Dan Blumberg

Really enjoyed meeting researchers and builders at the AI + Environment Summit Zurich. Highlights include Melissa Chapman's great overview of her work to drive conservation policies through a combination of social x ecosystem analysis, Michael Anthony's insights on challenges of using AI within the constraints of real world data and institutional know-hows, and Xiaoxiang Zhu's wishlist for the burgeoning number of earth observation models. Through Ecomonitor's work of building a policy sandbox for natural hazards and socio-economic policy "levers" (ex: retrofit), I truly appreciate these much needed highlights on the importance of validation, user/decision maker educations, and as Michael succinctly pointed out, context. Looking forward to more of these discussions in the near future.

13

With all the year-end carbon market reviews and 2026 outlooks lately, I’ve been reflecting on what I’m actually watching most closely as a project developer heading into the new year. I’ve worked in carbon markets for several years now, and what’s interesting to me about 2026 is that a few themes that used to feel far off are starting to feel real in a very operational way. 🏛️ Compliance markets are beginning to take shape in a way that will fundamentally change the landscape. For a long time, regulatory schemes felt like something always on the horizon. But with CORSIA, the EU and UK ETS, and larger programs emerging in places like Japan, China, Indonesia, and Brazil, it feels like we’re starting to see the early shift from carbon markets being mostly voluntary to increasingly compliance-driven. I don’t think the voluntary market is going anywhere anytime soon, but as compliance demand grows, I find myself thinking a lot about what that means for removals in particular. Meeting future demand will require serious scaling work around price, quality, and operational readiness. 🤝 🌱 Benefits beyond carbon are clear project differentiators, not just “cherries on top.” Co-benefits have always mattered, but it’s abundantly clear that they are becoming central to how projects stand out and how premiums are earned. This is something nature-based projects have done well for years, and I think all CDR pathways are going to need to get more intentional here. For us in biochar, I’m thinking about impacts beyond removal itself. Better biomass management, methane avoidance at landfills, soil health improvements in agriculture and urban environments. But also partnership-building in the communities we operate in, and what it looks like to make carbon removal work create strong livelihoods, not just credits. ✅ Project integrity is moving from an abstract concept to something really tangible. Integrity has been a theme in carbon markets for years, and we’re seeing high-rated projects draw real price premiums. In engineered CDR, permanence and quantification are often more straightforward than in some nature-based pathways. But in biochar, and especially as we scale, that integrity is just as dependent on the physical world. Long-term feedstock certainty, durable community relationships, and multiple real offtake routes matter tremendously. Delivering high-quality credits means being able to trace every step from feedstock to end use, and proving that can hold up over time. I’m obviously looking at a lot of this through a biochar-focused lens, and more than anything I’m eager to see the role biochar and other CDR pathways end up playing in compliance markets, and in how these projects differentiate going forward. Would love to hear from other project developers and folks in the space on what you’re thinking heading into 2026, and how these broader market shifts are shaping your operations. Also sharing some super helpful sources in the comments below ⬇️

23

2 Comments

Hot take about the NYC tech networking scene. Everyone is starting an “event series” now. Every week in New York there are dozens of “founder mixers,” “VC networking nights,” and “tech community gatherings.” The barrier to entry is basically zero. A group chat. A free bar space. A Canva flyer. An Eventbrite link. That’s it. Which means we’re seeing two very different types of hosts emerge. 1. The Monetizers (masked as impact) These are the people charging $25–$75 tickets, $5k sponsor packages, and “VIP access” to rooms they got for free. I mean literally free. Think about it, hotels need traffic, they need people buying rooms and drinks at the bar. Foot traffic. So the hotel gives event space away for FREE. No real curation. No real outcomes. Just volume. The math rarely adds up for founders or sponsors. If you’re charging people to get in the room, you better be extremely intentional about who is in that room and what ROI they will get from it. Because charging founders and sponsors for access without delivering outcomes isn’t community building. It’s extraction. 2. The real Builders (actual impact) Then there are people who genuinely care about building ecosystems. They host events because they want founders to meet investors. Operators to meet builders. Ideas to collide. No tickets. No sponsor exploitation. Just value creation. Yesterday I met Somya Gupta, and honestly he might be the best networker I’ve seen in the next generation of 20-something community builders. He’s hosted 75 events. Charged $0. Just focused on connecting great people. That’s the type of energy the ecosystem actually needs. Which is why I’m excited to soft launch a partnership where anyone attending Somya’s events will get free access to Vettable Because I only want Vettable aligned with value creation, not event arbitrage. If you want to make money hosting events, that’s fine. Just be honest about it. And deliver results that justify the price. Otherwise you’re not building community. You’re selling the illusion of it. Thanks for coming to my rant.

