release smog-forming compounds and hazardous substances like formaldehyde, pollutants associated with asthma, respiratory illnesses, and certain types of cancer. (The location is near neighborhoods that already experience significant industrial pollution, and researchers from the University of Memphis indicated that in their own limited analysis, air pollution had worsened “slightly” due to the data center.)

But Memphis is merely the most conspicuous instance. The same struggle is unfolding wherever gas turbines have become the standard solution for power shortages in data centers. In Virginia’s “Data Center Alley,” a study commissioned by the Piedmont Environmental Council, utilizing the EPA’s COBRA health-impact model, found that emissions from a single facility’s eight full-time gas turbines could impact over 2.5 million individuals across various counties — with the most severe effects falling on already marginalized communities — resulting in an estimated 3.4 to 6.5 additional premature deaths per year, equating to $53 million to $99 million in annual health-related damages.

The list of concerns and complaints continues.

Welcome back to TechCrunch Mobility, your central hub for the evolution of transportation, especially regarding the increasing impact of AI. To receive this in your inbox, subscribe here for free — simply click TechCrunch Mobility!

Supporters of autonomous vehicle technology have consistently claimed that robotaxis and other self-driving cars will lessen accident rates and enhance roadway safety. Some evidence supports this. However, it does not negate the fact that there have been consequences for those employed (or previously employed) by the firms creating this technology. 

Sean O’Kane, senior reporter for special projects, examined data reported to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and discovered that test drivers for Waymo and Zoox experienced over two dozen injuries in 2024 and 2025 due to sudden braking or other abrupt actions taken by the autonomous vehicles. In certain instances, these employees faced months off work after sustaining injuries such as whiplash from the AVs halting unexpectedly and forcefully.

Read his complete story, which features interviews with both former and current personnel. 

There’s a crucial point to contemplate. You may be wondering, what about other AV developers? Surely, this issue isn’t exclusive to Waymo and Zoox? You’re likely correct. It is probable that test drivers for other AV developers are facing injuries too, but the companies they represent could be exempt from the reporting obligations of OSHA.

Have a suggestion for us regarding this story or others? Contact Kirsten Korosec at [email protected] or reach her via Signal at kkorosec.07, and Sean O’Kane at [email protected].

Deals!

I have been following Gatik, the autonomous vehicle company recognized for its self-driving box trucks, since 2019 when it emerged from its “stealth” phase. At that time, I was uncertain about the startup’s viability. The hype cycle had been rapidly discarding AV startups, and no one appeared near to commercializing their technology. 

Gatik not only persevered but has transitioned from research and development to commercial operations, though on a smaller scale compared to conventional human-operated delivery firms. (The company’s box trucks are unmanned and transport goods from distribution hubs to retail outlets such as Walmart.) With $200 million in new funding, it’s now aiming to expand. The funding round was led by Qatar Investment Authority and Koch Disruptive Technologies, with contributions from Millennium Management, ARK Invest, and Intact Private Capital. 

This represents Gatik’s most significant funding round thus far. However, I would argue that its multi-year commercial partnership with PepsiCo, signed in June and part of a total of $600 million in contracted revenue, is even more substantial. 

Other noteworthy deals …

Airbound, an Indian company focused on autonomous drones, secured $37 million in a Series A funding round led by Greenoaks, with participation from DoorDash, Lachy Groom, Lightspeed, and Humba Ventures.

Mubadala Capital, the alternative asset management division of Mubadala Investment Company, agreed to acquire a majority equity stake in Arrive Logistics, a truckload brokerage located in Austin.  

Regent Craft, a startup from Rhode Island creating and producing electric seagliders, raised $120 million in a Series B round co-led by Mare Liberum and AE Ventures. (The seaglider falls under a category of vehicle known as a wing-in-ground effect vehicle, or WIG.) Regent also obtained around $120 million in debt funding from Erebor Bank, established by Palmer Luckey, the founder of Anduril Industries. A point of interest about Regent, a company I have tracked for some time: The startup, which recently completed its 255,000-square-foot seaglider factory, is evidently advancing deeper into the defense sector, likely due to the available funding and partnership opportunities.  

Vista Global Holding, a private aviation entity based in the UAE, is contemplating a European IPO that might generate over $1 billion, as reported by Bloomberg.

