Crowd funding, new business or start up company to get money or venture capital to support or sponsor business concept, businessman hand giving money dollar coin to new business idea light bulb.

Inception Capital closes flagship $30M Fund of Funds focused on crypto emerging managers

Crowd funding, new business or start up company to get money or venture capital to support or sponsor business concept, businessman hand giving money dollar coin to new business idea light bulb.

Image Credits: Getty Images

Early-stage-focused web3 firm Inception Capital, formerly known as OP Crypto, has closed its inaugural fund at $30 million, David Gan, founder and general partner of the firm, exclusively shared with TechCrunch. This capital is in addition to the firms’ existing $50 million Venture Fund I.

The fund, OP Fund of Funds I LP, targeted family offices and high-net-worth individuals who want “diversified” exposure to early-stage crypto venture deals. It is backed by investors including Mirana, FJ Labs and Serafund. “Instead of family offices trying to make the best investments themselves, this vehicle is a good hedge and risk adjusted downside vehicle to get crypto exposure,” Gan said.

This vehicle plans to invest in about five new investment managers and funds annually, opposed to backing specific projects, protocols or startups, Gan added. “We’re putting our money in the hands of other institutional managers and getting a fairly diversified portfolio that these funds are invested into.”

The flagship vehicle will focus on investing in people “up and coming,” who are “hungry” and looking for early-stage startups. “This is a good calendar year to double down on the space, invest early and back entrepreneurs,” Gan said.

The fund has deployed about 30% to date and plans to continue its focus on emerging managers in the crypto venture space.

The five managers it has invested in are Syncracy Capital, Escape Velocity, Alliance, OrangeDAO and Everyrealm. It has also co-invested alongside Bain Capital Ventures, ParaFi Capital, Multicoin Capital and a16z’s Marc Andreessen and Chris Dixon. (Note: Inception Capital has a general partner stake in the first two managers.)

In general, the Fund of Fund (FoF) space is a massive market with billions of dollars in capital, but in the crypto sector, it’s “very small,” Gan said. “I can count the number of crypto Fund of Funds with one hand.”

But going forward, Gan thinks there’s big opportunities for managers that have grown over the past couple of years to take on sovereign wealth money, endowments, pension funds or institutional FoFs that can then propel the crypto venture space “to match that in the traditional market.”

This post was updated to include information about its Venture Fund I in the first graph.

Crowd funding, new business or start up company to get money or venture capital to support or sponsor business concept, businessman hand giving money dollar coin to new business idea light bulb.

Inception Capital closes flagship $30M Fund of Funds focused on crypto emerging managers

Crowd funding, new business or start up company to get money or venture capital to support or sponsor business concept, businessman hand giving money dollar coin to new business idea light bulb.

Image Credits: Getty Images

Early-stage-focused web3 firm Inception Capital, formerly known as OP Crypto, has closed its inaugural fund at $30 million, David Gan, founder and general partner of the firm, exclusively shared with TechCrunch. This capital is in addition to the firms’ existing $50 million Venture Fund I.

The fund, OP Fund of Funds I LP, targeted family offices and high-net-worth individuals who want “diversified” exposure to early-stage crypto venture deals. It is backed by investors including Mirana, FJ Labs and Serafund. “Instead of family offices trying to make the best investments themselves, this vehicle is a good hedge and risk adjusted downside vehicle to get crypto exposure,” Gan said.

This vehicle plans to invest in about five new investment managers and funds annually, opposed to backing specific projects, protocols or startups, Gan added. “We’re putting our money in the hands of other institutional managers and getting a fairly diversified portfolio that these funds are invested into.”

The flagship vehicle will focus on investing in people “up and coming,” who are “hungry” and looking for early-stage startups. “This is a good calendar year to double down on the space, invest early and back entrepreneurs,” Gan said.

The fund has deployed about 30% to date and plans to continue its focus on emerging managers in the crypto venture space.