33

4 Comments

AI won't fix your content. But it will expose whether you have anything worth saying. I've been building content systems for years -- on my blog, on WP Mayor, and several other niche sites I've run over the years. And the thing I keep seeing -- from founders, consultants, agency owners -- is the same mistake. They grab an AI tool, feed it a topic, and start publishing. The content looks fine. It's grammatically correct. It hits the right keywords. And it goes absolutely nowhere. Here's why: they skipped the only step that actually matters. What do I actually know and think about this? AI is a multiplier. But a multiplier on zero is still zero. The content engine I use has two layers: Hero content (quarterly) -- high-effort pieces that take a genuine stance and attract new audiences BAU content (weekly) -- consistent output that keeps you in front of people who already trust you AI handles the execution speed. The thinking still has to come from you. In practice: I jot notes on a flight, record a voice memo while driving, or dump rough thoughts into an AI tool. It turns those into a structured article, social posts, and a newsletter. My ideas, just no longer stuck in my head. This is especially powerful for founder-led marketing. Founders and CEOs are the most authentic voices in their companies -- but also the busiest. AI lets them turn a few minutes of thinking into a week of content. No ghostwriter. No marketing team speaking on their behalf. Most professionals can write a decent blog post. But crafting content that works on LinkedIn or X requires understanding how each platform's algorithm surfaces content. AI bridges that gap -- translating your expertise into platform-native formats. So the question isn't "should I use AI for content?" It's "do I have something worth amplifying?" I wrote up the full system -- the two-layer framework, the interview hack, where AI fits and where it doesn't: https://lnkd.in/eusZ4fVU What's your current content workflow -- fully manual, AI-assisted, or something in between?

11

2 Comments

Anthropic just threw down the gauntlet, and as a founder building on Claude, I see this as the definitive shift from AI-as-a-feature to AI-as-the-Operating-Layer. The launch of the Claude Marketplace is the boldest move in the industry because it doesn’t just build a store; it constructs an enterprise dependency moat. Here is why this changes everything for startups and technologists: The Zero-Commission Moat: While incumbents like Apple, AWS, and Azure take a 3% to 30% cut, Anthropic is taking 0%. They are trading short-term transaction revenue for total ecosystem lock-in. Budget Liquidity: Enterprises can now use their pre-allocated Anthropic spending commitments to buy third-party startup tools. This effectively turns a "use-it-or-lose-it" API budget into a venture fund for specialized agents. Procurement as a Service: The "enterprise hurdle"vetting dozens of individual startups is gone. Startups get immediate GTM access to the Fortune 500 through a single, consolidated invoice. The MCP Standard: By leveraging the Model Context Protocol (MCP), Anthropic is standardizing how agents talk to the world. We aren't just building apps; we’re building interactive UI components that run directly inside the customer’s workspace. The message to founders is clear: If you build on Claude, you aren't just getting a frontier model you're getting an enterprise distribution engine that bypasses the traditional sales cycle. The moat isn’t the fee. The moat is the dependency. #AI #Startups #Anthropic #Claude #EnterpriseAI #Founders #MCP

35

3 Comments

Digital ID is starting to show up in real-world environments at scale. It’s easy to assume that one dominant wallet will emerge and own the experience. I don’t think that’s where this is going. I think we’re heading towards a multi-wallet world: > Government wallets for public services and neutral national ID > Platform wallets (Apple, Google, Samsung) optimized for consumer convenience > Embedded and cloud wallets inside bank, telco, and retail apps (often invisible to users) > Organizational wallets for legal entities, authority, and auditability > And eventually, wallets designed for AI agents Some of these wallets will be ones users actively open and interact with. Others will operate quietly in the background, powering authentication, authorization, and data exchange without adding friction. The real value is using this technology to create seamless experiences that improve privacy, security, and efficiency across the board. Wallets and credentials can become the backbone for protecting users, enabling entirely new types of interactions, and unlocking new economic and ecosystem opportunities. The goal is not more apps or more interfaces. It is better trust infrastructure that just works.