Noteworthy reads and other updates

As per a recent YouGov survey, a larger proportion of Americans oppose police license plate cameras than support their use. What’s your take? Send me an email with your thoughts. 

Any, a startup producing electric two-wheelers from Belgium, is betting on cargo capacity. 

General Motors is under heightened examination from U.S. safety officials following numerous incidents, including over 20 crashes or fires, and at least six injuries linked to brake malfunctions in its electric vehicles.

Ford has appointed Dave Carroll as president of its energy division. Carroll, who previously worked with ENGIE North America, will take over from longtime executive Lisa Drake.

Rivian CFO Claire McDonough is stepping down and will depart by the end of October. Her tenure at Rivian coincided with a challenging yet exhilarating (ahem IPO) phase for the company. Her exit occurs at another pivotal juncture for Rivian as it embarks on some of its largest endeavors to date, including the robotaxi agreement with Uber and scaling production of its R2 SUV. 

Uber is rolling out a fresh live video streaming function allowing parents to monitor their kids during rides. 

Waymo shared ten insights gained from having their vehicles cover over 200 million autonomous miles. The foremost insight — that multimodal sensors are essential — garnered significant attention as it directly counters Tesla’s focus on camera-only systems. There were additional insights that caught my eye, including Waymo’s endorsement of vision language models (which are increasingly prominent). 

In the meantime, Waymo is advancing internationally, announcing plans to establish operations in Munich, Germany. 

One more thing …

A significant clarification regarding what I mentioned last week. You may recall that Waymo provided details about its custom silicon chip — specifically a 5 nm ASIC chip designed to manage the extensive influx of raw data prior to reaching the core “brain” of the autonomous system. Waymo stated in its blog entry:

“While these ASICs alone deliver over 1,000 TOPS of ML performance dedicated to front-end processing and ML models, we optimize across the full stack to maximize achieved performance, especially in the low-batch regimes we often operate.”

That statement led me, along with others, to conclude that a single chip could deliver 1,000 TOPS (trillions of operations per second) of computing performance. I compared it to Nvidia’s Drive AGX Thor automotive processor, noting the similar capabilities. 

However, one attentive reader reached out with inquiries, leading me to seek official clarification from Waymo. A spokesperson for Waymo indicated, “It’s for the system, not a single chip.”

This is a vital distinction.

Almost every organization aiming to implement artificial intelligence encounters a similar issue: integrating the technology into routine practices is challenging. Industrial giant Caterpillar has spent many years tackling a version of that dilemma in the physical realm, and now it’s leveraging that experience to integrate AI.

Caterpillar’s venture into autonomy initiated with mining, where labor shortages and dangerous conditions create a significant need for automation. Currently, it offers automated haul trucks, drilling equipment, underground loaders, dozers, remote-controlled construction machinery, and more. Additionally, it provides software command centers, fleet management, and remote terrain intelligence as part of its autonomous technology suite.

“We are now in a thrilling era where we can apply all that knowledge from mining and extend it to more dynamic environments like jobsites, quarries, and construction locations,” stated the company’s CTO, Jaime Mineart, to TechCrunch during the Ai4 conference in Las Vegas earlier this month.

The industrial behemoth is now extending AI applications more broadly, including in tools utilized by technicians and its internal team. One instance is the Cat AI Assistant, allowing field technicians beside a machine to use voice commands for accessing repair procedures, troubleshooting issues, and pinpointing necessary parts prior to starting a repair. Mineart noted that the tool is currently used by customers, operators, and technicians alike.

The assistant relies on Caterpillar’s exclusive data, drawn from insights produced by its connected machinery. Mineart mentioned that Caterpillar has approximately 1.6 million connected assets worldwide and over 16 petabytes of structured information.

The organization is also utilizing AI to enhance software for site scanning and creating digital twins in manufacturing to scrutinize operations, she added. Similar to nearly all companies, Caterpillar is employing AI across its business processes, as well as in software development. “We implement AI agents to modernize outdated code, generate and test new software, and detect faults early on,” Mineart stated.

However, Mineart emphasizes that constructing the technology is merely part of the hurdle, as deploying an autonomous machine differs from altering a site to incorporate AI. Organizations must also reconsider how personnel collaborates with the technology and how existing procedures need adjustment.

“The challenging aspect of autonomy and physical AI is integrating that technology into the customer jobsite and into the workflows,” she explained.