The five managers it has invested in are Syncracy Capital, Escape Velocity, Alliance, OrangeDAO and Everyrealm. It has also co-invested alongside Bain Capital Ventures, ParaFi Capital, Multicoin Capital and a16z’s Marc Andreessen and Chris Dixon. (Note: Inception Capital has a general partner stake in the first two managers.)

In general, the Fund of Fund (FoF) space is a massive market with billions of dollars in capital, but in the crypto sector, it’s “very small,” Gan said. “I can count the number of crypto Fund of Funds with one hand.”

But going forward, Gan thinks there’s big opportunities for managers that have grown over the past couple of years to take on sovereign wealth money, endowments, pension funds or institutional FoFs that can then propel the crypto venture space “to match that in the traditional market.”

This post was updated to include information about its Venture Fund I in the first graph.

Digital transformation concept. Binary code. AI (Artificial Intelligence).

As AI accelerates, Europe's flagship privacy principles are under attack, warns EDPS

Digital transformation concept. Binary code. AI (Artificial Intelligence).

Image Credits: metamorworks / Getty Images

The European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) has warned key planks of the bloc’s data protection and privacy regime are under attack from industry lobbyists and could face a critical reception from lawmakers in the next parliamentary mandate.

“We have quite strong attacks on the principles themselves,” warned Wojciech Wiewiórowski, who heads the regulatory body that oversees European Union institutions’ own compliance with the bloc’s data protection rules, Tuesday. He was responding to questions from members of the European Parliament’s civil liberties committee concerned the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) risks being watered down. 

“Especially I mean the [GDPR] principles of minimization and purpose limitation. Purpose limitation will be definitely questioned in the next years.”

The GDPR’s purpose limitation principle implies that a data operation should be attached to a specific use. Further processing may be possible — but, for example, it may require obtaining permission from the person whose information it is, or having another valid legal basis. So the purpose limitation approach injects intentional friction into data operations.

Elections to the parliament are coming up in June, while the Commission’s mandate expires at the end of 2024 so changes to the EU’s executive are also looming. Any shift of approach by incoming lawmakers could have implications for the bloc’s high standard of protection for people’s data.

The GDPR has only been up and running since May 2018 but Wiewiórowski, who fleshed out his views on incoming regulatory challenges during a lunchtime press conference following publication of the EDPS’ annual report, said the make-up of the next parliament will contain few lawmakers who were involved with drafting and passing the flagship privacy framework.

“We can say that these people who will work in the European Parliament will see GDPR as a historic event,” he suggested, predicting there will be an appetite among the incoming cohort of parliamentarians to debate whether the landmark legislation is still fit for purpose. Though he also said some revisiting of past laws is a recurring process every time the make-up of the elected parliament turns over. 

But he particularly highlighted industry lobbying, especially complaints from businesses targeting the GDPR principle of purpose limitation. Some in the scientific community also see this element of the law as a limit to their research, per Wiewiórowski. 

“There is a kind of expectation from some of the [data] controllers that they will be able to reuse the data which are collected for reason ‘A’ in order to find things which we don’t know even that we will look for,” he said. “There is an old saying of one of the representatives of business who said that the purpose limitation is one of the biggest crimes against humanity, because we will need this data and we don’t know for which purpose.

“I don’t agree with it. But I cannot close my eyes to the fact that this question is asked.”

Any shift away from the GDPR’s purpose limitation and data minimization principles could have significant implications for privacy in the region, which was first to pass a comprehensive data protection framework. The EU is still considered to have some of the strongest privacy rules anywhere in the world, although the GDPR has inspired similar frameworks elsewhere.

Included in the GDPR is an obligation on those wanting to use personal data to process only the minimum info necessary for their purpose (aka data minimization). Additionally, personal data that’s collected for one purpose cannot simply be re-used, willy-nilly, for any other use that occurs.

But with the current industry-wide push to develop more and more powerful generative AI tools there’s a huge scramble for data to train AI models — an impetus that runs directly counter to the EU’s approach.

