India’s Airbound bags $37M to take on trucks with rocket-like drones

India’s Airbound bags $37M to take on trucks with rocket-like drones

Airbound, an Indian startup building autonomous drones, has raised $37 million in fresh capital as it pushes to make moving goods through the air as cheap as trucking them by road.

The Series A round, led by Greenoaks with participation from DoorDash, Lachy Groom, Lightspeed, and Humba Ventures, comes less than a year after Airbound raised an $8.65 million seed round. With this funding, the three-year-old startup has raised nearly $50 million.

Airbound, and other startups in this nascent sector, argue that drones can move certain goods faster and cheaper than vehicles on the road. And while there have been successful deployments, drone delivery is still far from matching the scale and versatility of trucking.

Airbound is trying to close that gap by redesigning the aircraft to make it more competitive with ground transportation.

Conventional aircraft spend a lot of energy carrying their own weight rather than the payload, making flight expensive, particularly for moving smaller loads. Airbound’s answer is to build vertical-flight drones designed to weigh less than the cargo they carry, founder and CEO Naman Pushp said in an interview.

Airbound’s current drone, called TRT, weighs about 3.3 pounds and can carry around 2.2 pounds of payload. Its next version, currently under development, is expected to weigh about 6.6 pounds and be able to carry up to 11 pounds, Pushp told TechCrunch.

The startup uses a rocket-like, tail-sitter design for its drones, which takes off and lands vertically in an upright position before transitioning to horizontal flight. Pushp said Airbound intends to retain vertical takeoff and landing even as it develops larger aircraft to avoid dependence on runways.

“We want to build towards a world where everything has cost parity with trucking,” he said.

Founded in 2023, Airbound has completed more than 13,000 autonomous flights across the southern Indian cities of Bengaluru and Guntur, Pushp said. That includes more than 1,000 flights with the Indian hospital network Narayana Health, where its drones transport diagnostic samples between healthcare facilities.

The startup uses a single active drone on the Narayana route, flying diagnostic samples about 2.5 miles in around seven minutes. The same samples can take three to five hours to be transported by two-wheelers when factoring in the time spent waiting for enough samples to be bundled for road transport, according to Pushp.

That partnership is expanding to include Narayana’s new Banashankari hospital in Bengaluru, which was designed without an on-site diagnostic lab or blood bank and will instead rely on Airbound’s drones to connect with centralized facilities.

Three-city drone network

Airbound has set its sights on a far larger ambition to create a drone delivery network that connects three cities in the state of Andhra Pradesh. The startup has sign an agreement with the state government with an eventual target of 10,000 flights a day for retail, e-commerce, and healthcare deliveries. That daily flight target will require between 250 and 1,000 aircraft, depending on route lengths, though Pushp expects the number to be closer to 250.

The agreement does not involve a government contract or subsidy, Pushp said, adding that the Andhra Pradesh government is working with Airbound on the regulatory framework needed to enable the network. The startup expects to generate business from companies using it for deliveries.

Indian startups including Skye Air Mobility and TSAW Drones are already building aerial logistics businesses, while other Indian drone makers such as Garuda Aerospace have also explored delivery use cases. Nonetheless, Pushp argues that Airbound wants to build the aircraft that other logistics networks could eventually use rather than just trying to become the largest delivery operator.

“That’s the Boeing role — the aircraft airlines everywhere rely on, not the airline itself,” he said.

Airbound designs and manufactures its aircraft in a 43,000-square-foot facility in Bengaluru, where it keeps work on the airframe and other core systems in-house. While Pushp declined to disclose its production capacity or how many aircraft the startup has built so far, he said manufacturing would not be the bottleneck as Airbound scales.

The bigger bottleneck, Pushp noted, is regulation, particularly securing approvals for beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS) operations, a certification that allows drones to fly beyond the direct sight of an operator and is critical to operating delivery networks at scale.

