This week, attorneys for Elon Musk and OpenAI delivered their final statements, leaving it to the jurors to determine if OpenAI misstepped while evolving into a more-for-profit entity. 

As highlighted by Kirsten Korosec, Sean O’Kane, and me during the latest TechCrunch Equity podcast episode, a central theme in the concluding days of the trial was the trustworthiness of OpenAI CEO Sam Altman. For instance, Musk’s legal representative, Steve Molo, intensely questioned Altman regarding the veracity of his remarks made during his congressional testimony.

Kirsten pointed out that Musk himself has been known to issue several misleading statements, indicating that trust is not solely an issue for Altman.

“This raises a fundamental question [for] a multitude of tech journalists, policymakers, and increasingly, consumers regarding all AI labs,” she remarked. “It really boils down to trust, as we lack insightful perspectives — these companies are privately held, and much remains obscured.”

Continue reading for insights from our dialogue, modified for brevity and clarity.

Anthony Ha: [The conclusion of the trial] prompted a striking headline from our writer, Tim Fernholz, which simply asks, “Who trusts Sam Altman?” Does anyone have thoughts on this? 

Kirsten Korosec: Yeah, Anthony, I’ll return that question to you. Do you have trust in Sam Altman? 

Anthony: It’s quite a compelling question because it seems like a bold one to explore in a journalistic setting, but in many ways, it really lies at the heart of the trial. 

Sean O’Kane: That’s not a definitive yes.

Anthony: Moreover, it appears to be [at the] center of comprehending much of OpenAI’s situation, especially regarding the significant power tussle now dubbed The Blip.

Numerous individuals who’ve collaborated with Altman seem to lack trust in him. He has acknowledged this somewhat, as he mentions being conflict-averse and tends to tell people what they want to hear, and he’s working on that.

I find this credible, and I can see how it might lead to misunderstandings in various scenarios. [However] I, too, am quite conflict-averse, and I hope that if any of this were to go to trial, folks wouldn’t be questioning, “Is Anthony Ha trustworthy?”

Sean: Still not a yes! 

Kirsten: I believe people would consider you trustworthy. While that question is captivating, it doesn’t just encapsulate the essence of this trial. I would broaden the view and assert it’s a fundamental question [for] many tech journalists, policymakers, and growing numbers of consumers regarding AI labs. It fundamentally centers on trust, given that we lack insight — these are private entities, and there’s still much hidden beneath the surface.

Perhaps after they all go public, we might gain some clarity, but it ultimately revolves around trust and misuse, and whether we believe in their intent. What I’d counter with is that sometimes the intent can appear worthy and noble, yet still be misapplied. The situation can devolve into quite a mess. This transcends the question of who trusts Sam Altman — although that was a significant aspect of the trial — pointing to a broader inquiry relevant to the entire sector. 

Sean: I’ll be frank: I don’t trust him. But then again, I don’t have trust in most individuals, so that’s my default stance. 

We’ll observe the developments. The trial wraps up today. I’m quite eager to see the jury’s verdict. I believe initially, a driving force behind this was Musk attempting to tarnish the image of a perceived competitor whom he feels has wronged him. Whether he has succeeded in that or has a chance of winning remains uncertain. However, it seems everyone involved comes out of this slightly worse off. 

Anthony: To clarify, this week’s discussion stems from [Altman] being on the stand, where he faced scrutiny over previous statements made during his testimony to [Congress], claiming he held no equity in OpenAI. That statement is false since he maintained a stake via Y Combinator, which he previously managed. He attempted to downplay this by asserting, “I assume everyone grasps what being a passive investor in a VC fund entails.” Musk’s lawyer, quite reasonably, asked, “Really? Do you believe the congressman who questioned you was aware of that?”

Kirsten: Indeed, he was playing a semantics game. I found it compelling to observe [this] regarding the contrasting ways Sam Altman and Elon Musk responded on the stand. 

