103 points tosh 2 hours ago 76 comments

redoxate 1 hour ago | parent

What edge do they have over the market to justify such evaluation

gavinray 1 hour ago | parent

Upvotes and Twitter hype

babelfish 1 hour ago | parent

100mm arr

simonw 1 hour ago | parent

Probably their team. Ex-OpenAI people who have already proven they can ship and get buzz for what they're doing.

miguelacevedo 21 minutes ago | parent

Same thing was said about Character AI, Cohere, etc. Companies started by the authors of the "Attention is all you need" paper. Look how that went... the team gets thrown around a lot as if it's the magic bullet. There is no magic bullet.

simonw 4 minutes ago | parent

Those ex-OpenAI people who started Anthropic are doing pretty well right now.

VC is a hits business. Just one hit pays for 9 that didn't work out.

prometheus1992 1 hour ago | parent

I really don't understand how this can be. I have sat in fund raising meetings with VCs in toronto and my experience is that there is shit ton of due diligence at the tech level. a product which has no moat, was already available, was duplicated within a couple of days is valued at 7B - i thought we were past the peak of the hype cycle.

slopinthebag 1 hour ago | parent

brb gonna wrap claude with a new form of prompting and raise 500 mil

Onavo 1 hour ago | parent

You are used to dealing with companies where the money bags hold the power.

When you are in the middle of a boom cycle, it's the hottest company that has the advantage. Investing in them is a matter of privilege and they get to pick and choose.

Also, Canadian VCs are bottom of the barrel as far as VCs go.

besterman23 1 hour ago | parent

Probably the “nobody ever got fired for buying IBM” effect. If there’s a use case for the tech, buying the most well known implementation of it will always be useful for people who want credit without the threat of blame. This funding is based entirely on the hype and a bet that TypeSafe will have name recognition.

johnfn 1 hour ago | parent

Isn't this the exact opposite? When people were saying that saying, the connotation was that IBM was an old, stodgy company that had been around forever. (These days I often think "No one got fired for choosing AWS"). Typesafe is a hot new startup that could, to my eyes, easily burst into flame or die in the next year.

besterman23 49 minutes ago | parent

I’m saying the bet is in them becoming THE System One Model company.

kingcauchy 1 hour ago | parent

It might be the people that are being acquired too, at huge inflated ai researchers salaries.

Acquired in the vc sense… not literal exit.

reticulates 1 hour ago | parent

The lack of a “moat” is mostly irrelevant because success is not decided by who can or can’t be cloned. TypeSafe invented[1] a new approach that became wildly popular almost immediately, if they can do that once, they can probably do it again. Venture capital is big bets, of course TypeSafe is going to fail, that’s inevitable, but if it has even a 10% chance of capturing 1/10th the market cap of OpenAI then it is a great investment! Plus, money means nothing any more, they’ve raised less at a lower valuation than Instinct, a personal assistant.

[1] not really but they did some innovative things and popularized a concept

nateb2022 58 minutes ago | parent

I'd guess they justified the funding by revealing some grand scheme for a new product that they just need more runway to produce.

phren0logy 1 hour ago | parent

The API was duplicated, the results were not.

dvrp 1 hour ago | parent

That is not how it works in the US.

InsideOutSanta 58 minutes ago | parent

> there is shit ton of due diligence at the tech level

Maybe in some cases. But counterexample, courtesy of The Information:

"It took just 15 minutes for Blue Owl executives to agree to invest up to $10 billion in future projects alongside real estate firm Primary Digital Infrastructure during their first in-person meeting two years ago, said Primary chief investment officer Bill Stein."

https://www.theinformation.com/articles/blue-owl-eyes-new-de...