26

6 Comments

Last year: Writing JavaScript on paper in high school. This year: $11M seed round and a government mandate. How is this possible? Tanner Jones and his co-founder had ZERO engineering background. They built an AI tool that analyzed Virginia's regulatory code. Result? → Saved Virginians $1 BILLION annually → Reduced average new home prices by $24,000 → Won government contract over established consulting firms The governor loved it so much that he signed Executive Order 51. Every. Single. State. Agency. Must now use "agentic AI regulatory review." Not a suggestion. A mandate. 30 days from idea to government contract. 4 months to $11M from top VCs. And they're not alone: Ambral → One solo CTO doing the work of an entire engineering team. Building AI that gives every B2B customer a dedicated account manager experience. HumanLayer → Pivoted their entire product. Built everything with Claude Code. Published a viral guide on AI agents now used across the YC ecosystem. Here's the part that should terrify traditional software companies: One founder said, "If you understand language and critical thinking, you can use Claude Code well. People who studied humanities might actually have an ADVANTAGE." Read that again. The technical moat is gone. Speed isn't about how many engineers you have anymore. It's about how clearly you can think and communicate with AI. 3-person teams are beating consulting firms. Non-technical founders are shipping production software. Development cycles went from weeks to hours. The question isn't "Do I have the technical skills?" It's "What am I building this week?" What would YOU build if the technical barriers disappeared right now? Drop it below 👇

2

I started as Chief of Staff at staXscale recently, and have gotten to be part of making some critical pre-launch decisions. Like how to bill. The industry is WEIRD about it and wholly unclear. We've opted to not try to trick anyone (which seems to be standard). Hear me out - in server administration, a 'site visit' isn't a unit of computing - it's a bullsht proxy metric. When hosts say they bill by visits, they're abstracting away what actually consumes resources - bandwidth, CPU cycles, memory, and I/O. A visitor reading a text page and a visitor streaming a 4K video are supposedly billed identically, despite vastly different resource demands. This works fine for simple sites, but it makes optimization harder and creates unpredictable costs as your traffic patterns evolve. At staXscale, you pay for what you allocate: RAM and CPU. No guesswork about whether your 'visits' will trigger an overage. You provision the resources your application needs, scale them when you need to, and pay for capacity, not traffic patterns. And if you DO go over, you're not permanently kicked out of your lower plan (spikes happen). If you want to optimize costs, you optimize your infrastructure, not your visitor count - it's meaningless. I LOVE IT HERE. Sign up for the launch alert at staXscale.com

21

9 Comments

💭 𝗔𝗺𝗲𝗿��𝗰𝗮 𝗶𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘄 𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝗯𝗶𝗴 𝗯𝗲𝘁 𝗼𝗻 𝗔𝗜 Ruchir Sharma's Financial Times piece is insightful and on point—the U.S. economy has turned into a single, massive bet on AI. AI is now the default fix for everything—productivity, growth, and global competitiveness. Markets are pricing in perfection, with a handful of AI-proxy stocks driving >80% of the S&P 500 gains. I am long on AI’s transformative potential; however, when one technology becomes the primary growth engine for an entire economy, the concentration risk is real. 💠 The upside: faster adoption, cross-sector innovation, and genuine productivity gains. 💠 The risk: over-dependence, inflated expectations, and fragile optionality if AI ROI lags behind the hype. Leaders and investors need to balance conviction with caution—building real capabilities and growth & productivity engines, not just narratives. #AIacceleration #DigitalTransformation #Innovation #FutureOfWork

16

3 Comments

The world is undoubtedly changing so fast. And there are a few people that have a bird's-eye view of what's really going on and how's going to unfold. Smart, inquisitive tech journalists are probably your best bet at that, And David Ewing Duncan is one of the best out there. This was a fun, heart-to-heart conversation. Recording a few months ago, it's crazy to see how much the world has changed since then. We covered longevity, AI, the future of humanity, and what we can do to find meaning and stability in 2026. Out now on The Beyond Tomorrow Podcast. Link in comments!

