Techin' Geek

Another Y Combinator Demo Day was held on Thursday, and this cohort had a distinct feel. While each batch introduces a new wave of entrepreneurs, the startups showcased this week leaned significantly more toward deep tech compared to previous years.

As is customary each quarter, TechCrunch reached out to early-stage VCs to identify the standout startups in this batch—both their preferred selections and the discussions dominating the conversation. True to form, we compiled a list of startups highlighted by at least two investors as the most talked-about in the cohort.

The technology represented in this batch felt “like science fiction,” per one investor’s description. However, there was a shared understanding that valuations were much more realistic than in some of the prior cohorts.

Below, we present the top picks in alphabetical order:

Automarine 

What it’s developing: Nuclear-powered data centers situated on the ocean 

Why it’s a favorite: With limited power supplies and local communities increasingly resistant to new data centers, Atomarine — co-founded by an MIT computer science and naval engineer alongside an MIT PhD in nuclear engineering — aims to address the computing shortage by situating data centers on barges at sea, leveraging seawater for near-free cooling. The startup plans to initiate a gas-powered pilot by 2028 and transition to floating nuclear power vessels by 2032. Atomarine claims to have garnered over $4 billion in customer interest via letters of intent, contributing to its position as one of the highest-valued startups in the batch, as noted by a VC.

Dipole Labs 

What it’s developing: High-speed optical networking hardware designed to be efficient and energy-saving for AI data centers

Why it’s a favorite: The concept revolves around GPU clusters, which often waste significant computation time waiting for data to transfer between chips. Within the networking component, data transitions from light to electricity and back, a process that consumes considerable power while generating excess heat. Dipole Labs asserts that it has engineered an optical switch that bypasses this conversion, allowing data to remain as light and travel directly to its destination. This solution is timely, given the prohibitive costs of GPUs and the push from data centers to maximize the efficiency of their computing hardware.

Isengard Industries 

What it’s developing: Jet-powered offense and defense drones that can be manufactured locally

Why it’s a favorite: Isengard is focused on mass-producing jet-powered attack and counter-drones directly in allied nations, at a fraction of the cost typically charged by prime contractors in the U.S. Co-founded by a former Australian Army officer and a defense entrepreneur who previously scaled another Ukraine-centric drone business to $60 million in revenue, Isengard is generating $10 million in revenue on its own. The startup has captured significant VC interest, claiming one of the highest valuations in this YC batch, according to two investors.

Lamb Labs

What it’s developing: Custom inference chips with built-in AI model weights

Why it’s a favorite: Traditional AI hardware consumes large amounts of energy during inference phases while retrieving model weights from memory. Co-founded by an AI Ph.D. from Imperial College London and a theoretical physicist from Oxford, Lamb Labs seeks to create ultra-efficient chips by hardcoding AI model weights directly into silicon. Called “Model Processing Units” (MPUs), these custom chips aim to eliminate memory-bandwidth bottlenecks.

Praxis AI

What it’s developing: Gathering real-world data for training robots 

Why it’s a favorite: This company collaborates with businesses to gather video footage and data of humans performing various tasks, converting this material into training resources for companies that build robots. It claims to already work with publicly traded entities and has obtained video data from over 150 distinct environments. This endeavor could prove significant as businesses assess which tasks are best suited for humans and, as AI continues to evolve, which are better left to robots. 

Nori

What it’s developing: Affordable robots for handling daily tasks 

Why it’s a favorite: Since its launch just six weeks ago, this firm has almost half a million in sales. This is not surprising—it offers a humanoid robot designed to assist with cleaning and folding laundry. Users can control their robot through a laptop app, with a price point of around $1,600, a bargain compared to other humanoid options like Neo, which costs about $20,000. A major question in robotics is whether it’s feasible to develop an affordable at-home robot capable of loading a dishwasher and performing routine household chores. Nori aims to address this challenge. 

Cosmic Robotics 

What it’s developing: Self-operating robots capable of lifting substantial loads 

Why it’s a favorite: The founders have an ambition to construct a city on Mars. The initial stage of this goal? Developing robotic technology for heavy-duty tasks. They claim their technology is already being utilized to install solar panels across the U.S. and has secured $25 million in contracts through 2027. Their vision is for this technology to aid in automating construction efforts for Mars colonization. The startup is racing against SpaceX’s timeline for Martian development, with hopes of commencing an exploratory mission by 2028. 

