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.

Imagine a 10-year-old in 2090 looking back at the social life of their grandparents from 2040.

What will they see?

Pictures and reels of them on Instagram following some trend that was big back then, the videos they've created on YouTube using AI video and voice tools, a Twitter profile filled with AI-generated content, recorded videos of their AI avatars teaching a course on app development, or even an OF account!

The kid will have access to a ton of videos and content about their grandparents from the internet.

But, the kid will have no way of seeing or understanding the real character or voice of their grandparents?

Imagine this for an entire generation in the future. It's scary.

When they look back, all they would see is a fabricated version of ourselves. A version where want to be seen as the happiest, sexiest, and the richest.

When the internet came into existence, it acted as a huge time capsule. It recorded every thought, idea, and interaction. For the first time in history, we could see how people like us thought, reacted, and behaved when they hung out with their friends, came across a social issue, or faced a personal crisis.

It was a treasure trove of information. It was a crowdsourced version of our history that gave room for very little manipulation (which was very common in previous centuries, as very few had the power to decide what goes to the future generations).

But, it's starting to fade.

Over the last decade, we've started fabricating how we'd want to be seen and heard. We go on holidays and buy gadgets we can't afford, we open up about our private lives to our 'audience' and we created a ton of AI-generated text, audio, and video - all for what? Social capital, fame, and money.

Today, the internet is being filled with millions of pieces of AI content every minute. And every piece of that content is history for our future generations. But, rather than it saying about who we are, it will show them an illusion of how we lived in 2024.

Despite having free will and freedom to do what we want, a majority of us do the same thing. In the process of making money and attaining social status, we're losing our conscience.

It's sad, but it's true.

Claude recently launched a new feature that would copy your writing style.

I thought it was a gimmick. But, it wasn't.

I uploaded a few of my essays from a personal project and it came up with a writing style it called "the memory weaver".

The description said,

Craft deeply reflective narratives that blend intimate personal observations with broader social insights

I gave it a topic to write on and the output was remarkably similar to my essays in terms of tone, style, use of anecdotes, etc.

It was fascinating!

It made me wonder,

How does one differentiate between authentic and AI-generated content? What's the mark for authenticity?

With AI models getting too close to human level writing capabilities (in fact they surpassed them mid last year), what's the filter that will regulate the flow of AI-generated content into our world?

The only answer is our conscience.

If you're a writer or a creator, you can either publish AI-generated content to speed up your creation process (to become famous, like be a become a thought leader or influencer on your field of interest) and call it your authentic work, or you choose to write everything yourself because you respect the trust of your readers.

This is where conscience comes into the picture.

There is also no legal implications of creating AI content that sounds just like you and calling it your own work. The readers will take your word for it. There is no way for them to verify.

It's like choosing milk from a supermarket. You might choose a milk carton that has a label "organic and hormone-free" over a milk brand that doesn't have the label. But, there is no way for you to verify if the milk is hormone-free.

You'll have to go to extreme lengths to prove your point. The only way you get hormone-free milk is when the owner of the company decides to do business in a honest way.

The same applies for creators.

So, if you're a creator, it's

To get a break as an artist, you'll have to be an influencer.

I'm not kidding.

Think about it.

Influencers and celebrities pretty much do everything today.

They sell books, launch their own merch, teach courses, give out commencement speeches, invest in startups, come up with their own apparel, liquor, or cosmetic brand, launch their fitness startup, act in ads, produce movies, endorse products on their Insta or TikTok. Everything!

I don't blame them. There's a huge market for this.

The celebrity craze is at its peak now.

People worship celebrities. They see them as role models. They defend them when someone bad mouths them on social media. And, they do mean things out of love for their 'idols'.

But, that's not my problem. Hero worship is part of every society. Has been and will be.

My problem is with the kind of celebrities we as a society are giving rise to…

A 17-year old TikToker who posts GRWM videos and tries on new clothes is some kid's role model today.

Kids who idolize these influencers think that they don't have to study. They think education is a waste of time. Their dream goes from going to college to becoming an influencer and enjoying a cool lifestyle.