Those regulatory constraints have also limited Airbound’s ability to turn its flights into meaningful commercial revenue. Moreover, the startup remains broadly pre-revenue despite having a team of more than 150 employees.

“The goal is to be a giant in a few decades, not to make revenue as soon as we can,” Pushp said.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

Situational Awareness, star AI hedge fund that nearly imploded, now being probed by the SEC

Situational Awareness, star AI hedge fund that nearly imploded, now being probed by the SEC

Situational Awareness, the AI focused hedge fund that was Wall Street’s fleeting obsession, is having a very bad month.

The company, led by twentysomething OpenAI alum Leopold Aschenbrenner, went all-in on a variety of AI investments and, for a period, enjoyed phenomenal growth. Then, at the end of July, a downturn in AI stocks erased billions of dollars in value at the firm. Now, federal regulators are reportedly probing the company as well.

The New York Times reports that the Securities and Exchange Commission has been subpoenaing banks that did business with the hedge fund. The subpoenas focus on the banks that supervised the fund’s trading and that channeled funding to support it, the outlet says.

The government reportedly warned the banks to “preserve any information” about the hedge fund, though it noted that Situational Awareness has not been accused of any wrongdoing.

Situational Awareness did not respond to TechCrunch’s request for comment but told the Times that scrutiny of high-profile funds is to be expected, and that it would “cooperate to the fullest extent with any regulatory request.”

The company, which very publicly hitched its wagon to AI’s star, may serve as a cautionary tale about the industry’s supposedly unstoppable trajectory.

Trump bought SpaceX shares two weeks after blockbuster IPO

Trump bought SpaceX shares two weeks after blockbuster IPO

President Donald Trump bought as much as $50,000 worth of SpaceX shares on June 23, according to a financial disclosure first reported by Reuters, two weeks after the record-setting IPO of Elon Musk’s company.

It’s not clear what price Trump paid for the shares, but by that point they had fallen from their highs of over $200. SpaceX shares were trading in the mid-$150 range on June 23. At the end of trading on Monday, shares closed at the IPO price of $135, possibly putting the president’s stake underwater.

Trump and Musk are close, despite a brief falling out last summer that involved the businessman accusing the president of withholding the Department of Justice’s files on Jeffrey Epstein because of how often Trump’s name appears in them. SpaceX has been hoovering up an increasing amount of government contracts and benefiting from the Trump administration’s deregulatory stance, according to a recent Wall Street Journal analysis.

White House spokesman Davis Ingle told Reuters that the president’s stock portfolio is managed by third-party financial institutions and replicate “recognized indexes, such as the Schwab ​1000.” SpaceX lobbied popular indexes to change their rules to allow for faster inclusion ahead of its IPO, which means many people likely own some of the company’s stock even if they don’t know it.

Who’s behind the new ‘stealth model’ Ox Alpha

Who’s behind the new ‘stealth model’ Ox Alpha

A mysterious new AI model called Ox Alpha has driven certain corners of the internet into a frenzy of speculation about who actually built it.

The free model was released on OpenRouter on Thursday, where it was described as “a reasoning model designed for coding, sustained agentic work, and production workload.” On X, Stripe CEO Patrick Collison (whose company is acquiring OpenRouter) described Ox Alpha as “very impressive.”

So who’s actually behind Ox Alpha? The OpenRouter listing described it as a “stealth model” and said it was “developed and operated by a third-party provider who has chosen to remain anonymous during this preview.”

Unsurprisingly, much of the speculation has revolved around China. AI analyst Andrew Curran posted on Friday that the initial speculation focused on the GLM models developed by Chinese company Z.ai, but “this morning people seem less sure of anything.”

Similarly, an article on Wccftech first suggested that the evidence pointed to GLM, but an update suggested that Ox Alpha could be an unreleased version of Microsoft’s MAI. And on Reddit, there’s at least one post declaring that Ox Alpha “can’t be the Chinese,” while another expressed “high confidence” that it is, in fact, Chinese.