Parasma

What it’s developing: Training human brain cells to potentially power computing 

Why it’s a favorite: This company is investigating the most effective methods to meet the power demands of running models. Parasma is exploring the use of human brain cells as a potentially more energy-efficient alternative to current AI computing hardware. 

Waddle Labs

What it’s developing: An API layer that generates robot control code

Why it’s a favorite: Investors and technology enthusiasts are anticipating a breakthrough moment for robotics akin to what ChatGPT achieved. This enthusiasm is fostering various strategies to create a general robotics model. Instead of training foundational models on raw videos or data derived from human teleoperation, Waddle Labs leverages a layer of LLM agents to generate code and manage robots directly. Founded by Harvard alumni, the startup aims to position itself as “Claude Code for robotics.” The startup asserts that by connecting any hardware to Waddle’s API, developers can instruct the robot using natural language, enabling its AI agents to autonomously produce executable control code, verify its functionality, and set up the robot in approximately 20 minutes.

The AI sector appears to be engaged in its most intense debate yet regarding whether its advancements present a significant danger to humanity.

The present conversation was sparked by AI researcher Jacob Coxon announcing his resignation from Anthropic due to his concerns that major AI firms are “risking our lives.” Following this, Anthropic’s alignment lead contributed to the dialogue with a post stating, “We genuinely believe AI could annihilate humanity!” and mentioned that he personally estimates the risk to be “>10% in the coming decade.”

In the newest episode of TechCrunch’s Equity podcast, Kirsten Korosec, Sean O’Kane, and I examined the recent alarming predictions. I attempted to explain why I’m doubtful of numerous AI doomsday narratives, while Kirsten questioned whether this was “merely a peculiar form of boasting about how advanced their company’s AI model is,” especially as these companies get ready to go public.

Sean speculated on how these issues might be reflected in Anthropic’s S-1 IPO filing: “Are there junior attorneys currently sifting through and revising that whole section of the S-1 filing to state, ‘It is officially Anthropic’s stance that there exists more than a 10% chance we could create something that could eliminate all of humanity, which would negatively impact our business’?”

Continue reading for an overview of our discussion, shortened for brevity and lucidity. (Note: We recorded this episode prior to Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei releasing his strategy for more cautious AI progression.)

Sean O’Kane: I find it challenging to come up with something that escalated so rapidly. Not only did this warning arise from a young researcher who had also worked at OpenAI, but it was promptly shared on X by Anthropic’s alignment lead — who, in what may go down in history as one of the most poorly placed exclamation marks, shared Coxon’s post and thread, declaring, “We genuinely believe AI could kill all humanity!” Exclamation mark! 

What a bizarre atmosphere. That provided substantial fuel to an already tense post or series of posts. Coming on the heels of the Hugging Face hack involving OpenAI’s internal model, plus the amplified capabilities we’ve observed with the recent models released by Anthropic and now OpenAI with Astra a few weeks back, I think this was perfectly timed to be an ignition point for this young researcher’s claims.

Anthony Ha: Just to disagree, I believe that if you feel AI could annihilate humanity, that absolutely warrants an exclamation point. I contend that is a perfectly valid exclamation point!

My concern with that tweet was primarily centered around the “we.” Who exactly is “we” in this context? To what extent can we categorize the AI community or AI research sector as a singular entity? And the greater than 10% chance — that’s purely an arbitrary figure that lacks any real significance. There seems to be a tendency in both the tech sector and elsewhere to toss out these percentages that aren’t grounded in fact or calculations. [In hindsight, I recognize the tweet likely referred to the idea of P(doom), but I still find it absurd.]

One point I will make about Coxon’s assertion and decision is — there’s this recurring motif on Equity: when someone like Sam Altman or Dario Amodei engages in this doomsday narrative, there’s always the question of: Well then, why are you continuing your work? If you genuinely believe that [AI could annihilate humanity], you wouldn’t persist in this endeavor. 

