Aarthi Ramamurthy Launches USD 20 Mn Schema Ventures to Back Early-Stage Startups
Schema Ventures will invest across sectors such as industrial software, robotics, intelligence for factories, construction, logistics, workflow intelligence, and developer tools.
You're reading Entrepreneur India, an international franchise of Entrepreneur Media.
Startup investor and podcast host Aarthi Ramamurthy has launched her own venture capital firm, Schema Ventures, with a USD 20 million fund focused on early-stage startups.
Announced via LinkedIn and X, Ramamurthy said Schema will back "exceptional outsider founders"—entrepreneurs building from lived experience rather than elite credentials or networks.
With deep experience leading tech and product teams at Microsoft, Netflix, and Meta, Ramamurthy brings both operational depth and founder empathy, having previously built two startups herself.
Schema Ventures will invest at the earliest stages across sectors such as industrial software, robotics, intelligence for factories, construction, logistics, workflow intelligence, and developer tools.
In 2020, Ramamurthy co-created the viral Clubhouse show The Good Time Show with her husband Sriram Krishnan, a former Andreessen Horowitz GP and current White House senior AI policy advisor. Featuring guests like Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg, the show evolved into The Aarthi and Sriram Show on YouTube, later securing a podcast deal with iHeartMedia and surpassing one million downloads.
Through Schema Ventures, Ramamurthy aims to champion unconventional builders tackling hard problems—those often overlooked by traditional venture capital.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Crypto Treasury Companies Are Bullish on Bitcoin and XRP. But Don't Invest.
Start-ups are piling Bitcoin and XRP onto their balance sheets for a few reasons. It's questionable whether their shareholders are getting any value. Owning these assets directly is probably the safer option. 10 stocks we like better than Bitcoin › Strategy (NASDAQ: MSTR) (formerly called MicroStrategy) famously pioneered the Bitcoin (CRYPTO: BTC) treasury concept, buying the crypto and holding it on the company's balance sheet. Now, a crop of start-ups promises to provide the same kind of leveraged exposure to select digital assets for anyone willing to buy their shares. But before you hand any treasury operator a dime, it's important to look at who really captures the value they're advertising, and to understand how the existence of these companies might be favorable for the coins you hold. In a nutshell, crypto treasury companies are businesses that accumulate cryptocurrency assets such as Bitcoin and XRP (CRYPTO: XRP) on their corporate balance sheets. Their aim is to provide investors with indirect exposure to these digital assets while theoretically offering some diversification or additional value compared to investors just buying and holding the main underlying asset. They are a very recent phenomenon, and most will probably not survive even if their main assets do fine during the next decade or so. Over the last quarter, at least five companies launched or pivoted to stockpiling coins as their main strategy, or as a pillar of their financing strategy for their other lines of business. Hong Kong-based logistics group Reitar Logtech Holdings just filed to buy as many as 15,000 Bitcoins, worth roughly $1.5 billion at today's prices. Another company, Twenty One Capital, wants to procure 42,000 Bitcoins, enough to rank third worldwide among corporate holders. Renewable energy player VivoPower International raised $121 million to start a $100 million XRP purchase program. Two smaller private firms announced their intent to form XRP reserves within 24 hours of that deal. More might be on the way. But why are these assets so appealing to hold, and why would investors want to buy shares of a business that only manages assets they don't have any control over? In short, chief financial officers are seeing that low yields on relatively safe assets they already hold, like U.S. Treasuries, look even punier in comparison to the meteoric run-up in prices for assets like XRP and Bitcoin during the past 10 years. They likely figure that a small coin allocation offers a hedge against inflation, without as much risk as an investment in stocks -- though it's not clear that they're correct on that latter point. Furthermore, buying and holding cryptocurrencies means that a company doesn't have to take on any risk of making capital investments in value-generating equipment, nor put hardly any of their operational expenses toward labor, like most companies do. The catch is that every one of these new crypto treasury companies is banking on the same set of assets, and the same infrastructure to support them. Therefore, none of them have any economic moat, nor do they have any competitive advantage. And that means that over the long term, they are more likely to be