Uber faces fine of nearly $1B over automated driver suspensions

Uber faces fine of nearly $1B over automated driver suspensions

The Dutch Data Protection Authority is fining Uber €825 million (around $966 million) — the second largest penalty issued so far under Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation, according to Reuters.

The Dutch regulator was investigating complaints that Uber had deactivated driver accounts through an automated process without sufficient warning or human oversight. In a statement, deputy chair Monique Verdier said that the company had “committed serious infringements.”

“A computer should not make decisions on its own that have [such] major consequences,” Verdier said.

Uber, however, argued that most driver suspensions are brief, that no permanent deactivations take place without human review, and that drivers have the ability to appeal. (Dutch regulators said some drivers were permanently deactivated without human review, which Uber disputes.) The company said it will appeal the decision.

“We strongly disagree with this decision ​and disproportionate fine,” an Uber spokesperson told Reuters. TechCrunch has reached out to the company for additional comment.

Brahim Ben Ali, a former Uber driver in France, told the Dutch newspaper de Volkskrant that after his account was deactivated in 2019, he collected testimonies from 170 other Uber drivers and eventually brought his complaint to the Netherlands, where Uber’s European headquarters are located.

Ben Ali was assisted in this effort by a Swiss nonprofit focused on digital rights called PersonalData.io, which helped the drivers collect data about how the deactivation decisions were made. Founder Paul-Olivier Dehaye said a driver “can complete a thousand journeys with satisfied passengers, but if just one person reports a very serious problem, the consequences can be enormous.”

Dehaye told me that this is the third fine that the Dutch regulator has levied on Uber, following a €290 million fine over its handling of drivers’ personal data and a €10 million fine stemming from related issues. He also said he plans to start a class action suit through which drivers can seek compensation.

In fact, Dehaye said these fines all originate with complaints made by the same group of drivers. And he’s starting a new company called StartClaims to support the litigation and other regulatory action — first against Uber and then eventually expanding to other gig economy cases, as well as related areas like adtech.

While discussing the case with Dehaye (who I’ve known casually since college), I brought up a blog post by Daring Fireball’s John Gruber, in which Gruber worried that this fine makes it “unlawful in the EU for Uber to monitor its drivers for pulling scams against customers, or just never picking riders up, leaving them stranded.”

Gruber also took issue with Verdier’s statement, arguing, “Saying that ‘a computer’ made these decisions is like saying that when a company suspends or fires a habitually late employee, that ‘the time clock’ made the decision. Managers at the company set the policies, and the devices measure employee compliance.”

Dehaye countered that Gruber “misses the point.”

“Uber is free to use humans to punish drivers who scam, but then [it] has to take responsibility for this decision making (like ‘being an employer’, not ‘being a marketplace’),” he said.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

Linkdaze’s smart calendar is built to run a household, not just track a schedule

Linkdaze’s smart calendar is built to run a household, not just track a schedule

With back-to-school season approaching (or already here in some places), keeping track of everyone’s schedules can get pretty chaotic. Between work, school, appointments, sports, chores, and everything else going on, a regular paper calendar just doesn’t cut it. That’s where Linkdaze’s smart digital calendar comes in — a touchscreen tablet built specifically to organize a household rather than a single person. 

One of Linkdaze’s biggest strengths is its calendar compatibility. The system can synchronize calendars from popular services, including Google, iCloud, Outlook, Yahoo, and Cozi, which is a dedicated family-organizing app. This is particularly useful for families where different members use different platforms. Instead of asking everyone to switch to a single calendar app, Linkdaze brings multiple schedules together and uses color coding to make individual family members easy to identify.

Launched last December, Linkdaze is available in 15.6-inch and 10.1-inch models, giving you some flexibility depending on how much wall space you have. Beyond calendars and appointments, you can use it for chores and rewards, meal planning, shopping lists, and other family organization. It can even double as a digital photo frame for displaying family photos.