In many situations, Elon Musk has been noted for disseminating misinformation or exaggerations on Twitter, yet he corrected the record while under oath. There’s a pattern of, I would argue, dishonesty or lying, flagrant or subtle, in Musk’s sphere, but his approach was notably confrontational, contrasting with Altman’s demeanor of “I’m addressing it,” which seemed more affable, though it’s uncertain if it will benefit him.

Ultimately, it hinges on the fundamental facts, and hopefully, that’s what the jury will focus on. But I found it quite remarkable — both were misleading, yet their responses were entirely different.

Commencement time has arrived once more — and this year, a few speakers have realized that it’s challenging to engage graduating students about a future influenced by artificial intelligence.

Last week, Gloria Caulfield, a leader at real estate firm Tavistock Development Company, delivered a speech at the University of Central Florida, noting that we are experiencing a period of “significant transformation,” which can be both “thrilling” and “intimidating.”

“The emergence of artificial intelligence marks the next industrial revolution,” Caulfield stated — prompting the audience of students to begin booing, with their noise growing progressively louder until Caulfield chuckled, looked at the other speakers, and inquired, “What just happened?”

“Alright, I struck a nerve,” she remarked. Caulfield then attempted to continue her speech, stating, “Just a few years back, AI played no role in our existence” — only to be interrupted again by the audience, this time with their enthusiastic cheers and applause.

[embedded content]

Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt experienced a comparable reaction when he mentioned AI during a speech at the University of Arizona on Friday.

In Schmidt’s situation, the backlash actually began prior to the speech, with various student groups advocating for his removal as a commencement speaker due to a lawsuit in which a former girlfriend and business partner accused Schmidt of sexual assault. (He has denied the charges.) A local news report indicated that booing started even before Schmidt took the stage.

However, Schmidt also faced loud boos when he told students, “You will shape the future of artificial intelligence.” The booing was so persistent that Schmidt attempted to talk over it, asserting, “You can now put together a team of AI agents to assist with tasks that you could never handle alone. When someone invites you to join the rocket ship, you don’t question which seat, you simply get aboard.”

To be fair, AI isn’t generating a negative reaction at every graduation event. Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang recently addressed Carnegie Mellon’s commencement, and he didn’t seem to encounter any audible dissent when he claimed that AI has “reinvented computing.”

Nevertheless, it’s not particularly surprising to see some students reacting negatively. In a recent Gallup survey, only 43% of Americans aged 15 to 34 felt it was a favorable time to find a job locally, a significant decline from 75% in 2022. 

This pessimism isn’t entirely a reaction to the rise of AI (a change that even some software developers are concerned about), but journalist and tech commentator Brian Merchant suggested that for many students, AI has become “the harsh new face of hyper-scaling capitalism.”

“I too would express my discontent vocally at the notion of this next industrial revolution if I were in my early twenties, unemployed, and had aspirations for my future beyond inputting commands into an LLM,” Merchant expressed.

Even when commencement speeches did not explicitly mention AI, “resilience” was a common theme this year. Schmidt himself recognized that there is “a fear among your generation that the future is already predetermined, that the machines are arriving, that the jobs are disappearing, that the climate is deteriorating, that politics are divided, and that you are inheriting a situation that you did not create.”

Caulfield, for her part, may have also misinterpreted her audience of arts and humanities graduates. One student remarked that prior to mentioning AI, Caulfield had already begun losing their attention with her “generic” commendation of corporate figures like Jeff Bezos.

Another graduate, Alexander Rose Tyson, mentioned to The New York Times, “It wasn’t just one individual that sparked the booing. It was more of a collective, ‘This is disappointing.’”

Welcome back to TechCrunch Mobility — your go-to destination for news and perspectives on the transportation industry’s future. To receive this directly in your inbox, sign up here for free — just click TechCrunch Mobility!

A noticeable pattern is developing in the realm of transportation — and indeed in all sectors: AI is generating employment for some while displacing others. 