bad investments than the assets they hold. For example, VivoPower's deal depends on BitGo for cold storage of its coins. Reitar's prospectus lists Coinbase Prime and Anchorage Digital as backup custodians. Insurance, auditing, chain attestations, and cold-storage logistics are effectively off-the-shelf services, which makes them great for operational security, but terrible for outperforming competitors. In other words, if you invest in these crypto treasury businesses, you are paying a premium for coin exposure that's being diluted by the company's need to pay overhead. A skeptical investor might also ask whether picking up shares in these crypto warehouses is safer than holding coins directly. The answer is "not really." Balance-sheet leverage not only amplifies the upside, but also the downside if prices swoon, leaving investors with losses. On the brighter side, assuming that demand from crypto treasury adopters keeps rising, the existence of supply scarcity favors buying and holding the coins themselves. Twenty One's goal of 42,000 Bitcoins alone is equivalent to almost 93 days of global Bitcoin mining issuance. Add Reitar, VivoPower, and a dozen smaller imitators, and the circulating float of coins available for public trading will shrink. None of that accrues uniquely to the corporate holders; it accrues to the protocol. Therefore, the easiest way to surf the wave here is to buy and hold a disciplined position in the digital assets these companies chase. Lastly, remember that volatility cuts both ways. If these crypto treasuries are forced to dump their coins to meet margin calls, prices can swing more violently than what's normal for crypto. Over long time horizons, assuming scarcity and consistent adoption remain intact, equity holders will be forced to eat management fees, dilution, and execution risk that they did not bargain for, whereas those who simply hold the coins won't need to pay for any extras whatsoever. Before you buy stock in Bitcoin, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Bitcoin wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $674,395!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $858,011!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 997% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 172% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 2, 2025 Alex Carchidi has positions in Bitcoin. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Bitcoin and XRP. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Crypto Treasury Companies Are Bullish on Bitcoin and XRP. But Don't Invest. was originally published by The Motley Fool Sign in to access your portfolio
Time Magazine
an hour ago
- Time Magazine
AI Can't Replace Education—Unless We Let It
As commencement ceremonies celebrate the promise of a new generation of graduates, one question looms: will AI make their education pointless? Many CEOs think so. They describe a future where AI will replace engineers, doctors, and teachers. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg recently predicted AI will replace mid-level engineers who write the company's computer code. NVIDIA's Jensen Huang has even declared coding itself obsolete. While Bill Gates admits the breakneck pace of AI development is 'profound and even a little bit scary,' he celebrates how it could make elite knowledge universally accessible. He, too, foresees a world where AI replaces coders, doctors, and teachers, offering free high-quality medical advice and tutoring. Despite the hype, AI cannot 'think' for itself or act without humans—for now. Indeed, whether AI enhances learning or undermines understanding hinges on a crucial decision: Will we allow AI to just predict patterns? Or will we require it to explain, justify, and stay grounded in the laws of our world? AI needs human judgment, not just to supervise its output but also to embed scientific guardrails that give it direction, grounding, and interpretability. Physicist Alan Sokal recently compared AI chatbots to a moderately good student taking an oral exam. 'When they know the answer, they'll tell it to you, and when they don't know the answer they're really good at bullsh*tting,' he said at an event at the University of Pennsylvania. So, unless a user knows a lot about a given subject, according to Sokal, one might not catch a 'bullsh*tting' chatbot. That, to me, perfectly captures AI's so-called 'knowledge.' It mimics understanding by predicting word sequences but lacks the conceptual grounding. That's why 'creative' AI systems struggle to distinguish real from fake, and debates have emerged about whether large language models truly grasp cultural nuance. When teachers worry that AI tutors may hinder students' critical thinking, or doctors fear algorithmic misdiagnosis, they identify the same flaw: machine learning is brilliant at pattern recognition, but lacks the deep knowledge born of systematic, cumulative human experience and the scientific method. That is