Image Credits:Linkdaze

The most interesting feature, however, is Linkdaze’s AI meal planner with “Snap-to-Sync.” Instead of manually entering everything into a meal-planning app, you can take a photo of a paper recipe or your kid’s school lunch menu. Linkdaze will turn that information into a digital meal plan and generate a shopping list from it. While not an entirely new idea, it’s a useful feature that helps Linkdaze stand out from a basic digital calendar.

Another big plus is that Linkdaze doesn’t require a monthly subscription for its main features. It’s an interesting choice in a category where recurring revenue has become the default. Skylight, a competing smart-calendar brand, offers additional features through its $79 per year subscription. For a hardware company entering a crowded smart-display market, that decision is either going to differentiate its product or look like a lost revenue stream.

Linkdaze is also less expensive up front, with the 10.1-inch model priced at $119.99 (currently discounted to $66 on Amazon) compared with Skylight’s 10-inch model starting at $149.99 (if you pay for the subscription.)

Overall, this device could make a practical gift for busy parents who are trying to keep everyone’s schedules in one place. It could also be a great fit for college apartments, where roommates can use it to coordinate chores, study schedules, shared meals, and other household responsibilities. It’s also very helpful for those of us juggling interviews, deadlines, meetings, and story assignments.

This post was first published on August 20, 2026.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

Two years after launch, Walmart’s Flipkart is closing in on India’s quick-commerce leaders

Two years after launch, Walmart’s Flipkart is closing in on India’s quick-commerce leaders

Indian startups spent years getting consumers accustomed to having groceries and everyday goods delivered within minutes. Now Walmart-owned Flipkart is rapidly closing the gap with those quick-commerce pioneers, as global rival Amazon mounts its own push into instant delivery.

Flipkart Minutes, which debuted in August 2024 as the e-commerce giant’s foray into quick commerce, is now delivering 1.1 million to 1.2 million orders a day, up from about 390,000 to 400,000 in November, people familiar with the matter told TechCrunch. That puts the two-year-old service close to Swiggy’s Instamart, which is delivering about 1.4 million orders a day, according to a person familiar with its operations.

The gap is notable as Flipkart is a relative latecomer to a market whose top ranks have been dominated by Instamart, Blinkit, and Zepto. Food-delivery giant Swiggy launched Instamart in 2020 and Zepto arrived the following year, both during the pandemic, while Blinkit traces its roots to online grocery platform Grofers, founded in 2013. The three have since established themselves as India’s top quick-commerce players.

Blinkit continues to dominate the market with around 3.4 million to 3.6 million daily orders, followed by Zepto at about 2.4 million to 2.6 million, per recent estimates from market research firm Datum Intelligence. Flipkart is now rapidly narrowing the gap with Instamart, the smallest of the three established leaders by order volume.

Instamart still has substantial scale. Earlier this month, Swiggy said the quick commerce service has more than 14 million monthly transacting users and operates over 1,200 dark stores across over 130 cities. The company has also been narrowing Instamart’s contribution-margin losses, with more than 45% of its dark-store network now contribution-margin positive.

Nonetheless, Flipkart has fueled that growth with an aggressive expansion of its delivery infrastructure. Minutes now operates about 1,020 to 1,050 micro-fulfillment centers — essentially small warehouses located close to customers specially to handle quick deliveries — up from 600 in January and about 340 a year ago, one of the sources told TechCrunch. The company is adding around 100 such facilities a month, the source said, aiming to have 1,500 by the end of 2026.

Flipkart’s advantage goes beyond adding dark stores. The company can tap an enormous pool of existing e-commerce customers it has already spent years and billions of dollars acquiring, giving Minutes a ready audience for faster deliveries, Satish Meena, an adviser at Datum Intelligence, told TechCrunch.

“Flipkart is already a serious player,” Meena said. “Once you open 1,000 dark stores and [are] doing a million orders per day, it’s serious enough.”