OpenAI, the maker of ChatGPT, has already run into trouble here. It’s facing a raft of GDPR compliance issues and investigations — including related to the legal basis claimed for processing people’s data for model training.

Wiewiórowski did not explicitly blame generative AI for driving the “strong attacks” on the GDPR’s purpose limitation principle. But he did name AI as one of the key challenges facing the region’s data protection regulators as a result of fast-paced tech developments.

“The problems connected with artificial intelligence and neuroscience will be the most important part of the next five years,” he predicted on nascent tech challenges.

“The technological part of our challenges is quite obvious at the time of the revolution of AI despite the fact that this is not the technological revolution that much. We have rather the democratization of the tools. But we have to remember as well, that in times of great instability, like the ones that we have right now — with Russia’s war in Ukraine — is the time when technology is developing every week,” he also said on this.

Wars are playing an active role in driving use of data and AI technologies — such as in Ukraine where AI has been playing a major role in areas like satellite imagery analysis and geospatial intelligence — with Wiewiórowski saying battlefield applications are driving AI uptake elsewhere in the world. The effects will be pushed out across the economy in the coming years, he further predicted.

On neuroscience, he pointed to regulatory challenges arising from the transhumanism movement, which aims to enhance human capabilities by physically connecting people with information systems. “This is not science fiction,” he said. “[It’s] something which is going on right now. And we have to be ready for that from the legal and human rights point of view.”

Examples of startups targeting transhumanism ideas include Elon Musk’s Neuralink, which is developing chips that can read brain waves. Facebook-owner Meta has also been reported to be working on an AI that can interpret people’s thoughts.

Privacy risks in an age of increasing convergence of technology systems and human biology could be grave indeed. So any AI-driven weakening of EU data protection laws in the near term is likely to have long-term consequences for citizens’ human rights.

ChatGPT is violating Europe’s privacy laws, Italian DPA tells OpenAI

Europe’s CSAM-scanning plan is a tipping point for democratic rights, experts warn

Snowflake logo at peak of two pieces of angled wood.

Snowflake releases a flagship generative AI model of its own

Snowflake logo at peak of two pieces of angled wood.

Image Credits: Joan Cros/NurPhoto / Getty Images

All-around, highly generalizable generative AI models were the name of the game once, and they arguably still are. But increasingly, as cloud vendors large and small join the generative AI fray, we’re seeing a new crop of models focused on the deepest-pocketed potential customers: the enterprise.

Case in point: Snowflake, the cloud computing company, today unveiled Arctic LLM, a generative AI model that’s described as “enterprise-grade.” Available under an Apache 2.0 license, Arctic LLM is optimized for “enterprise workloads,” including generating database code, Snowflake says, and is free for research and commercial use.

“I think this is going to be the foundation that’s going to let us — Snowflake — and our customers build enterprise-grade products and actually begin to realize the promise and value of AI,” CEO Sridhar Ramaswamy said in press briefing. “You should think of this very much as our first, but big, step in the world of generative AI, with lots more to come.”

An enterprise model

My colleague Devin Coldewey recently wrote about how there’s no end in sight to the onslaught of generative AI models. I recommend you read his piece, but the gist is: Models are an easy way for vendors to drum up excitement for their R&D and they also serve as a funnel to their product ecosystems (e.g. model hosting, fine-tuning and so on).

Arctic LLM is no different. Snowflake’s flagship model in a family of generative AI models called Arctic, Arctic LLM — which took around three months, 1,000 GPUs and $2 million to train — arrives on the heels of Databricks’ DBRX, a generative AI model also marketed as optimized for the enterprise space.

Snowflake draws a direct comparison between Arctic LLM and DBRX in its press materials, saying Arctic LLM outperforms DBRX on the two tasks of coding (Snowflake didn’t specify which programming languages) and SQL generation. The company said Arctic LLM is also better at those tasks than Meta’s Llama 2 70B (but not the more recent Llama 3 70B) and Mistral’s Mixtral-8x7B.

