Karthik Pasupathy

The API layer is getting replaced by the agent layer! 

If you look at how web apps are built today, they basically have a front end, a backend, and a couple of APIs (Application Programming Interface) in between.

The API layer governs everything - processes all the inputs, triggers the right workflows, and updates the correct records in the backend. But APIs are difficult for non-developers to use because it was hard to understand (I hear developers chuckle. I'm talking from personal experience) how to integrate them with a web page or backend.

Despite lots of documentation and free APIs, people without coding knowledge are unable to use them. The only alternative was to spend a bomb on platforms like Bubble, Zapier, or Make.

But with the evolution of AI and AI agents, the API layer is slowly being replaced by an agent layer.

Today, you can build a web page, add an agent to it and simply say:

"Look for these areas, research these topics. And when you get the output, update these relevant fields."

An agent will contextually understand your command and update the relevant fields or areas in your website.

This is really powerful because in the future, I think agents will perform the function of most APIs instead of traditional APIs. Maybe we'll call them "Programmable Agentic Interfaces" or PAI.

If you want to connect an agent, all you'll do is plug it directly to your front end and backend, give written instructions on the actions you want it to perform, and it will start doing it. Building ideas and taking them to market is going to get much easier.

To address this, I've come up with a new funding model called the Asset-Secure Venture Capital. 

This new funding model solves two critical problems: VCs losing billions of dollars worth of investments on failing startups (with 90% of startups eventually failing), and talented operators and ambitious founders remaining stuck at day jobs because they can't build a corpus that would give them the necessary financial runway to build their vision.

Pouring millions into established companies to retrofit them for AI era is not the only solution. VCs should consider enabling the next generation of entrepreneurs who are building with an AI-first approach from the ground up. These solo innovators often need different support structures than traditional startups.

Asset-Secure Venture Capital: How it works? 

The Asset-Secure VC model operates differently from the traditional VC funding approach:

1. Capital preservation with income generation: Instead of handing over $2 million to be spent, the VC places that capital in a fixed deposit or similar investment vehicle. This generates a steady monthly interest—approximately $2,000—which flows directly to the founder, covering their essential living expenses.

2. Limited operational budget: Alongside this stability, the VC provides a modest operational budget of $20K-$50K annually for business essentials: software tools, legal incorporation, minimal marketing, and occasional travel.

3. Aligned partnership terms: In exchange, the investor receives a reasonable equity stake (typically 10–15%) or a share of profits (or a carefully structured combination of both).

This arrangement creates a dramatically more sustainable relationship between capital and revenue generation.

Benefits

For solo founders:

• Financial liberation: The steady interest income gives founders the freedom to quit their jobs and dedicate themselves entirely to building their vision without personal financial stress.

• Complete focus on product and market: With a smaller, more intentional operational budget, founders avoid the trap of premature scaling and can laser-focus on developing product-market fit.

• No pressure to "scale at any cost": The extended runway from interest payments means founders can build more deliberately, without the constant distraction of fundraising rounds.

For Venture Capitalists:

• Principal protection: The core investment remains intact in secure financial instruments, dramatically reducing the risk of total capital loss—a refreshing change from the "all or nothing" traditional model.

• Better control on portfolio performance: After predefined periods (typically one year), VCs can evaluate progress against agreed milestones and decide whether to continue the arrangement, potentially increasing support, or withdraw their capital.

• Portfolio diversification: This model allows VCs to back more solo founders with the same amount of capital required to fund a traditional startup, increasing their chances of success. 

What does the market say? 

The numbers powerfully illustrate why we need to rethink VC funding:

• In the United States, there are 41.8 million one-person companies, contributing over $1.3 trillion to the economy annually.

• Several solo-founded companies have cross $10+ million in annual revenue (going as high as $300 million), demonstrating that individual entrepreneurs can build massive value when properly supported.

• Studies consistently show that startups with controlled early spending and a focus on sustainable growth outperform those that rapidly deploy large capital infusions before finding product-market fit.

This data reveals an enormous, underserved market of founders who are overlooked simply because they operate independently rather than as part of conventional founding teams.