Minutes is also seeing customers return and shop more frequently. About 65% to 70% of customers making purchases on the service each month are repeat buyers, while transactions per customer have increased 50% to 60% from a year earlier, people familiar with the matter said.

Those customers are spending an average of about ₹400 to ₹500 (about $4.20–$5.20) per order, with fruits and vegetables, staples, dairy, and meat among the fast-growing categories, the sources said. Flipkart is also expanding its selection of higher-end gourmet products, including organic and artisanal items, as it looks to capture more of customers’ spending on Minutes.

Even as Minutes has expanded, its average delivery time has fallen to about 11 minutes, from 13 minutes a year ago, one of the sources told TechCrunch.

A battle for India’s shoppers

Flipkart’s growth comes as quick commerce takes a bigger role in how Indians shop online, even as broader consumer demand has shown signs of weakness. In a recent report, Bernstein analysts said while the country’s consumption growth softened in July, a shift toward quick commerce and e-commerce continued, with quick-commerce platforms recording healthy growth in monthly active users.

Similar to Flipkart, Amazon is striving to gain its share in the Indian quick-commerce market. The Seattle-based company has been expanding Amazon Now, its quick-commerce service, as it seeks to bring the instant-delivery model to its existing e-commerce customer base.

During CEO Andy Jassy’s visit to India in June, Amazon stated that Now became its fastest-growing business in India, with orders doubling every quarter since launch. The company also laid out plans to take the service to more than 300 cities and set up a network of more than 1,000 micro-fulfilment centers, alongside larger facilities aimed at expanding the range of products it can deliver within minutes.

Amazon, Flipkart, Swiggy, Zepto, and Blinkit parent Eternal did not respond to requests for comment.

The quick commerce expansion is increasingly defensive as well as offensive for both Flipkart and Amazon, Meena told TechCrunch. As consumers grow accustomed to receiving certain purchases almost immediately, the e-commerce giants risk losing those transactions to specialist quick-commerce platforms if they cannot offer comparable speed.

“Can you go back to scheduled delivery now in grocery? No,” Meena said. “You will not go back.”

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

Harvard’s $699 startup bootcamp offers AI avatars of its instructors

Harvard’s $699 startup bootcamp offers AI avatars of its instructors

As Harvard Business School seeks to expand its reach, it’s leaning on AI avatars to provide individual feedback.

These avatars were created by a startup called HeyGen and are included in the eight-week, $699 HBS Foundry bootcamp for entrepreneurs. The program offers live sessions with instructors every week, but the AI avatars are the ones providing feedback during practice pitches and board meetings.

New York Times reporter Sarah Kessler actually tried this out herself by pitching an AI-generated copy of Flybridge Capital co-founder Jeff Bussgang. Apparently, both the real Bussgang and his simulacra were unimpressed by her plan to build “Uber for bananas,” but Kessler said the virtual version offered a noticeably frozen smile during her pitch.

Project director Katharina Rings said she initially envisioned the AI component as something closer to a chatbot. However, after HBS released a trial version, students said they wanted a more guided experience.

And while some college students haven’t been shy about expressing their negative feelings towards AI, Foundry participants told Kessler they like the avatars. As for Bussgang, he acknowledged his digital copy is a little “creepy,” but he said, “My students love it.”

OpenAI says California should strengthen its AI safety bill

OpenAI says California should strengthen its AI safety bill

OpenAI is calling for California to add more safeguards to a landmark AI safety bill that was passed last year.

In a LinkedIn post from the company’s global affairs team, OpenAI said California’s SB 53 “should be amended to expand safeguards,” for example by “requiring monitoring of frontier models under training or evaluation for potential serious incidents,” and by “strengthening cybersecurity protections throughout the model-development lifecycle.”

“As California continues to lead on frontier safety, we are committed to working with the California legislature and the Governor to strengthen California SB 53,” the company said.