Mineart mentioned that the company relies on seasoned operators to assist in training AI systems, harnessing institutional knowledge accumulated over years. As machines grow more autonomous, some operators may transition from managing a single machine to overseeing multiple machines from a remote command center.

This transition, however, presents a new obstacle for Caterpillar: training its 118,000 workforce. Mineart indicated that the organization plans to invest $100 million over the next five years to educate its employees in AI, autonomy, and robotics.

This investment is likely aimed at helping the company capitalize on the wider surge in AI infrastructure, which is already benefiting its revenue. Caterpillar’s quarterly earnings hit a record $20.5 billion in the second quarter, buoyed by robust demand for power-generation equipment utilized in data centers. Its power-generation segment experienced a 72% increase in sales, reaching $3.10 billion, with CEO Joe Creed stating that “no one is slowing down” regarding the demand for cloud computing and generative AI infrastructure.

At TechBBQ in Copenhagen, discussions among investors, founders, and operators from various parts of Europe revolved not merely around building with AI but rather around who ought to wield control over it. Regardless of your location during the annual Nordic conference—whether onstage, during cocktail hours, or at after-parties—the dialogue continually returned to how Europe could assert greater control over the technology driving AI.

This inquiry into sovereignty—fittingly aligned with this year’s theme of “Emerging from Agency”—was particularly pertinent following the unavailability of Anthropic’s AI models Mythos and Fable to users outside Europe earlier this year.

The situation prompted many within the European ecosystem to seriously contemplate the implications of owning the models and the infrastructure supporting this AI surge, rather than depending on the U.S. and China for that power.

One startup executive remarked to me that the Mythos and Fable incident significantly disrupted his software team, while another downplayed its impact. Indeed, the startup executive acknowledged that relying on two other geopolitical powers for AI could one day lead to considerable challenges for Europe, but at present, things remain largely satisfactory. 

“TechBBQ’s theme of agency felt especially relevant this year as the dialogue shifted from what AI is capable of to what we are genuinely prepared to allow it to do,” Ellen de Brever, an angel investor and head of partnerships at the Novo Nordisk Foundation Cellerator, shared with me during the conference that concluded on August 27.

Panels addressed the future of women’s health, a summit on collaboration between Nordic and African ecosystems for innovation and investment, and discussions on increasing the flow of growth capital into Europe. Although AI served as a common thread in numerous conversations, as de Brever noted, “the debates centered not on smarter machines, but on human judgment and who retains control.” 

“The era of AI agents isn’t solely about machines gaining agency,” she elaborated. “It’s about humans determining what to relinquish.” 

An attendee mentioned that one of the most invigorating sessions at the event was the panel featuring Signal President Meredith Whittaker, which I moderated, centered on whether privacy and AI can coexist. Whittaker was forthright and expressed strong opposition to the integration of AI assistants and agents into operating systems, akin to ChatGPT’s implementation with iMessage.

She stated that this AI epoch is establishing a “data collection apparatus” and that AI labs are utilizing savvy marketing tactics to obscure “the collateral consequences” of amassing so much data. 

“There remains a substantial market demand for privacy,” she remarked. “And especially in light of sovereignty concerns, we will find customers here.” 

In another session, Emad Mostaque, co-founder of Stability AI and Intelligent Internet, joined me on a panel discussing how an agentic workforce will influence the economy and its implications for personal sovereignty.

“Sovereignty is the capacity to resist power exerted over you,” Mostaque stated. He discussed the accumulation of power within a few AI labs, asserting that “eventually, every nation will be governed by AI and that ‘the person controlling the AI governs the nation.’” 

Mia Negru, the advocacy and engagement director for the nonprofit Life With Artificials, reached out to me post-panel to share her reflections.

“If intelligent agents take on cognitive tasks and robots increasingly handle physical work, we might be on the cusp of something far greater than another technological revolution,” she conveyed in her message. “We could need to reconsider ownership, labor, democracy, economic engagement, and ultimately who gets to be part of society.” 

However, when the panels wrapped up, attendees relaxed at happy hours and rooftop soirées, where lighter conversations eventually dominated.

Lovable, Nvidia, OpenAI, AWS Startups, and HSBC collaborated to sponsor a rooftop barbecue where I conversed with founders regarding the emerging tech hubs in Denmark.