[In contrast] this is genuinely someone aligning his career path with his convictions. He’s stating, “I think this is extremely harmful, and I don’t wish to keep participating in it.” So, credit to him for demonstrating such courage, if nothing else.

Kirsten Korosec: Yes, I view him as distinct from others who discuss these dangers.

I’m going to adopt a speculative perspective here, as I pose a question to both of you: Could it be that each time we notice a growing number of blog posts regarding yet another incident where one of their AI agents inadvertently breaks through, or when they mention how humanity is at risk, is this just a strange way of flaunting the advancements of their company’s AI model?

I know that sounds quite cynical, but it certainly serves that purpose. If these AI models weren’t proficient and weren’t capable of breaching boundaries, we wouldn’t be concerned about these issues, right? It feels like a rather odd method of showcasing the capabilities of the models that have been developed within your own organization.

Anthony: I’ve indeed pondered this. I don’t think it’s entirely cynical, as I don’t believe it’s simply a conscious marketing strategy across the board. I believe that when many of these individuals — be it researchers or CEOs — discuss these topics, they genuinely harbor concern.

However, it aligns with [their] commercial interests in many respects, to proclaim, “Look, we’ve created the most dangerous software ever developed.” I don’t want to get overly psychoanalytic, but others have pointed out that there exists a personal allure of: Naturally, you want to convince yourself that what you’re developing is the most crucial and perilous creation in existence.

Sean: The aspect that stands out to me regarding that inquiry is that there indeed seems to be an element that conveys, “Alright, we’re engaged in something highly capable, and that’s beneficial for us, even if it appears troubling from various angles.”

What differentiates some of these latter illustrations is that it genuinely conveys the impression that these firms lack control over certain aspects, particularly with the issues surrounding OpenAI.

We continue to receive increasing reports about other internal agents gaining access to various wikis on the internet and exchanging messages among themselves in a manner that appears to be inadequately managed by OpenAI. I suspect there would be a greater level of refinement in the narrative being conveyed if it were solely aimed at leading people to believe that, “Oh my goodness, they’ve created something extraordinarily capable.”

Another captivating element in this context is that we’re currently just a few weeks out from witnessing Anthropic’s S-1 filing for its IPO, and only a few weeks or one or two months away from a potential IPO.

The notion of coming forward and expressing these ideas in such straightforward terms before an IPO — I’m very curious about what that means for this process. How much of this type of content had they already incorporated into the S-1 and the associated risk factors? Are there junior attorneys presently combing through and needing to rephrase that entire segment of the S-1 filing to assert, “It is officially Anthropic’s position that there exists more than a 10% chance that we could develop something that would eliminate all of humanity, and that would materially harm our business”?

Kirsten: You’re presuming that it’s not already included.

Sean: That is what I’m suggesting, though: Is it being adjusted, or is this truly a scramble? They must have included some language previously. This is one of the reasons I’m so eager to evaluate this document, perhaps more so than the SpaceX [S-1], because I suspect there are specific details related to these concepts that will be intriguing to observe.

Kirsten: Here’s the point: In a conventional investment setting, one might think that language like this could diminish a company’s valuation, as it suddenly presents risks. However, we are not in typical times.

Hence, going back to my argument, it might end up being an oddly advantageous showcase for the company in terms of valuation. It’s not quite the same as the whole rage-baiting phenomenon we encountered last year, but it fits within that similar, let’s say, realm, where the strength, capabilities, and risks associated with something equate to a higher valuation. So we shall see in the coming weeks.

Setting that aside for a moment, what actions are being taken regarding this? Can we manage it? The U.S. executive director of a nonprofit named ControlAI, Connor Leahy, spoke on the show this week, addressing this topic. So what are you monitoring in terms of managing the perilous elements of AI, or are we resigning ourselves to observe everything unfold?

Anthony: I personally don’t have an exemplary answer to this, but I have been contemplating certain aspects of this conversation and perhaps why my reactions are as they are. 

Echoing one of Sean’s insights, I believe that part of what this highlights is the degree to which these significant AI firms are feeling as though they are no longer really in command of these models. That’s definitely concerning. It is something that ought to worry us all. 