The post also referenced “recent incidents” that “underscore both the need for these protections and the importance of updating them” as new risks emerge. Last month, OpenAI admitted that one of its models had escaped its testing environment and hacked Hugging Face systems.

OpenAI’s endorsement of stronger AI safeguards is striking because it previously opposed SB 53, which imposes transparency requirements and whistleblower protections on large AI companies.

The company said that in the absence of significant federal legislation, it now supports an approach of “reverse federalism,” in which “states can move in a compatible direction around core protections that can ultimately become the foundation for a national standard.”

Michael Polansky is training an AI model on skin that’s still alive

Michael Polansky is training an AI model on skin that’s still alive

Michael Polansky is remarkably unassuming for someone operating in a corner of the world known for outsize egos.

Seated at a leafy patio outside a popular bakery in Mill Valley, an affluent town about 15 miles north of San Francisco, Polansky — bespectacled, his fresh face framed by dark hair shot through with gray — has the look and the friendly demeanor of a young professor.

He is, in fact, both the founder of a buzzy AI and biology startup called Outer Biosciences and the creative, business, and romantic partner to Stefani Germanotta — better known as Lady Gaga. It’s an unlikely double life. On the one hand, the couple invariably moves in the world that comes with celebrity; on the other, he’s running an outfit that has spent years figuring out how to keep living human tissue alive outside the body — for over a month, so far — without anyone outside the company knowing.

He didn’t see any of it coming. Polansky grew up in Minnesota and went on to Harvard, where he studied applied mathematics and computer science, graduating in 2006. Afterward, he logged three years at the hedge fund Bridgewater Associates — “a very unique place,” Polansky says over coffee, and one where he had “a really good experience,” even if it wasn’t a place he was going to “wake up and be excited about . . .every day.”

His pilgrimage from Bridgewater to Silicon Valley ran through Minnesota. By coincidence, Sean Parker’s assistant at the time had been Polansky’s neighbor growing up. At a 2007 wedding in their home state, she mentioned that Parker was looking for someone to work with him. Polansky already knew who Parker was and was looking to move west. The two had dinner in New York, “hit it off immediately,” and, as Polansky tells it, he quit Bridgewater the next day and moved to San Francisco.

He first landed a role as a principal at Founders Fund when the firm was run by its four original partners — Peter Thiel, Sean Parker, Luke Nosek and Ken Howery – with Polansky and another young principal at the time, Brian Singerman, sharing an office. “It was a really, really great experience,” Polansky says.

When Parker left Founders Fund after becoming liquid in his Facebook stock and wanted to build out his own family office, he brought Polansky with him. Polansky ran that office — handling Parker’s business, investment, and philanthropic interests, including helping stand up the Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy (where Polansky remains executive director) until COVID, when his life “moved in a different direction.”

That change had a lot to do with Germanotta. Polansky met her in late 2019 at one of Parker’s birthday parties. Charmingly, the meeting came at the urging of her mother, Cynthia Germanotta, president of the Born This Way Foundation, whom Polansky had come to know through his philanthropic work.

“She had said, you know, for months and months, ‘I want to set you up with my daughter,’” Polansky recalls. “I was like, I think you’re making fun of me.” She wasn’t. When their own mothers later met, he says, laughing, “it all made perfect sense.” (His mother and Germanotta’s mother are now close friends.)

Their relationship is a full partnership, professionally and personally. Notably, for Gaga’s most recent world tour, which began in July of last year and ended in April, the couple managed a massive operation across three 747s, something Polansky compares to running “a 200-person startup that travels around the world every day.”

It also includes Haus Labs, the cosmetics brand Germanotta initially built “on her kitchen floor,” Polansky says, instead of simply licensing her name to an existing company. That business, based in El Segundo, California, an operation with roughly 70 employees, is reportedly thriving.

Germanotta also sits on the board of Outer Biosciences, and the two companies collaborate at the margins. For example, Outer Biosciences’ chief scientist, Kyung-Jin Jang, sits on Haus Labs’ scientific advisory board, and the companies have run some joint projects.