AI seems to make some people lose their damned minds.

nlpnerd 47 minutes ago | parent

This is the difference between a "hot" company in a good ecosystem like SF. Yeah, the funds can take 2-3 months to do their due diligence. By the time it's done, the round has closed, and then what good is the due diligence?

bix6 42 minutes ago | parent

They got money and it needs to be put to work!

baobabKoodaa 41 minutes ago | parent

> was already available

no, it was not

> was duplicated within a couple of days

was it already available or did it become available in a couple of days? it cant be both (neither is true, actually)

geoffschmidt 38 minutes ago | parent

There is a belief that there is going to be at least one more breakout success in startup AI labs - rather than OpenAI and Anthropic being the final word - and so investors want to own a part of whichever companies seem most likely to be that success. If you start from that premise and stack rank what company that might be, you could quite reasonably put TypeSafe toward the top of that list right now, based on the people at the company and the ability they've demonstrated to ship stuff that people care about and cut through the noise in a crowded space.

Also the situation isn't static. Investors know that the act of writing them a $870M check itself increases the chance that they'll be one of the winners, because that will attract more talent, customers, and funding to the company in a self-reinforcing cycle. And investors know that other investors know that, and that someone is going to write them that $870M check, so to some extent they're forced to think of the company as having already been successful at the fundraising and already having that momentum boost.

Only a small number of investors in the world can play the game at this level, because you have to smart enough to be right (often enough), and you have to be established enough to see the deals (be on every CEO's short list - because CEOs are only going to seriously pitch 5-10 VCs on a hot deal, if that). Otherwise you can't pull it off. Martin Casado and his team are among the few that can and I think their results reflect that.

dist-epoch 28 minutes ago | parent

What was the moat of Dropbox? Of Instagram? Of GitHub? Or of countless other very successful startups when they started?

Anyone know when this "have no moat" meme appeared? Even 5 years ago I don't remember seeing it on every post.

jghn 1 hour ago | parent

Every time I see these headlines I wonder why the Scala company is back in the news

bel8 1 hour ago | parent

Do they have patents over jev related tech or something valuable to justify this?

armcat 1 hour ago | parent

It's weird because two days after Jev was released there were a dozen decision models, a week later there are several dozen, mostly open source, OpenAI's own Decisions API [1] beats it, and you can easily finetune your own [2]. But as others have pointed out, this doesn't matter.

[1] https://developers.openai.com/api/docs/guides/decisions

[2] https://unsloth.ai/docs/basics/train-your-own-decision-model...

dkersten 59 minutes ago | parent

Most of them appear to be small LLM’s fine tuned for the role.

That’s a different set of properties in terms of size, cost, and latency. Jev (apparently, not like I’ve seen its insides) is extremely cheap, extremely fast, doesn’t cost any output tokens as it speaks the output natively, can’t get the output wrong because it speaks the format natively, and (presumably based on the docs), the context is separate from the question, meaning it should be immune (or at least highly resistant) to prompt injection attacks.

It’s not just about the accuracy of the result, it’s a collection of all the properties that make Jev interesting.

Jev took years to develop, I strongly doubt that a copycat that was put together within days after Jev’s release will be able to match it on a sun of its properties. Even if fine tuned LLMs can outperform it on raw accuracy.

devin 48 minutes ago | parent

Jev did not take years to develop. What it does was published in arxiv back in 2025. TypeSafe just marketed it.

baobabKoodaa 28 minutes ago | parent

What specific arxiv paper are you referencing here?

homarp 25 minutes ago | parent

baobabKoodaa 21 minutes ago | parent

Yeah, I figured it was gonna be this one.

"SalesRLAgent: A Reinforcement Learning Approach for Real-Time Sales Conversion Prediction and Optimization"

Jev is a general-purpose thing. That is a specific-purpose thing. General-purpose thing is not the same as specific-purpose thing. What makes people think these are the same thing? I don't get it.

devin 9 minutes ago | parent

What do you mean? Jev is trivially different from what is described in this paper.

hbrn 9 minutes ago | parent

> I strongly doubt that a copycat that was put together within days after Jev’s release will be able to match it on a sun of its properties

But why? If the simplest way to achieve Jev's capabilities (accuracy, cost, latency) is by fine tuning a small model, what makes you think that this isn't exactly what Typesafe did?