The same thing happens to a lot of women. They quit their career and jump onto OnlyFans to make money. What the hell! If you haven't heard about the girl who quit her PhD to do OnlyFans, go read it!

If this continues, no one will become a scientist or a researcher. Everyone would be holding their smartphones on a monopod and would be scream "Hey fammmm!..."

This whole craze around influencers and celebrities is crushing the spirit of art and true artists from around the world.

Before the 21st century, artists became celebrities. Now, celebrities are becoming artists.

I read somewhere that for a book to sell, publishers have set a new criterion.

The author has to have at least 1,00,000 followers on their social media - enough to get 5,000 to 10,000 pre-orders - which makes the book a bestseller.

When numbers take precedence over content, art gets diminished and mediocrity begins to sell. And, if you really want to be a writer, you have to do more than just write.

You'll have to create content, play to the rules of the 'algorithm', engage with your fans, voice out your opinion, gain your 1,000 true fans, and do a zillion other things to sell your book.

It's crazy!

I'm scared and worried when I think about the next generation, will they create an environment for real art to thrive?

Will they celebrate the masters like we or our previous generations did?

What kind of society we will be if we only prioritized and celebrated content that are sub-par or that only focuses on making money?

It shakes me up.

Only a miracle can change all of the above from happening.

Whenever you read headlines about Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) becoming a reality in a few years, you would've thought,

How can a machine, a non-living entity, have human-level cognitive abilities?

Non-living things gaining consciousness isn't a new idea.

It's happened before, billions of years ago. That's the reason we are who we are today.

The same process, when it occurs in silico, might to give rise to AGI.

Let me explain.

Probability created life

In 1924 and 1929, Alexander Oparin and J.B.S. Haldane proposed a similar theory - the extreme weather conditions that existed on the surface of Earth 3.7 to 4 billion years ago led to the formation of the first organic compounds, which led to the origin of life.

Four billion years ago, Earth had no life as we know it. No plants, no animals - nothing.

For millions of years, the only thing the surface of our planet witnessed were lightning strikes, volcanic activity, and a ton of ultraviolet radiation.

Oparin and Haldane believed that these conditions paved way for life. They proposed that these condition led various inorganic compounds to interact with each other, resulting in the formation of amino acids, the building blocks of proteins. Over time, these proteins led to the formation of DNA, the blueprint of life, giving rise to the first unicellular organisms.

They called this the primordial soup theory or the heterotrophic theory.

This was later proved by Harold Urey and Stanley Miller in 1953 through the Miller-Urey experiment.

Miller tried to mimic the atmospheric conditions of Earth from four billion years ago - filled with Methane, Ammonia, and Hydrogen. He then passed electric spark to mimic lightning. This resulted in the formation of several organic compounds.

What does this say about intelligence?

Conditions that favor random interactions of elements or molecules or compounds, will produce something meaningful eventually.

But, how is this related to AGI?

I'll talk about that next. But, before that, I should talk about the 2004 Will Smith starrer, I, Robot.

Will probability give rise to AGI too?

I was watching I, Robot (2004) recently and there's a scene with Dr. Alfred Lanning's voiceover. It was interesting. It goes like this,

"There have always been ghosts in the machine. Random segments of code that have grouped together to form unexpected protocols. Unanticipated, these free radicals engender questions of free will, creativity, and even the nature of what we might call the soul."

Looking at unprecedented growth we've seen in the AI space over the last two years, it makes sense more than ever.

While researchers and programmers have a good handle over the inner workings of various AI models (which allows them to set guardrails and define scope), there are still several things they don't know or cannot explain.

Sometimes, AI models can exhibit emergent behavior - abilities the developers did not explicitly program. These emergent capabilities can be surprising or seem “mysterious,” but they rest on an underlying architecture and training process that is well understood.

It's like everyone of us is born with the brain that is physiologically the same. But, our interactions with our environment and the interactions between our neurons inside our head makes us who we are.

The same is happening to AI models.

Every day, they're having millions of conversations from across the world, allowing them to learn a ton of new things. I believe this is the equivalent of the scenario where the inorganic compounds interacted with each other for a prolonged period of time.