Real world implementation: Athena's approach

One organization already pioneering aspects of this philosophy is Athena.vc. Their model offers valuable insights into how new funding approaches can succeed:

• Centered around financial independence: Athena provides $30K–$50K investments designed specifically to cover founders' living expenses—conceptually similar to the interest-based support in the Asset-Secure VC model.

• Hands-on support: Beyond capital, Athena offers a 6-month "residency" with direct mentorship from accomplished entrepreneurs like Rob Liu, providing guidance on ideation, MVP development, and sustainable growth strategies.

• Inclusive investment thesis: Solo founders are welcomed, even at the idea stage without traction—a stark departure from traditional VC requirements that often demand co-founders, existing revenue, or user growth.

Athena's track record demonstrates that this founder-friendly approach isn't just idealistic but can produce remarkable results. Their portfolio includes numerous founders who've built multi-million-dollar businesses while maintaining significant control and equity.

The Future of entrepreneurial funding

Asset-Secure Venture Capital and similar models like Athena's represent more than incremental improvements—they signal a fundamental paradigm shift in how we fund innovation:

• Better incentive alignment: By separating living expenses from business capital, founders can prioritize creating sustainable value rather than artificial growth metrics.

• Democratized access: This model opens entrepreneurship to diverse talent previously excluded by financial barriers, including those from underrepresented backgrounds or geographic regions.

• Focus on founder health: By removing existential financial stress, these models promote founder well-being and sustainable company building—addressing the mental health crisis plaguing the startup ecosystem.

By focusing on people rather than headcount, the Asset-secure venture capital model ensures that the capital is used to help talented individuals create world-changing companies.

We envy people who have generational wealth. Because they don't have to work hard or do anything to make a living. Whatever be the situation, they're financially safe. At least we think so.

I've done that too - bad mouth someone for enjoying their grandparent's or great-grandparent's wealth (because that's what I could do, considering my current net worth.)

But, how did that person, whom we're jealous about, got generational wealth in the first place?

One of their great-grandparents or great-great-grandparents, who had nothing, built something on their own, made enough money, was disciplined when it came to spending and investments, leaving behind enough for their heirs who did the same. 

And every successor who followed them conscious about what the wealth means for them and their future generations.

Because even if one successor makes a poor financial decision, their successive generations will have nothing.

It's fascinating when you think about it.

Personal finance gurus might argue saying "If they withdraw 4% of their wealth every year, and if the money grows at X %, the money would last a long time".

But, even for that to happen, discipline is the key. What if they start withdrawing 14% instead? Or fail to re-evaluate their wealth portfolio and reinvest in the right financial instruments?

They might end up with a huge loss.

It's insane! 

But, then I realized something personally. 

I should be that risk-taker in my family. I should be that great-grandparent for my future generations. The one who took the risk. The one who beat the odds. The one fell, but rose to great heights. 

It's like leaving an all-time high score in your neighborhood gaming arcade, challenging everyone else to beat that score. 

I want to be that guy. I hope I become that guy.

My biggest frustration with AI is that it is stealing my dopamine.

Before AI, knowledge work gave me all the dopamine I needed.

Have to work on a landing page copy in two hours? Sign me up.

Have to come up with a kick-ass product copy in under eight words? I'm in.

Write an interesting blog post combining Marvel characters and a helpdesk software? This is why I love marketing!

We took up the challenge, and we put our minds to it. It was interesting, fun, and seeing the finished product out in the wild gave me the chills.

I loved marketing before AI.

But now, things are different. You want something, you get it immediately. It doesn't matter if it is an eight word product copy, a 160-character meta description, or a 2,000-word blog post. AI does it all effortlessly.

It definitely simplifies my job as a marketer. It makes everything in the leadership happy.

But, what about me? AI has sucked the pleasure of doing the work.

Industry veterans across the globe are saying SaaS is dead. I agree. A there is a shift happening from SaaS-based products to outcome-based products amid the rise of AI. This transition is not only killing SaaS businesses. It is also killing the creativity of SaaS professionals.

Now, I have to look for something else - a hobby or a project that will give me back all the lost dopamine.

Maybe I'll go back to doing pencil sketches of superheroes or start a food blog. Haven't figured out yet.