London’s Ada Ventures hosted a gathering at the cocktail bar Bird, where I spoke with a health tech founder about the surge of innovation in the women’s brain health sector. Subsequently, there was the speakers’ dinner on an island in the heart of Copenhagen where the international press gathered to enjoy fire dancers. The after-party carried on upstairs, with guests tempted to linger for one last drink until the bar tab was closed.

“In a setting filled with discussions about machines, the most unforgettable experiences still arise from the most straightforward interactions,” de Brever reflected. “Human connection, face-to-face, forging relationships, exchanging ideas, and reminding each other of what technology can never truly replace.” 

Vijay Pande was once more recognized in academic communities than in investment ones. This changed suddenly about twelve years ago when Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz — who had dedicated the first five years of their firm to steering clear of healthcare and life sciences — opted to invest in the sector, entrusting Pande with the initiative. At that time, he was a chemistry professor at Stanford, best known for creating Folding@home, the distributed computing project that enabled millions of personal computers to function as a supercomputer for disease research. Over the following decade, he expanded a16z’s investment into a venture managing nearly $4 billion.

Thus, it was somewhat surprising when Pande decided to leave it all behind in June of last year to embark on a much smaller venture. In fact, his new firm, VZVC, co-founded with long-time investor Zach Werner, centers around a limited number of concentrated bets each year rather than numerous ones, has no staff, and significantly relies on AI for its daily operations.

To dive deeper into Pande’s significant shift, we engaged him this week on why he is focusing on a few concentrated bets instead of spreading himself too thin in today’s market — as well as addressing one of the more intriguing dilemmas in AI-driven biotechnology: unlike textual data, biological information cannot be extracted from the internet, causing almost every company to develop its own isolated dataset. What implications does this hold for the advancements that AI in medicine has promised, and who actually gains access to these innovations?

This discussion has been edited for brevity and clarity. You can also listen to the full conversation (below).

You mentioned that biology is transitioning from a “science of discovery” to something that can be engineered. What does that entail?

Historically, drug development has involved a fair amount of luck. I believe the change now is that AI and machine learning enable computers to process and understand complex concepts… to determine which targets your drugs should aim for regarding specific diseases, to create those drugs, and now even to assist in clinical trials — the most costly phase of the process.

I thought clinical trials were becoming less expensive due to drug developers utilizing more synthetic data, thus requiring fewer participants.

That’s certainly a goal.

The expenses and duration for reaching clinical trials have been decreasing, especially with AI, yet executing a trial can still cost hundreds of millions of dollars, explaining why medications are so pricey. The odds of a drug progressing successfully from the initial trial to the conclusion of the third trial are merely 20%. If 8 out of 10 fail, and these processes cost hundreds of millions, the overall financial burden becomes extremely high. Typically, the cause of failure isn’t because of error from the biologist, but rather that all the tests these drugs were based on utilized animal models like mice, which are ultimately poor predictors for human outcomes. The AI model won’t be flawless, but it’ll surpass any animal model, and once it achieves that, it becomes really thrilling.

[The following phase is]: Is this drug appropriate for me?

You refer to personalized medicine. . .

The term used here is precision medicine. When individuals consult a doctor for something significant, the physician often has to make educated guesses about the situation since their capabilities are limited. Subsequently, they prescribe a medication — if that fails, another is provided, followed by yet another. This pattern occurs in cancer and various areas. We would all benefit significantly if the initial drug was the correct one. Typically, your blood test outcomes are compared to population norms. However, they should truly be compared to: is this [result] unusual for you? What we are also beginning to achieve on the medical front is [the capacity] to comprehend what would be appropriate for the individual.

Would you say the progression to this point has been gradual and consistent, or has there been a recent surge?

I believe it’s a collection of various factors [coming together]. For example, precision medicine has long relied on genomics. However, the truth is that your genome is somewhat like the original blueprint of your house; yet your home has altered considerably since its construction. There are numerous other elements now measurable in proteomics and more that are much more pertinent for comprehending diseases and your current bodily state. Moreover, there has been substantial automation in robotic measurements that integrates well with AI, complementing each other effectively.

Over the last decade, there’s been a steady progression in both AI for biology and AI for chemistry. The biology aspect focuses on how we can treat a disease, while the chemistry facet deals with how we can develop a drug targeting that specific protein. Notably, there have been substantial advancements in those ten years.