33

13 Comments

OpenAI just lost its COO, its AGI CEO is on medical leave, and its CMO is stepping down — all at the same time. 🚨 Let that sink in. This isn't a minor reshuffle. This is the leadership team of the most talked-about AI company in the world shifting dramatically — right in the middle of its most critical growth phase. Here's what's actually happening: 🔹 COO Brad Lightcap is out of his role, moving to lead "special projects" reporting directly to Sam Altman. 🔹 CEO of AGI Development Fidji Simo is taking medical leave for several weeks due to a neuroimmune condition — with co-founder Greg Brockman stepping in to manage product. 🔹 CMO Kate Rouch is stepping down to focus on her cancer recovery. 🔹 Former Slack CEO Denise Dresser absorbs commercial duties. OpenAI says it has "continuity and momentum" — and with nearly 1 billion users and strong enterprise growth, the numbers back that up. But here's the real lesson for every leader and organization watching this unfold: Strong systems outlast strong individuals. The companies that scale aren't the ones that depend on any single person — they're the ones that build deep enough benches, clear enough processes, and resilient enough cultures to keep moving no matter what. OpenAI is stress-testing that theory in real time. Whether this is a sign of cracks at the top or simply the growing pains of a company moving faster than any org chart can keep up with — only time will tell. What's your read on this? Is this a red flag for OpenAI, or proof that great organizations can weather any storm? 👇 Drop your thoughts below. 🔗 Full story via TechCrunch: https://lnkd.in/dZW-JWAK

10

IRL in NYC this month, bringing people together, one room at a time At Fabrik, I’m continuing to explore how intentional gatherings can create meaningful connection: ✨ May 11: New In NYC - Build Your Next Chapter for anyone starting something new - career, project, or life in NYC. ✨ May 28: Social Wellness in the Workplace - Designing Connection Systems for People, Culture, & Workplace leaders rethinking how connection actually happens at work. And a few events I’m excited to join across the city: ✨ May 6: Podcast people dinner (with Lauren Passell) ✨ May 10: Cajun & Creole music & dancing (Red Hook) ✨ May 12: Human intelligence in the age of AI (with Olivier Siboni) ✨ May 14: SaaS Lander Tech Night (with Business France Tech - North America) So much momentum starts in conversations, small groups, and the right rooms. If we’re crossing paths this month, come say hi!

13

What does it really mean to be building a Consumer AI-native product today? BBG Ventures continued its Breakfast Series with a convo on Consumer AI co-hosted with Factorial, Lightspeed, New Enterprise Associates (NEA), Stellation Capital (thanks SVB!) We were joined by two forward thinking AI-native builders - Dennis Crowley at Hopscotch Labs and Anna Bofa at Crate - and got into the hard stuff: what's valuable or just a feature; what does real personalization look like; what makes a product a no-brainer for user adoption; what are the new moats, and what are VCs looking for when they invest early? Our top takeaways below - weigh in with your thoughts! ✨ What’s newly possible vs. what’s newly trivial. AI makes a lot easier—but only some things more valuable. The best builders are distinguishing between products that unlocks new user behavior, that are meaningfully differentiated (possible) and features that simply make things easier - or could be built in a weekend (trivial). VCs are looking to invest in the former. H/t Matthew Hartman for this frame. 🧠 Is personalization the VIBE N of 1 personalization is the holy grail - but it's about more than prediction, it's about empathy. It's about building memory over time—capturing user tone, goals, and intent—and creating a vibe match that makes the product feel intuitive and emotionally aligned. That’s what builds trust, repeat use, and brand equity. Crate is doing this by collecting implicit signal, and Hopscotch's Beebot through its ambient "pop in your airpods" approach. Which brings us to ... ⚖️ The product "effort spectrum" Every product lives somewhere on the no → low → hard effort spectrum. AI-native experiences need to be closer to the "no-effort" end of the spectrum - a value exchange and clear payoff for little work. Put another way, friction is the enemy of frequency. 🧱 Moats are the same but different Fundamental moats remain the same, but network effects, proprietary data etc, but they get more exciting because of feedback loops and real time user data - for each interaction and related improvement. Hot take related to personalization from me: maybe the vibe match becomes the moat? 📊 What VCs are looking for at Seed vs. Series A At Seed, the VCs in the room Matthew Hartman Peter Boyce II and BBG Ventures are backing founders with a deep POV on behavior, training loops, and interface design. We prize organic growth and WOM. By Series A, investors like Michael Mignano Danielle Lay are looking for continued organic growth, strong retention and stable user cohorts, real engagement depth, customer obsession and proprietary data We're investing in Consumer AI! If you're building something newly possible and you believe in wow moments; if you’re working on n of 1 personalization and the vibe match with less work users come talk to us. Full post 👉 https://lnkd.in/geFief5D Claire Biernacki Susan Lyne