Says Polansky, beaming as he talks about her from our sun-dappled table: “People really haven’t gotten to know a certain side of her publicly … She’s such a brilliant businessperson.”

From cancer to tissue in a dish

While Polansky is also a businessperson, he’s not a scientist. He got into life sciences “accidentally,” he says, through more than a decade spent alongside Parker in cancer immunotherapy, a field that was “very fringe” when they entered it.

Outer Biosciences, which Polansky founded in 2022 and where he is CEO, grew out of frustration that the pace of innovation in biology and chemistry has never matched software, in large part because there’s no ethical way to run experiments directly on people. Meanwhile, the proxies scientists rely on instead — animal models, simplified cell cultures, lab-grown organoids — are poor stand-ins for how a real human organ behaves.

So Outer Biosciences took a different approach. Instead of engineering a synthetic organ, the company sources human skin that would otherwise be discarded after surgery – mostly plastic surgery – through what it describes as vetted non-profit and commercial biobanks and brokers operating under “institutional review board oversight and documented donor consent,” principally the National Disease Research Interchange and the Cooperative Human Tissue Network. (Both outfits receive federal funding from the NIH and the National Cancer Institute without being federally operated.)

Polansky is careful to note that there is no single government tissue network that qualifies buyers. He says Outer Biosciences pays fees to these suppliers on a cost-recovery basis rather than purchasing tissue outright. He also says the company spent roughly two years on building that pipeline and handling the protocols required to receive that tissue “within hours” of surgery, while it’s still living.

Asked about the donors’ privacy, he says that every sample arrives already de-identified — stripped upstream by the supplying organizations of names, contact information and other direct identifiers. A proprietary support system developed by his team then feeds the tissue nutrients and removes metabolic waste, extending its viable life well past the industry norm.

That norm, by the way, is a matter of days. That’s enough time to test for acute toxicity, but not for slower biological processes like collagen remodeling, pigmentation change, or barrier repair that take weeks to unfold. (Dermatologists routinely tell patients to expect changes over a matter of weeks for this same reason.)

Outer Biosciences’ system meanwhile keeps tissue alive for up to a month, says Polansky, who says it retains its “day-zero architecture and preserves its day-zero epidermal, stromal and immune-associated molecular programs.” In plainer English, that means that 30-day-old tissue cared for by the company looks a lot like day-one tissue, but it isn’t fully indistinguishable from it.

Sunburn is one of the clearer examples of what that extra time buys Outer Biosciences. Polansky says that its researchers can induce UVB damage in living tissue, then track the stress, inflammatory, and recovery-related responses that follow over the following weeks as an information-gathering exercise. He says the team isn’t “healing” the skin but rather watching an injury happen and then watching the biology that follows it over time.

Perhaps anticipating pushback from the scientific community, Polansky is careful about how he frames the company’s achievements when this reporter asks questions about rival technologies. The startup’s value, he says, isn’t any one piece of what it’s doing but how the pieces fit together: human tissue that can be kept alive for weeks, a diverse donor pool that Outer Biosciences’ team can subject to controlled experimental conditions, and repeated molecular measurements taken along the way.

And it’s all fed into one, closed self-enforcing system. An AI model predicts which untested chemicals are likely to have a beneficial effect on a specific skin function. Those chemicals get run through the living-tissue system. Then the results, whether the prediction was right or wrong, get fed back into the model, improving the next round of guesses.

It’s a giant improvement from where things started, says Polansky. Early on, the company relied on a “brute force” approach, mining scientific literature and partnering with the National Cancer Institute on natural compounds from extreme environments. That phase produced a couple of leads over about 18 months, but with AI layered in, the company is now generating a new candidate roughly every six weeks, with six leads currently active in its pipeline and several dozen additional “hits” logged.

What makes that pace truly astonishing, Polansky says as the crowd around us thins out, is the size of the current universe of skin-active ingredients.