You indicated that biology is one of the few domains from which AI cannot simply extract data from the internet. How does this impact the evolution of the field?

This domain lacks the data that allows everyone to train comparable models, and your data cannot easily transfer between models. It’s a fascinating scenario from a purely AI perspective.

Doesn’t that reflect a familiar challenge in medicine — healthcare professionals working within [territorial, frequently competitive] silos?

You’re touching upon a significant issue here. Consider a patient diagnosed with a type of cancer that involves both oncology and endocrinology; these two specialists often don’t coordinate well. The intriguing aspect of AI is that it can, in theory, function as a specialist across disciplines, potentially observing patterns that any individual physician couldn’t perceive. It’s akin to assembling a team of top-notch doctors collaborating instantaneously.

Is there sufficient data sharing for that vision to become a reality? I understand the motivation for founders and investors to safeguard their [individual findings], but . . .

I believe a significant trend is emerging where we’re witnessing a shift towards compiling atlases of biological information — which, from a technological perspective, typically involve foundation models. As these become more prevalent, I anticipate we will observe a trend similar to the one observed with open-source LLMs, which outperform corporate counterparts: open-source foundation models in biology having a wide-reaching effect.

You’re affiliated with Genesis Therapeutics, which originated from your lab at Stanford, and Insitro, the drug discovery firm launched by Daphne Koller, a former Stanford colleague. You also mention incubating a company with a founder you have known for 20 years. What attributes do you seek in founders, and in what sectors?

I’ve primarily focused on two areas. One is AI for healthcare delivery, where I have considerable experience from a16z, and the other is AI for clinical trials.

One of the most crucial aspects for me [regarding founders] is establishing mutual trust — founders who demonstrate high integrity and follow through on their commitments… I envision this collaboration lasting well into the future, ideally, extending over the next 5 to 10 years and beyond, as they develop their next company. I want to work with individuals who prioritize long-term thinking, not just competitive success, but genuinely pondering the question: how can we succeed together?

What do you think you’ve achieved correctly and incorrectly in your investment journey so far?

When I first began discussing AI, machine learning, technology, and bio-medicine over a decade ago, I faced considerable resistance, with many asserting, ‘Oh, that will never materialize. It won’t be useful,’ and so forth. That skepticism has largely dissipated, and witnessing this progression has been immensely rewarding.

I suppose it took me time to fully grasp that while the allure of the most advanced technologies is undeniable, the core always comes back to go-to-market strategy. I remind my founders, particularly those from scientific or product backgrounds, to channel their brilliance and creativity towards the go-to-market strategy since that aspect is at least as challenging, if not more so, than the technical side.

Can you elucidate how you’re structuring this new firm differently compared to your previous experience at a16z?

Currently, we are operating in a distinctly different manner… VZ is named after myself, Vijay, and my co-founder, Zach Werner — the “Z.” We intentionally maintain a smaller size… from an investment standpoint, it’s just the two of us. Initially, we planned to hire associates, but we discovered that with our existing networks, that wasn’t necessary.

What does “concentrated” really mean?

We’re [not] aiming for 30 investments per year… we’re looking at approximately five, not many — very concentrated. Adding a company in a typical fund is akin to adding a Facebook friend — it’s a quick process. For Zach and me, it’s more like… wanting to have another child. It’s a significant decision for us.

Given this structure, who are you up against for deals?

Interestingly, with this model, we aren’t typically competing for top rounds — people often create opportunities for us. It’s a markedly different approach compared to pursuing desirable Series A or B investments. Generally, others are eager to bring us on as investors due to the unique contributions Zach and I can make and our hands-on involvement. When I consider figures who inspire me, I look at someone like Antonio Gracias at Valor — he’s become well-known through the SpaceX deal, but he has been committed to his work for 20 years. What Thrive has accomplished with a more concentrated portfolio also serves as a real source of inspiration. Obviously, a16z remains part of my essence, but I see those other entities as newer influences on our perspective.

What trends do you believe are currently overhyped in AI and biotech?

The truth is that AI can uncover insights concealed from human comprehension. The nuance becomes complicated when claims arise that AI will solve everything. The hesitation stems not from mistrust in AI — it’s about skepticism regarding data quality. LLMs thrive due to the abundance of data available for training. When the necessary data simply isn’t present, AI cannot magically provide a solution to that issue.