And even if they did something different - what makes you think it was a good idea in the first place, given how easy their results were replicated without any "secret sauce"?

mlmonkey 55 minutes ago | parent

OpenAI's "Decisions" library has this in requirements:

To run the SDK examples below, use these OpenAI SDK versions or later: Python 3.26.0,

I thought Pythin 3.15.0 just came out, 3.26.0 must be really far off?

bayesianbot 43 minutes ago | parent

That is their Python SDK version, not Python version

scottyah 53 minutes ago | parent

> OpenAI's own Decisions API [1] beats it

Have you heard that from a different source than OpenAI? From what I'd heard other models haven't gotten close, and the open source ones are like running gemma4 E2B against Opus 5.5- sure, the API calls go in and are returned the same but the quality isn't close.

nlpnerd 49 minutes ago | parent

You are assuming that the VCs have done their due diligence. For a "hot" company like Typesafe AI, most likely little due diligence was done. That's the way it's played.

baobabKoodaa 43 minutes ago | parent

> you can easily finetune your own

no, you can't, and it's unclear why you would think this.

ricericerice 13 minutes ago | parent

you can easily finetune your own*

*if you have a sufficiently sized and quality dataset for the specific classifications you're targeting

baobabKoodaa 12 minutes ago | parent

And even if you do have that, you haven't made your own Jev, because Jev is a general-purpose thing, whereas what you have built is a specific-purpose thing.

ttul 41 minutes ago | parent

But Jev established the branding and investors are betting that Jev will be acquired by one of the big labs soon - and if they aren't, the money itself can create a positive outcome by allowing Jev to hire incredible talent and scale the company rapidly.

Oras 22 minutes ago | parent

Rapidly? Their 2 years of stealth was replicated in 2 weeks.

I give it to them for creating the hype (good marketing), and for making a useful classifier. Not sure what they would scale rapidly though.

brink 14 minutes ago | parent

Either the investors know something we don't, or the market is irrational.

rsalus 13 minutes ago | parent

I feel like half the game now is marketing though, so I can see why they'd be attractive to an investor. Maybe if they scale they can come up with something.

ModernMech 12 minutes ago | parent

It’s the classic SV flip. You scale your investors, your executive team, your sales people, hire a bunch of engineering you don’t need, then sell the company. The company’s product doesn’t matter, the company is the product.

doctorpangloss 29 minutes ago | parent

"It doesn't matter"

By all means, become an A16Z LP.

amelius 18 minutes ago | parent

I mean I'm already ditching my Apple stocks because soon AI will be able to replicate iOS and MacOS.

827a 12 minutes ago | parent

Decision models have the potential to have an even larger impact on the Real World than LLMs have to this point (which is obviously quite large). But the model itself matters less than the product experiences you build around the model, and its very likely that the incumbent labs are treating the area as something more like "oh yeah I guess we can ship that and then forget about it" rather than investing in what building business processes on decision models looks like. Unlike full language models, I don't think the primary business of Typesafe will be serving Jev at API pricing; it'll look a lot more like putting Jev at the center of a much more expensive suite of software.

There's the potential for an inverse LLM play. In contrast with LLMs, all that seems to matter is the model, and the products the labs build around the models are all really samey and boring; the same left panel list of agents, main view agent conversation, right hand extra context, and we're now in the era of everyone creating the same cutesey furry friend on top of all this tech.

moralestapia 11 minutes ago | parent

Nothing beats nepo, brother.

hkalbasi 8 minutes ago | parent

> OpenAI's own Decisions API [1] beats it

Jev is 42$/B but OpenAI is 100$/B token.

robotswantdata 1 hour ago | parent

I’ll just use open source, thanks

jypepin 1 hour ago | parent

Their headline says "TypeSafe A raises series AI". Is that AI slope?

CompleteSkeptic 26 minutes ago | parent

intentional to make it fun (:

stephen_cagle 10 minutes ago | parent

Is it a pun or something? I have been called dense.