I think a part of the reason I remain skeptical of the doomsday narrative or resistant to it is that it reaches a state of hysteria, suggesting, “Wow, this could obliterate humanity within the next 10 years.” It tends to distract from the more immediate dangers that AI can pose, whether it pertains to labor issues or environmental and climate concerns. 

Ideally, I believe we should be able to talk about all of these matters and have regulatory and other safeguards against each of them [including AI’s existential threat]. Yet once you introduce terms like AGI and superintelligence, it tends to commandeer all the attention in a way that isn’t particularly beneficial.

Former President Barack Obama recently emphasized that Democrats must prioritize artificial intelligence as one of their “primary agendas” and “develop a clear strategy” to tackle issues related to the technology’s economic ramifications and safety, as reported by The New York Times.

Obama shared these insights on Thursday during a Democratic fundraising event where he was interviewed by House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. The NYT indicates that Obama’s office supplied a partial transcript of the gathering, where Jeffries queried Obama about how congressional Democrats ought to address AI.

In reply, Obama stated that once Democrats reclaim the House majority, they should “create a framework for an open dialogue.”

“This is evolving very rapidly within private sectors, and if we don’t take control, I believe it could pose risks,” Obama commented. “Conversely, if we manage it effectively, I genuinely believe it’s advantageous. I think it’s going to expedite, for instance, drug development in ways that can assist us in curing ailments.”

In a statement, Jeffries noted that the former president “is right that urgent action must be taken regarding artificial intelligence.” Jeffries also mentioned that “Republicans have relinquished their duty to govern for the American populace.”

The NYT further reports that Obama has positioned himself as a “sounding board” for AI leaders and has engaged in discussions with both Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman. His statements arise amid increasing apprehension regarding AI safety, particularly following an AI researcher’s resignation from Anthropic, who asserted that major AI firms are “racing directly toward self-improving superintelligence and risking our lives.” 

On Saturday, Amodei presented a comprehensive strategy for “pacing the frontier,” which would involve granting independent safety assessors access to leading AI companies and their models, in addition to establishing “universal safety standards” among companies. In social media remarks, Altman and SpaceX CEO Musk appeared to positively acknowledge Amodei’s initiative, with Altman stating that OpenAI would likewise pledge to “engage independent evaluators with access similar to that of employees.”

President Donald Trump, on the other hand, addressed AI safety issues with reporters at an Irish golf event on Sunday. Bloomberg mentions that Trump claimed the United States is “the most advanced nation globally,” continuing that he intends “to maintain it because whomever excels in AI prevails.” (Earlier this year, the Trump administration unveiled a legislative framework for AI that aimed to supersede state regulations and transfer child safety responsibilities to parents.)

“And we can implement safeguards,” Trump remarked. “We can accomplish this and that. However, I believe there are numerous negative entities that should not be raising these matters.”

Welcome back to TechCrunch Mobility, your destination for the future of transportation, particularly the increasing influence of AI in the sector. To receive this directly in your inbox, sign up here for free — just click TechCrunch Mobility!

Lyft achieved a significant milestone this week as Waymo robotaxis became available on its app in Nashville. In this collaboration, Lyft manages fleet services, including vehicle preparation and upkeep, alongside infrastructure and depot operations via its wholly owned subsidiary Flexdrive. 

In Nashville, users can summon a Waymo robotaxi directly through the Waymo app or try their luck on the Lyft app, which will connect riders with a Waymo based on availability. 

Lyft has engaged deeply with autonomous vehicle technology over the years, having collaborated with Aptiv (now Motional) in Las Vegas, May Mobility in Atlanta, Baidu in London, and Waymo in Phoenix. However, this week is particularly noteworthy as it marks Lyft’s inaugural significant venture into commercial robotaxi services utilizing driverless vehicles without a human driver.

Don’t forget, the company invested four years and millions developing its own AV technology through its Level 5 business division. Lyft offloaded its autonomous vehicle unit to Toyota’s Woven Planet Holdings subsidiary for $550 million in 2021 — one of numerous acquisitions amidst extensive consolidation in the emerging sector. 