Snowflake also claims that Arctic LLM achieves “leading performance” on a popular general language understanding benchmark, MMLU. I’ll note, though, that while MMLU purports to evaluate generative models’ ability to reason through logic problems, it includes tests that can be solved through rote memorization, so take that bullet point with a grain of salt.

“Arctic LLM addresses specific needs within the enterprise sector,” Baris Gultekin, head of AI at Snowflake, told TechCrunch in an interview, “diverging from generic AI applications like composing poetry to focus on enterprise-oriented challenges, such as developing SQL co-pilots and high-quality chatbots.”

Arctic LLM, like DBRX and Google’s top-performing generative model of the moment, Gemini 1.5 Pro, is a mixture of experts (MoE) architecture. MoE architectures basically break down data processing tasks into subtasks and then delegate them to smaller, specialized “expert” models. So, while Arctic LLM contains 480 billion parameters, it only activates 17 billion at a time — enough to drive the 128 separate expert models. (Parameters essentially define the skill of an AI model on a problem, like analyzing and generating text.)

Snowflake claims that this efficient design enabled it to train Arctic LLM on open public web data sets (including RefinedWeb, C4, RedPajama and StarCoder) at “roughly one-eighth the cost of similar models.”

Running everywhere

Snowflake is providing resources like coding templates and a list of training sources alongside Arctic LLM to guide users through the process of getting the model up and running and fine-tuning it for particular use cases. But, recognizing that those are likely to be costly and complex undertakings for most developers (fine-tuning or running Arctic LLM requires around eight GPUs), Snowflake’s also pledging to make Arctic LLM available across a range of hosts, including Hugging Face, Microsoft Azure, Together AI’s model-hosting service and enterprise generative AI platform Lamini.

Here’s the rub, though: Arctic LLM will be available first on Cortex, Snowflake’s platform for building AI- and machine learning-powered apps and services. The company’s unsurprisingly pitching it as the preferred way to run Arctic LLM with “security,” “governance” and scalability.

“Our dream here is, within a year, to have an API that our customers can use so that business users can directly talk to data,” Ramaswamy said. “It would’ve been easy for us to say, ‘Oh, we’ll just wait for some open source model and we’ll use it. Instead, we’re making a foundational investment because we think [it’s] going to unlock more value for our customers.”

So I’m left wondering: Who’s Arctic LLM really for besides Snowflake customers?

In a landscape full of “open” generative models that can be fine-tuned for practically any purpose, Arctic LLM doesn’t stand out in any obvious way. Its architecture might bring efficiency gains over some of the other options out there. But I’m not convinced that they’ll be dramatic enough to sway enterprises away from the countless other well-known and -supported, business-friendly generative models (e.g. GPT-4).

There’s also a point in Arctic LLM’s disfavor to consider: its relatively small context.

In generative AI, context window refers to input data (e.g. text) that a model considers before generating output (e.g. more text). Models with small context windows are prone to forgetting the content of even very recent conversations, while models with larger contexts typically avoid this pitfall.

Arctic LLM’s context is between ~8,000 and ~24,000 words, dependent on the fine-tuning method — far below that of models like Anthropic’s Claude 3 Opus and Google’s Gemini 1.5 Pro.

Snowflake doesn’t mention it in the marketing, but Arctic LLM almost certainly suffers from the same limitations and shortcomings as other generative AI models — namely, hallucinations (i.e. confidently answering requests incorrectly). That’s because Arctic LLM, along with every other generative AI model in existence, is a statistical probability machine — one that, again, has a small context window. It guesses based on vast amounts of examples which data makes the most “sense” to place where (e.g. the word “go” before “the market” in the sentence “I go to the market”). It’ll inevitably guess wrong — and that’s a “hallucination.”

As Devin writes in his piece, until the next major technical breakthrough, incremental improvements are all we have to look forward to in the generative AI domain. That won’t stop vendors like Snowflake from championing them as great achievements, though, and marketing them for all they’re worth.