And, similar to it giving rise to amino acids and eventually life, the constant learning might give AI models new behaviors and capabilities which could eventually lead to their consciousness.

It's a huge "what if...", "only if..." scenario, but you can't rule it out, considering the times we live in.

Learning from our origins

When we look back at the primordial soup, life's emergence was a natural progression. It was not forced. It was organic. It was also sudden - unplanned and unanticipated. And, it led to us humans, who are capable enough to build AI models.

We're at a very similar crossroads with the progression of AI. The current pace of evolution of AI models might one day lead to something we currently can't fathom.

But unlike the distant past, we have the ability to observe, guide, and influence this evolution. We have some level of control.

We have an unprecedented opportunity and responsibility—to shape what comes next.

Let's be curious. Let's ask questions. Let's engage with the technology, not just as users but as thoughtful participants in its evolution.

The rest is not up to us.

The dystopian future we read about in science fiction novels is already here. It just doesn't look like what we imagined.

Yes, there are no robots walking the streets or flying cars zooming over our heads. Not yet.

But we have something that is equally unsettling – a world where we can't simply exist without performing for an audience.

When was the last time you saw someone truly enjoy a concert? People watch live performances through their camera apps, ready to capture 'the right moment'. The music, the atmosphere, the collective joy of being as one and enjoying the music is gone. Every moment comes filtered through a smartphone display.

Travel isn't about discovery anymore. It's about content. People hop between Insta-worthy locations, trying to capture the perfect shot. They go looking for restaurants to post pictures of the amazing looking food they had. The joy of getting lost in a new city without an agenda, is almost extinct.

And you can't just create art anymore. You can't just write a book, run a magazine, write poetry, make art. You also need to be a "content creator." You need to hit a critical mass of followers to even get a publisher to notice you.

Every business owner must be an influencer. You can't rest until you've "cracked" it, because you have to grab the attention of your potential customers. “You have to get above the noise” as they say it.

You're not truly independent. You're always under pressure to create and perform. You can't be burnt out or take a break, because the algorithm wants you to post every day. Take a break, and you become invisible. The future of your business depends on engagement metrics, follower counts, and likes.

We've turned against each other too. We fight viciously over trivial things online. We've formed digital tribes, ready to attack anyone who questions our beliefs, our idols, or our choices.

We're uncertain about our kids' future. With AI coming into the picture and taking entry-level jobs, we have to question the very existence of schools, colleges, and careers.

Isn’t this dystopian enough?

We didn't need an authoritarian regime to control us. We built our own little bubble. And the scariest part? We're all willing participants. We have the key to break free. But we won't use it. Because somewhere along the way, our cage became our comfort zone.

Jimmy is a familiar name. At least among those who grew up in Tamil Nadu. It's the most common name for domesticated dogs that were born in the 80s, like how “Karthik” was common for most Tamil men born during the late 80s-90s.

I have vague memories of Jimmy when I grew up. I've heard most of it through my mom and dad.

I'm not sure how Jimmy came into our family. Dad said a friend of his brought in a stray pup, and it got the name “Jimmy”. What can I say? My family lacked creativity, and they didn't want to name the pup “Subramani” after Moondram Pirai.

Jimmy grew up too pampered. Dad used to say Jimmy knew the sound of dad's cycle bell when he entered the street, and he could hear the barking from far away. My dad had another associate – a cat. It was a weird one. It used to visit our house only for meals, and it ate namkeen all the time. My family always had a pack of 'kaara sevu' in a giant Calcium Sandoz bottle on top of the TV unit, just for the cat.

Apart from eating the 'Kaara sevu', the cat hung out with Jimmy in the afternoons, and spent the evenings on a compound wall at the end of the street. When my dad entered the street, the cat used to walk over compound walls, along with my dad. Jimmy, on the other hand, was lazy. Lazy enough to look at a robber once and sleep again.

One night, everyone at the house was sound asleep. A robber jumped into our house and opened the window to take a peek inside. He was daring enough to stand next to sleeping Jimmy. Jimmy, being the mighty, woke up, looked at him, and slept again. Makes me think if Jimmy is the laziest dog that ever lived.