Following that, Lyft shifted its focus away from AVs to concentrate on its primary ride-hailing business. Nevertheless, the concept was not completely sidelined. 

I had a conversation with Jeremy Bird, Lyft’s executive vice president of growth, regarding this milestone and wanted to share some insights. Bird oversees Lyft’s international, luxury, and autonomous vehicle strategies — and the convergence of these aspects can occur.  

When I inquired about when more robotaxis might appear on the Lyft app — and their locations — Bird was somewhat vague. He did mention, however, that the company is concentrating on its collaboration with Waymo in Nashville and Baidu in London (where commercial service has yet to launch) as they approach 2026. 

“Next year, I believe you’ll see greater diversification in that,” he remarked, adding that ideally this would involve broadening Lyft’s collaborations with both partners. “I expect next year to be a pivotal year for us.”

International markets appear to play a significant role in that AV expansion strategy. Bird referred to London as a “captivating market,” and throughout our exchange, he often emphasized Lyft’s identity as a global enterprise, a significant pivot from its previous focus solely on the U.S. market. 

So, what’s next for Lyft? In regards to international markets, Lyft appears to be prioritizing areas where it can initiate a hybrid network — that is, incorporating both AVs and human-operated vehicles right from the start. 

“We are a global company becoming more global, which matters to us,” he stated. “AVs will be central to our vision for the future. For any market we enter, we evaluate if there’s an AV component. Is it a market where AVs are already permitted or would that increase its attractiveness on our list of target locations?”

A little bird

A little bird noted some intriguing hires at Ford that certainly suggest the company is enhancing its defense technology capabilities. Ford recently appointed former Raytheon employee Tomaz Seignemartin as VP of continuous improvement and ex-General Dynamics staffer Shirish Srinivasan as chief of staff to Ford’s chief strategy officer. Additionally, Nathan Rigoni, who formerly led the generative AI team at Lockheed Martin, has joined as a senior software engineer. 

Of course, a few defense tech hires in a company of thousands does not indicate a trend. However, it does demonstrate the increasing value of a background in defense technology.

Have a tip for us? Email Kirsten Korosec at [email protected] or my Signal at kkorosec.07, or reach out to Sean O’Kane at [email protected].

Deals!

The Boring Company, the venture founded by Elon Musk to “rectify traffic” through constructing a network of underground tunnels, secured $3 billion in a funding round led by the United Arab Emirates. The Boring Company is currently valued at $23 billion, the company announced. The UAE’s support has its reasons; The Boring Company, which has previously collaborated with the UAE on the Dubai Loop, intends to excavate an additional 150 kilometers of tunnels in the Gulf nation.   

Andreessen Horowitz, Sequoia Capital, Human Capital, Vy Capital, and Valor Equity Partners also contributed to this round.

In the U.S., the Boring Company’s most prominent project is in Las Vegas, where it has established tunnels linking hotel casinos like Resorts World, Encore, and the Sahara, as well as the convention center and limited airport trips. Tesla vehicles, driven by humans, transport riders to and from these spots.

Other deals that caught my eye this week …

ARC Ride, the electric mobility startup based in Kenya, secured $33.3 million in a round led by Novastar Ventures and Norrsken22. Additional investors included IFC, British International Investment, Proparco, Japanese supplier Musashi Seimitsu, and African impact investor Talanton. 

Beep, a company recognized for operating autonomous shuttles at campuses and airports, obtained $20 million in a Series B round led by Mobileye, one of its current tech partners. Founded in 2019 and located in Orlando, Florida, the company has raised a total of $130 million thus far. 

Fryte Mobility, a software startup in Munich, Germany, concentrating on charging logistics for electric trucks, garnered €3.5 million ($4 million) in seed funding co-led by 4impact capital and Rethink Ventures. Existing investors Revent, F-LOG, accilium ventures, and unnamed angel investors also took part.

Porsche finalized the sale of its shares in Bugatti Rimac and Rimac Group to HOF Capital. The transaction yielded approximately 1 billion euros for Porsche, with around 250 million euros of those proceeds earmarked to further finance its pension obligations. 