Hollywood’s elite — individuals used to hefty eight-figure paychecks and lavish film locations — are now placing their bets on something much more compact: microdramas.

Microdramas are brief, scripted series meant for viewing on mobile devices. Episodes usually last just a few minutes and often incorporate soap opera-like narratives, intense plot twists, and cliffhangers crafted to keep audiences engaged and frequently paying for subsequent episodes.

This format gained popularity in China before rapidly expanding worldwide. Omdia anticipates that revenue generated by microdramas in the U.S. will hit $1.5 billion this year. An increasing number of applications have surfaced to take advantage of this trend, including ReelShort and DramaBox, with TikTok also joining the arena by launching its PineDrama app earlier this year.

Hollywood talent is now beginning to step in, either by featuring in fresh series, starting their own ventures, or funding platforms.

This shift is understandable. Film studios seek more economical and quicker methods to generate content, and numerous talents and crew are finding themselves out of work. Concurrently, TikTok, Instagram Reels, and YouTube Shorts are capturing a larger share of viewers’ focus, making microdramas an increasingly appealing sector within the entertainment field.

Here are some renowned personalities who are taking advantage of the microdrama phenomenon.

James Franco

The most recent notable Hollywood figure to enter this domain is James Franco, who stars in the series “Love, Lies & Frank,” available for streaming exclusively on Shortical.

Franco portrays the chief executive of an advertising firm who becomes embroiled in crime and werewolf-related chaos. The concept appears to follow a familiar structure typical of microdramas, filled with excessively dramatic sequences and a secret romance.

This project stands out as one of the pioneers produced under the new SAG-AFTRA verticals agreement, a union contract aimed specifically at low-budget microdramas. It offers an initial insight into how this format can open new avenues for actors and other talent in Hollywood.

Additionally, Franco’s participation has drawn interest for another reason: this venture signifies his attempt at a comeback after facing sexual misconduct allegations and a legal resolution in 2021. A review from Variety of the show was not particularly favorable, stating that the actor “seems to be sleepwalking through his lines.”

What motivated Franco to take on a microdrama role remains uncertain, yet his casting is still noteworthy. It is uncommon to see a prominent actor, who has earned millions and starred in major box office hits, take the lead in a small series intended for mobile viewing.

Issa Rae

Issa Rae stands out as a natural talent to welcome the microdrama surge. She was the creator and star of the 2011 web series “The Misadventures of Awkward Black Girl,” which propelled her career forward.

In May, Issa Rae’s company Hoorae Media collaborated with TikTok’s new PineDrama app to unveil “Screen Time,” a suspenseful tale centered on a double date that takes a sinister turn when an unidentified individual takes control of the television and forces the couples to face their secrets.

The series quickly emerged as a sensation, racking up nearly 75 million views within its first week and becoming the leading vertical series on TikTok and PineDrama at that moment. It eventually surpassed 150 million views.

Jesse Tyler Ferguson

“Modern Family” actor Jesse Tyler Ferguson is also entering the field with “Theater Kids Vs. Zombies,” an upcoming musical comedy for the vertical storytelling platform aTwist.

The concept aligns closely with what the title suggests: a group of theater students discovers their high school overrun by zombies and realizes that their best chance of survival involves staging a musical. 

Ferguson’s venture could be significant, as this series seems to diverge from the typical romance and soap-opera conventions dominating microdramas, instead embracing comedy and theater culture.

Taye Diggs

Taye Diggs not only featured in a microdrama but is also becoming more heavily invested in the field.

In January, Diggs was announced as the star and executive producer of “Off Limits & All Mine” for the platform CandyJar. He portrays a widowed entrepreneur who gets entangled in a secret romance with his best friend’s grown daughter.

More significantly, Diggs has established his own mobile-first vertical storytelling platform, Microhouse Films, aimed at granting filmmakers better control over the production and monetization of their works. The platform’s inaugural launch included eight projects, one of which is “Tides of Temptation,” a series developed in partnership with Lifetime.

This step is important because instead of merely joining the microdrama trend, Diggs is now contributing to shaping the industry itself.

Kim Kardashian

Kim Kardashian’s participation showcases another avenue through which celebrities are engaging in the industry. Although she has yet to star in a microdrama, she has already invested in the sector by putting her money behind GammaTime, alongside her mother, Kris Jenner, and other angel investors.