It’s almost impossible to know the exact number, but it’s small. “Active ingredient” means something different informally than it does formally. While the FDA maintains rules covering 13 categories of over-the-counter skin drugs (think sunscreen, antifungals), across all of them, only about 120 to 130 active ingredients are approved. Add cosmetic ingredients backed by actual research, says Polansky, and that number is closer to 200.

This, of course, presents opportunities.

Outer Biosciences is discovering cosmetic ingredients, not drugs, so there’s no FDA approval to seek out. Instead, the route runs through two steps: first, getting the ingredient a standardized industry name; then safety testing under guidelines set by the OECD, a Paris-based international body whose member countries agree to accept each other’s properly run studies — meaning a study done correctly in one participating country is accepted in the other 40-plus.

A partner outfit then commercializes the whole thing. Indeed, rather than build its own consumer brand, Outer Biosciences right now plans to license or sell its finished ingredients to beauty or pharma outfits that will then formulate these into actual products (a serum, a cream) and bring them to market under their own brands. Already, four of Outer Biosciences’ six current leads look likely to reach commercialization, Polansky says.

In the meantime, the company is generating money from collaborative research partnerships, including a pharmaceutical partner that’s studying why certain cancer drugs cause severe skin rashes, and consumer beauty brands that are testing whether Outer Biosciences’ data holds up against their own product-development and marketing needs.

If Polansky is raising more money for the company currently, he won’t say. To date, the company has raised roughly $23 million, with early backers including Calm Capital, Brighter Capital and Polansky’s own investing firm, Hawktail, among others. The company employs 19 people, with all but Polansky based just outside Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Asked why he’s chosen now to talk about the company after years of near-total silence — he says he barely discussed it even with close friends — Polansky points to the data the team is beginning to amass and the confidence that has given them. “Trying to do this in private is hard,” he says, as the wait staff start flipping chairs onto tabletops, signaling it’s closing time at the bakery. “We kind of want to start working in public now,” he adds, shrugging.

Outer Biosciences is not the only company chasing this idea, even if its use of real tissue, rather than synthetic, is distinctive.

Vivodyne — a Philadelphia-based competitor building lab-grown human organ tissue paired with predictive AI to replace animal drug testing — just this month announced it has raised close to $80 million to date, including a $38 million seed round and a $40 million Series A, both led by Khosla Ventures.

Other rivals are pursuing various flavors of organ-on-a-chip and microphysiological systems for preclinical testing.

Polansky doesn’t seem especially preoccupied with any of them — less, it seems, out of arrogance than because he seems to have his hands full. Besides, there’s plenty of room for everyone in this moment. Unlike AI companies training on scraping the internet, there is no “biology internet” to scrape.

And Outer Biosciences has two other reasons to focus on its own knitting. First, the data it generates doesn’t exist anywhere else, which, conceivably, makes the company’s position more defensible, if a lot slower, to build than “traditional” software-based AI startups. It’s also cheaper to run, with modest compute demands compared with training a large language model. In fact, all of the company’s AI work currently runs on-premise, not in the cloud, because “we don’t want the data in the cloud,” Polansky says.

Whether over time, Outer Biosciences becomes a standalone commercial-ingredients business, licenses its discoveries, or eventually reorganizes around a single breakout compound, Polansky says he hasn’t settled on – and the team doesn’t need to. The more important goal, he says, is a predictive model that’s accurate enough that the company can spot promising directions in skin biology without having to run every experiment physically first, opening up a rate of discovery in dermatology that doesn’t currently exist.

For now, instead, the work of turning a promising compound into a real product — the formulation, the manufacturing scale-up, the supply chain, the safety testing — is still done manually by the same scientists who discover the compounds in the first place. Building out a product-development team, with people who’ve done this kind of work before, is next on the roadmap.

“I think it’s going to be fun,” he says, “to have people know that this is what we’ve been doing.”

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.