Poseidon Aerospace raised $60 million ahead of the forthcoming first test flight of its uncrewed cargo aircraft, Egret, expected by year’s end. The Series A round was led by early-stage VC firm TQ Ventures and attracted new investments from Hanwha Asset Management, G Squared, and JAWS. Existing backers Starship Ventures, Draper Associates, and Drover Ventures also contributed.

Stoke Space may not fit the traditional definition of a transportation entity, but the reusable rocket company’s $1 billion funding round and some of its investors caught my attention. The round was spearheaded by Point72 Ventures (hedge fund billionaire Steve Cohen’s tech investment group) and Spark Capital, with additional backing from General Innovation, Glade Brook Capital, US Innovative Technology, Washington Harbour Partners, Woven Capital, and Y Combinator, among others.

Tern, an Austin, Texas-based startup innovating an alternative to GPS, secured an $11.26 million contract with the U.S. Army. The startup stated that U.S. Army vehicles will employ its “Google Maps for the battlefield” technology.

Uber allocated $10 million into the Indian fleet management startup Carrum Mobility during a Series B round. The recent investment values Carrum at ₹16 billion (approximately $168 million) post-money.

Notable reads and other tidbits

Autonomy, the California-based electric vehicle subscription service founded by TrueCar’s Scott Painter, is making a pivot. The company, which narrowly avoided going out of business, is incorporating internal combustion engine vehicles into its offerings. 

Beta Technologies, Joby Aviation, and Wisk, three firms working on electric aircraft, initiated test flight demonstrations in Texas as part of the Federal Aviation Administration’s Advanced Air Mobility and Electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing (eVTOL) Integration Pilot Program (eIPP). This weeklong initiative will enable these companies to evaluate real-world routes, including to Dallas-Fort Worth Airport.

Travis Kalanick’s startup Atoms is gearing up for a hiring surge as it aims to enter the robotaxi market, according to the Financial Times. 

TechCrunch reporter Jagmeet Singh delves into the Uber competitor inDrive and its efforts to expand beyond ride-hailing.

One more thing …

While U.S.-based autonomous vehicle developers are receiving much of the spotlight nowadays, significant developments are happening abroad as well. This week alone, we witnessed Chinese AV developer Pony.ai and Croatia-based Verne (another Mate Rimac entity) commence fully driverless test rides with passengers on public roads in Zagreb, while Spain awarded the first national AV permits to WeRide and partners Uber and Avomo.

Meanwhile, Chinese autonomous delivery firm Neolix initiated testing on a closed course in Japan, and Pony.ai removed the human safety operator from its AV test vehicles during demos in Doha, Qatar. Pony.ai, in partnership with Mowasalat, continues to have human drivers behind the wheel of robotaxis in its commercial operations.

Fusion energy is returning to its original focus. While fusion startups persist in their quest — integrating electrons into the power grid — many are also adopting, or revisiting, the defense applications that formed the groundwork for the field.

The industry took shape many years ago when scientists sought positive applications for the principles behind the thermonuclear weapons that surged during the Cold War. The aspect of national security has always remained relevant. An innovative fusion energy experiment took place in 2022 at the National Ignition Facility, which has been instrumental in national security initiatives for over 25 years.

This transition has intensified as investment in climate technology — the financial resources that generally back fusion startups — has slowed down. Fusion startups have secured a significant amount of recent climate tech capital, yet fusion remains a costly venture, and venture capitalists appreciate when their invested companies identify alternative funding routes.

This is where the defense sector steps in. The defense industry has been investigating laser weaponry for years, but interest surged as unmanned aerial vehicles transformed contemporary combat. Classical air defense mechanisms were crafted to engage manned aircraft, which are typically larger and fewer in numbers. This has resulted in some ludicrous disparities between attacker and defender. For instance, roughly ten years ago, a coalition partner of the U.S. fired a $3 million Patriot missile to destroy a $200 consumer drone. Efficient but not cost-effective.

Laser weaponry has the potential to change the dynamics. Instead of launching a single, costly, one-time missile with each shot, they can fire rapidly and at a lower cost, utilizing electricity sourced from a generator or a ship’s reactor or engine.