I actually resized my browser thinking maybe something weird was going on with flex-wrap or overflow or whatever it is.

throw03172019 25 minutes ago | parent

They also say they are a fun team. Maybe it’s a pun.

dovin 58 minutes ago | parent

Jev does seem to have become the Kleenex of decision models. Is brand recognition worth $7.5B? There are lots of other decision models out there that perform at or near jev-level (laya, gliner 2.5 decide, even embedding gemma 2) that you can also run locally, and honestly I think this kind of model makes the most sense running locally as well. Maybe if TypeSafe can ship fast they can stay the default. Guess we'll find out.

pickle-wizard 31 minutes ago | parent

I just started experimenting with the decision models. I spun up Laya on a VM with a couple of vCPU and 6GB of RAM. I get the results in about half a second. No need for GPUs or tons of memory.

I am integrating it into the product I am building and to me it doesn't seem like there is much need to go with a SaaS for this since the requirements are so light. I just can run it in Cloud Run and get all of the scale I'll ever need, and I get to tell my customers their data never leaves my environment.

jacobgold 47 minutes ago | parent

Whether they can compete on decision models or not, TypeSafe showed that a lot of the market had missed something important. With this much money, they have a lot more chances to discover other important things that are missing.

christina97 42 minutes ago | parent

Everyone appears surprised by this news. It’s clear that they don’t have a product with some incredible moat. But they clearly have good engineering and product people that came up with a product people wanted. On top of that they have very strong marketing muscle that took the AI world by storm. And as far as I’ve seen, they still lead in some part of the latency-quality (-cost) curve?

They may well be a good team to throw money behind if you are hoping to bet on a new AI lab.

soleveloper 35 minutes ago | parent

They don't lead on latency nor quality; but their execution was superb

tietjens 33 minutes ago | parent

Who they trailing on quality?

baobabKoodaa 29 minutes ago | parent

I'm not the person you're asking, but:

https://benchmarkheaven.com/jev-models

According to this benchmark, Jev is currently trailing Quyet-1.0-Large and a few other hastily put-together LLM-based decision API-like setups.

deepsquirrelnet 26 minutes ago | parent

verdverm 23 minutes ago | parent

Wonder if they can get coin flips and dice rolls to make sense with this fresh funding, or if it even matters to people.

I have no faith in the technique if it cannot do the basics (i.e. not real probabilities, the confidence for coin flip outcomes)

tried it a couple of days ago here: https://jevplayground.com

the "not real probability" disclaimer only appears after you get a result

rvz 14 minutes ago | parent

This is all due to 40% marketing, 50% execution and 10% credentials (with the founders being associated with creating ChatGPT).

If anyone else came up with the same concept on a Reddit thread (they have) it no-one would care without those characteristics even if you are "first".

Rebranding, execution, marketing, ex-<big_name_company> and mostly importantly, hype is what gets the investors scrambling into throwing money at you.

maxdo 34 minutes ago | parent

interestingly , it destroy the landscape of Chinese models.

Unless china takes leadership in frontier space the picture is next :

1. cheap workhorses for classification, routing, other scenarios : Jev 2. coding agents with less erros : Anthropic/Openai, etc. 3. Science /Legal/Medical : A mixture of Jev+Anthropic scenarios

dvt 30 minutes ago | parent

Is Jev being astroturfed on HN? It certainly feels like it. It's a middling product with virtually no moat (but great marketing).

minimaxir 26 minutes ago | parent

There have been a lot of posts/comments claiming "Jev-like models" but that's more of an shorthand for decision models, not astroturfing.

amelius 26 minutes ago | parent

They already got Sherlocked by OpenAI:

https://developers.openai.com/api/docs/guides/decisions

benatkin 8 minutes ago | parent

They weren't running on OpenAI, so nope.

stickfigure 25 minutes ago | parent

Remember when reaching $1B valuation made you an exotic "unicorn"?

enahs-sf 18 minutes ago | parent

got the recruiter call only to essentially be summarily rejected because my pedigree is wack. looks like i would've gotten hosed on valuation anyways.