General Motors, for example, terminated more than 10% of its IT workforce, approximately 600 salaried positions — as part of a strategic skills transition. This won’t equate to a direct one-to-one replacement, suggesting a probable overall job loss. Nonetheless, GM asserts it is actively hiring, and these layoffs have created opportunities to onboard IT professionals with expertise in AI.

The most in-demand skills include AI-centric development, data engineering and analytics, cloud engineering, agent and model formulation, prompt crafting, and novel AI workflows. Essentially, GM seeks individuals capable of building with AI from the foundational level — crafting systems, training models, and engineering pipelines — rather than merely utilizing AI as a productivity enhancer.

Job reductions associated with AI are growing within the automotive industry. CNBC reported that Ford, GM, and Stellantis collectively have eliminated over 20,000 salaried positions in the U.S., accounting for 19% of their total workforce, since employment peaks earlier in the decade. Although various factors contribute to these reductions, they are generally linked to technological advancements, including AI.

Businesses are increasingly embracing AI, even if anecdotes from certain engineers and founders indicate that not all these companies fully grasp its application yet. 

Samsara stands out as a company that appears to have developed a viable revenue-generating model. Over the past decade, the firm has provided its clients with cameras to install in millions of trucks for driver oversight, theft deterrence, and assisting with liability matters. This extensive data collection has enabled the company to train its own model to identify potholes and assess their rate of deterioration. They are marketing this product to municipalities and have disclosed contracts with cities, including Chicago. 

A little bird

Nothing to report this week, though I’m working on something entertaining! Feel free to reach out with insights, tips, or just to chat. You can contact us via email or Signal.

Email Kirsten Korosec at [email protected] or my Signal at kkorosec.07, or drop an email to Sean O’Kane at [email protected].

Deals!

You may have noticed that Rivian’s spinoff entity Mind Robotics secured an additional $400 million, just two months after its previous $500 million round. This rapid funding pace had me reflecting on founder RJ Scaringe’s remarkable talent in attracting VC and institutional investors for his concepts and ventures.

I assessed that investors have allocated a staggering total of $12.3 billion to Scaringe’s three ventures — Also, Mind Robotics, and Rivian. This total does not encompass the nearly $12 billion generated from Rivian’s IPO, nor does it include the recent strategic partnerships with Volkswagen Group and Uber — which might together contribute almost $7 billion to Rivian’s financial reserves. 

You can read my entire analysis on this matter here. However, if you prefer not to click, an intriguing detail stood out. I conversed with several insiders and investors, and they all highlighted Scaringe’s skill in providing undivided attention to whoever he engages with — whether an investor, supplier, or executive — making them feel like the most significant individual in the room. 

This provides further support for my longstanding argument against multitasking. Challenge me!

Additional deals that caught my eye …

Arkeus, an Australian startup specialized in developing perception technology for autonomous drones and aircraft, raised $18 million in a Series A funding round led by QIC Ventures. Other participants include R+VC, Folklore Ventures, DYNE Ventures, Main Sequence Ventures, Salus Ventures, and Beaten Zone.

Aseon Labs, a startup based in Redwood City, California, has launched a depot-in-a-box for charging, cleaning, and inspecting autonomous fleets, emerging from stealth with undisclosed backing from Y Combinator. 

Rapido secured $240 million in a funding round spearheaded by Prosus, valuing the Indian ride-hailing platform at $3 billion. Existing backers, including WestBridge Capital and Accel, participated in the round, which was part of a larger $730 million financing scheme.

Quantum Systems, a drone startup based in Germany and backed by Peter Thiel, is reportedly in negotiations to raise roughly €600 million ($703 million), with companies like Airbus and Blackstone showing interest as investors, according to Bloomberg.

Notable reads and other tidbits

Is Redwood Materials poised for an IPO? Senior reporter Sean O’Kane spoke with the company’s new CFO, Deepak Ahuja, whose name should ring a bell for Tesla followers. Ahuja previously served as Tesla’s finance chief and most recently held a similar role at drone firm Zipline. 