39

5 Comments

I've been reflecting on the great night last week of Massachusetts AI Coalition. Special thanks to Jamie Goldstein and the Pillar VC team, and to WHOOP for hosting. Fun surprise to have both Maura Healey and Sam Altman participate. I'm so excited for how New England, and Boston in pariticular will evolve with this new era of AI-driven change. As a longtime affiliate of MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL), we've long been discussing frontiers of AI. Clearly, the Bay Area is currently so impressive in its forward momentum, but other hubs are really coming into their own - LA, NYC, etc. Of all of them, Boston is clearly positioned as a major leader in leveraging AI to author our new future. We have breadth and depth of industry, unbelievable educational institutions, and a long history of tech leadership. So I'm excited to be a part of the Boston AI community, and excited for what we will build together in years to come. If you are considering where to base yourself, strongly suggest looking to Boston. Great core tech; great breadth of industry; unlimited educational opportunities, and perfectly broad lifestyle opportunities for all interests (mountains, beaches, Arts, sports, etc.) ---not to mention a rational constitution-abiding government, safe cities, with solid K-12 education and worldclass healthcare access as well! AI future is very exciting. And, Boston is a fabulous place to locate as you look to build and leverage! Onwards & upwards, #GetTogetherGetAhead !

32

1 Comment

Talking to users and thoughtfully integrating their needs and wants was woven through everything we did at IDEO—threaded through every prototype and product decision. Reading my colleagues Joanne and Leo's latest work brought that to mind. They describe a future where research runs continuously, with AI agents recruiting participants and instantly surfacing insights. Synthetic personas, carefully trained on consumer signals, mirror human behavior closely enough to extend live studies and compress timelines from weeks to hours. Today user research mostly runs in fits and starts, prohibitively expensive and locked away in dedicated project cycles when it could be a constant companion, seamlessly integrated into the product development process. Joanne and Leo lay out the full vision here: https://lnkd.in/gEUBSG_J

35

3 Comments

Hot off the press! 🚨 We’re officially announcing The Angel Pledge by the Massachusetts AI Coalition. Help Massachusetts lead in AI. Support our founders. Take The Angel Pledge angel today and commit to investing $50k+ over five years into companies being built here in Massachusetts. Fast flexible capital is an important piece to success in the life of early stage founders and we want to make sure that accredited investors are able to help support these founders quickly, and in a meaningful way. Thank you to those who have already taken the pledge! We appreciate it, and so do all founders. There are three rules to taking the Angel Pledge. 1. Be Accountable: Hold yourself accountable to the pledge. The opportunity here is simple: make the pledge and follow through with it. Commit to deploying capital consistently over the five years and hold yourself to that standard. 2. Make fast decisions: Decide in 1 day One 30-minute call to decide. No multi-meeting "process." No diligence theater. You take the call, you make your decision. "Yes" or "No." This is how SF operates and it's how we'll operate. 3. Be a silent supporter: Founders decide if they want to reach out. Consider yourself a silent backer unless reached out to directly by the founder. With small checks, founders can't be expected to manage relationships with every investor, they need to stay focused on building the future. Take the pledge!

94

16 Comments

“Vibe coding has brought the joy back to building software.” 💻 Dan Katcher, founder and CEO of Rocket Farm Studios, leads an AI development consultancy based in Boston. In a recent Connected Stories conversation for Tech Waves, he reflects on how generative AI is beginning to reshape the craft of software development. After a decade away from coding, Katcher recently returned to it. AI tools, he argues, allow developers to move more quickly from idea to working prototype. Instead of fully specifying systems before writing code, teams can build early versions, test them with clients, and refine them through rapid iteration. The change affects not only productivity but also the creative process.🧑‍🎨 Development becomes more exploratory, closer to experimentation than to traditional engineering planning. ⚙️ This shift is appearing across the technology industry. As AI becomes embedded in development workflows, the boundaries between design, prototyping, and coding are starting to blur. 🤖 The takeaway: AI may reshape not just software products, but how software itself gets built.

8

8 Comments