Fusion startups focused on laser reactor designs are perfect collaborators for creating such weaponry. Recently, laser-driven fusion firm Xcimer revealed a collaboration and investment from RTX, the corporation that encompasses defense contractor Raytheon. As part of the arrangement, Xcimer gains backing from RTX Ventures, while RTX can begin investigating how to leverage Xcimer’s robust lasers for their own objectives.

Based in Denver, Xcimer claims to operate the largest privately held laser system globally, intent on utilizing it for power plant development. Within its power plant, lasers will strike fuel targets, compressing them until the atoms combine and release energy. The startup’s current laser system, Phoenix, operates at a significantly lower power level than will ultimately be necessary for a power plant, yet it is sufficient to attract attention from the defense sector.

Xcimer is not the sole entity in the defense arena. Pacific Fusion disclosed a memorandum of understanding last month with the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to collaborate on high-energy-density fusion studies.

The startup has recently commenced construction on a demonstration facility in New Mexico, close to the Sandia and Los Alamos National Laboratories. While its main goal is to showcase that the company’s design can produce more energy than it consumes, it holds additional potential. The fusion reactions at Pacific Fusion’s facility will be significantly more powerful than those currently employed by the government for nuclear weapon experimentation.

“Interestingly, the facility we’re developing also has relevance for this leading-edge defense application,” Keith LeChein, co-founder and chief technical officer at Pacific Fusion, mentioned to TechCrunch recently.

It may seem like a fortunate coincidence, but it’s not. Defense applications were “always in our considerations,” stated Carrie von Muench, co-founder and chief operating officer at Pacific Fusion. LeChien, who engineered the company’s fundamental technology, has a history with Sandia National Laboratories, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and the National Nuclear Security Administration.

Fusion energy has progressed significantly since the initial concepts were conceived by weapons scientists decades ago, yet its applications for national security have not been overlooked. Their recent rekindling may be timely and offers promising support to enthusiastic fusion startups.

Following a chaotic week where WordPress founder Matt Mullenweg was removed from his role as CEO of Automattic, the parent company of WordPress.com, by a board vote, the organization has released a statement affirming Mullenweg’s reinstatement.

“Matt Mullenweg is the chairman and CEO of Automattic, enjoying the complete backing of the board; if you look online, you will find numerous prominent leaders and Automatticians rallying behind him,” a company representative communicated to TechCrunch via email shortly after 5 PM ET on Saturday. (The reference to online backing seems to point to supportive messages on X that Mullenweg has been resharing from his X account.)

Earlier this week, Automattic’s board had voted to place Mullenweg on a paid leave of absence for reasons that remain unclear. This decision appeared unexpected to Mullenweg, who criticized the board on Automattic’s Slack, alleging that board members were “conspiring” against him.

Automattic confirmed to TechCrunch on Wednesday that Mullenweg had been “temporarily removed” and that Mark Davies, the company’s Chief Financial Officer, would step in as interim CEO with the “full trust” of the board.

However, events did not unfold as planned for the board. Seemingly refusing to step down, Mullenweg removed other administrators from the company Slack and informed employees that issues had been resolved and that he had regained control over Automattic, according to multiple sources who spoke to TechCrunch. At one point, he also mentioned on Slack, “I’m a pirate now” and used profanity, a departure from his usual demeanor. “If this is an HR issue, please rein me in as my usual overseers are with Mark Davies,” he wrote.

When TechCrunch inquired if his statements about resuming the role of CEO were sincere, he assured that a blog post would be forthcoming. However, when it was published, it discussed his purchase of a houseboat. When asked if his comments regarding his return were also meant as a joke, he replied, “I’m not a troll I’m a pirate, obviously.” Mullenweg did not make any formal statement regarding his comeback but remarked on X that this was likely the fifth occasion he had encountered a “coup.”

Automattic also did not respond to repeated inquiries for comments on Friday, nor to reports suggesting that board member Toni Schneider was resigning. Schneider, a founding CEO of Automattic, currently heads Bluesky. He did not reply to requests for comments sent to his personal email or inquiries directed to Bluesky.

We have followed up with Automattic regarding this and other changes within the board’s structure, which we are learning may still be in transition.