Tesla Robotaxis have been involved in at least two crashes since July 2025 while a teleoperator was remotely controlling the vehicles, according to recently disclosed information submitted to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Uber is expanding its footprint in India with the establishment of two new engineering campuses that can accommodate around 9,600 employees, along with a data center partnership aimed at enhancing its overall product development and infrastructure capabilities.

Waymo implemented a software update across its fleet of nearly 4,000 vehicles to assist them in avoiding flooded roads, as part of a recall announced by the NHTSA. Note: The company has not yet fully addressed the issue of how its vehicles perform under these conditions.

One more thing …

Disrupt, our flagship annual tech conference in San Francisco, is scheduled for October. Though that is some time away, I wanted to share one piece of news. This year, we will feature six stages, detailed further here. Particularly noteworthy for this audience is our AI in the Real World Stage, where we’ll explore robotics, autonomous systems, manufacturing, defense, and industrial operations.

When Lior Susan established Eclipse Ventures in 2015, the firm’s notion of digitizing the tangible world wasn’t especially favored in Silicon Valley.

“It was the period of enterprise software and SaaS, and it seemed pretty isolated the initial couple of years,” Susan remarked during a recent StrictlyVC event in San Francisco.

Over a decade later, Eclipse has positioned itself at the core of the tech scene. The firm’s $6.5 million Series A funding in Cerebras Systems back in 2016 led to a total yield of $2.5 billion when the semiconductor firm went public this week. The firm ultimately invested $147 million in Cerebras throughout the years, a gamble that yielded a 17-fold return at the IPO valuation of $185 per share, as per Eclipse’s report.

For Susan, the profit from Cerebras marks merely the start of harvesting significant benefits from a long-held conviction that, given that 85% of global GDP is linked to the physical realm, investing in firms beyond just pure software could prove highly profitable.

Public markets and startup creators appear to be acknowledging the significance of physical-world technology now as well. Susan pointed out that stocks of TSMC and Micron recently reached their highest ever, while an increasing number of premier founders are keen to establish startups at the crossroad of hardware and software.

“I believe people recognize that the genuine advantage in software is diminishing. You can vibe code almost whatever you wish,” he stated.

Susan mirrored public market sentiments that earlier in the year caused many SaaS stocks to decline, under the impression that enterprises might utilize Anthropic’s Claude Code or OpenAI’s latest models to develop their own customized software tools instead.

“What you cannot achieve with ‘vibe code’ is produce wafers, because you require machinery and silicon, along with clean rooms and various other necessities,” Susan elaborated.

Regarding technology that interacts with the tangible world, it’s not solely semiconductors that are now piquing the interest of investors and founders.

Eclipse’s portfolio companies across sectors such as robotics, energy, and defense, secured nearly $15 billion from external investors last year, and that late-stage momentum reached $4.5 billion in Q1 2026 alone, Susan mentioned. This investor enthusiasm contrasts sharply with the firm’s initial performance: in its first eight years, its portfolio firms raised less than $4 billion collectively.

Indeed, the recent follow-on rounds across Eclipse’s portfolio showcase a record that any venture firm would envy. Motivated by a series of huge late-stage deals this year, the collection includes $1.2 billion for Wayve, $650 million for True Anomaly, $270 million for Bedrock Robotics, and $200 million for Oxide Computer. Additionally, Eclipse was the Series A backer for all four companies.

At first glance, it may appear that investor excitement for physical-world technology is solely driven by AI, whether as an infrastructural component like chips and data centers, or through AI’s capability to finally render robotics practical. However, Susan contends that other strong tailwinds are propelling this momentum.

Aside from technology — in this instance, AI — essential factors for this market to flourish include capital, customer demand, talent, and regulation. Susan suggests that as investors and engineers transition from SaaS to industries such as robotics, semiconductors, space, and mining, the U.S. government is likewise promoting these fields through subsidies and supportive legislation.

“This is the first time I believe in America’s history, dating back to Henry Ford and Carnegie, where those five forces are in sync,” Susan stated. “For builders like us, this is the prime time to create those companies.”