My dad's elder sister, who's a bit of a hard nut to crack, melted every time she was around Jimmy. The dog always got VIP treatment around her. Legend says I used to wrestle with the dog when I was a toddler. Mom used to say whenever we went to Chennai for vacation, the dog wouldn't let us in until we gave him six months' worth of cuddles and kisses.

Jimmy lived a full life. We came to know about Jimmy’s end through an inland letter. We didn’t have a phone back then, and we were living far away. We couldn't go. But we knew Jimmy was buried somewhere in our backyard. I don't know if my dad cried. But, he never adopted a dog again. He said he won't be able to bear the loss of another Jimmy.

A few years later, we moved back to the house Jimmy grew up in. We spent the next 15 years in that house. And dad hardly mentioned Jimmy. Several times, I've seen him sit on the porch smoking a cigarette, lost in his thoughts. Was he thinking of Jimmy? Was he regretting not being with him in his last moments? I never figured out. If I'm thinking of Jimmy every now and then, I bet he would've too…more than I ever could.

Takeaway: Most times, customer experience comes as a result of common sense. I realized it last week while sitting at a restaurant.

The Story: It’s been a while since I and Suba went on a dinner date. Pregnancy and the kid kept us busy for the last six months. Also, after my daughter was born, we were always too tired to sneak out and get some dinner even if we had the chance. All we had the energy for was a short walk and a cup of tea.

So it is natural for us to get excited when we heard about the new seafood restaurant that opened in the vicinity. We decided to do a proper dinner this time. So, we made careful planning two weeks in advance to squeeze 90 minutes of our time for a quick dinner. We were looking for the right moment and it came in on a Friday evening. We got buy-in from my mom who agreed to watch the kid while we were out.

As we entered the restaurant, a Tamil guy opened the door and said “namaste”. I don’t understand why! (Because ‘namaste’ is a Hindi word and we no way look like people from the North). But that’s not important in this story.\

The restaurant was a fine dining place and it looked the part. Fancy lights, a large seating area, props on the wall fitting the beach vibe, etc. Even the waiters wore bright floral shirts to fit into the theme.

The experience was great right from the beginning. A waitress saw us walking in, opened the door, and walked us to our table. She pulled the chairs for us to sit on and even suggested the best items on the menu. The food came in and it was great. The speakers were playing M.S. Viswanathan hits, which gave the place a different vibe. The classic playlist was effortless to listen to and we were having a good time. Everything was on point until I heard the ad.

I felt like I was snapped back to reality. Everything I was vibing to until then came to a standstill. The playlist was from YouTube and it started playing ads in the middle of the song. I only thought I had in my at that moment was “How much will it cost the restaurant to buy a YouTube premium subscription?

It’s ₹1250 (~$15 USD) for a whole year. I know it because I have a subscription.

That’s the average bill amount in the restaurant for a party of two. Even with all the math, we can certainly say $15 a year is not a huge expense for the restaurant.

I don’t know about you, but I don’t want to listen to YouTube ads on a fine set of speakers while I’m having dinner at a fancy restaurant. Probably the restaurant management would’ve thought “When we don’t have live music, let’s play songs from YouTube. It’s free anyway!

Companies should realize that even the smallest things matter when it comes to customer experience. I wrote about this a couple of years back, an incident where cutting a chole bhature in half before frying it gave us a memorable customer experience.

I can recall another personal experience from 2014. A bunch of friends visited a barbeque restaurant for lunch on a rainy day and our clothes got wet. The restaurant gave us T-shirts and took our clothes for drying. After our lunch, we got back our clothes neat and dry. The restaurant didn’t have to do that. But, they did, because they want us to feel comfortable right from the beginning. That is the key to a good customer experience.

The size of the brand doesn’t matter when it comes to customer experience. It is the mindset of the people who are running it that matters. The people behind the best brands understand how the little things matter and execute them in order to deliver an exceptional customer experience. I wish more brands understand the importance of customer experience and work towards it.