where a growing movement in AI offers a path forward. It focuses on embedding human knowledge directly into how machines learn. PINNs (Physics-Informed Neural Networks) and MINNs (Mechanistically Informed Neural Networks) are examples. The names might sound technical, but the idea is simple: AI gets better when it follows the rules, whether they are laws of physics, biological systems, or social dynamics. That means we still need humans not just to use knowledge, but to create it. AI works best when it learns from us. I see this in my own work with MINNs. Instead of letting an algorithm guess what works based on past data, we program it to follow established scientific principles. Take a local family lavender farm in Indiana. For this kind of business, blooming time is everything. Harvesting too early or late reduces essential oil potency, hurting quality and profits. An AI may waste time combing through irrelevant patterns. However, a MINN starts with plant biology. It uses equations linking heat, light, frost, and water to blooming to make timely and financially meaningful predictions. But it only works when it knows how the physical, chemical, and biological world works. That knowledge comes from science, which humans develop. Imagine applying this approach to cancer detection: breast tumors emit heat from increased blood flow and metabolism, and predictive AI could analyze thousands of thermal images to identify tumors based solely on data patterns. However, a MINN, like the one recently developed by researchers at the Rochester Institute of Technology, uses body-surface temperature data and embeds bioheat transfer laws directly into the model. That means, instead of guessing, it understands how heat moves through the body, allowing it to identify what's wrong, what's causing it, why, and precisely where it is by utilizing the physics of heat flow through tissue. In one case, a MINN predicted a tumor's location and size within a few millimeters, grounded entirely in how cancer disrupts the body's heat signature. The takeaway is simple: humans are still essential. As AI becomes sophisticated, our role is not disappearing. It is shifting. Humans need to 'call bullsh*t' when an algorithm produces something bizarre, biased, or wrong. That isn't just a weakness of AI. It is humans' greatest strength. It means our knowledge also needs to grow so we can steer the technology, keep it in check, ensure it does what we think it does, and help people in the process. The real threat isn't that AI is getting smarter. It is that we might stop using our intelligence. If we treat AI as an oracle, we risk forgetting how to question, reason, and recognize when something doesn't make sense. Fortunately, the future doesn't have to play out like this. We can build systems that are transparent, interpretable, and grounded in the accumulated human knowledge of science, ethics, and culture. Policymakers can fund research into interpretable AI. Universities can train students who blend domain knowledge with technical skills. Developers can adopt frameworks like MINNs and PINNs that require models to stay true to reality. And all of us—users, voters, citizens—can demand that AI serve science and objective truth, not just correlations. After more than a decade of teaching university-level statistics and scientific modeling, I now focus on helping students understand how algorithms work 'under the hood' by learning the systems themselves, rather than using them by rote. The goal is to raise literacy across the interconnected languages of math, science, and coding. This approach is necessary today. We don't need more users clicking 'generate' on black-box models. We need people who can understand the AI's logic, its code and math, and catch its 'bullsh*t.' AI will not make education irrelevant or replace humans. But we might replace ourselves if we forget how to think independently, and why science and deep understanding matter. The choice is not whether to reject or embrace AI. It's whether we'll stay educated and smart enough to guide it.
Fast Company
an hour ago
- Fast Company
This free AI supersite is like Gemini Deep Research on steroids
Everywhere you look these days, there it is—some manner of breathlessly hyped new 'AI' service that's, like, totally gonna change your life forever. (Like, totally. For realsies.) Or so they say. In reality, of course, most of this stuff is far more fallible, limited in utility, and inadvisable to use outside of super-specific scenarios than most tech companies (and self-declared 'AI gurus') would lead you to believe. But AI, in its current form, isn't entirely useless. Far from it, in fact: This type of tech can be quite helpful in the right sort of scenario and, critically, if you think about it in the right way—not as an end-all instant answer machine but as a starting point for certain types of specific tasks or info-seeking. And as we wade our way through a year that's absolutely overflowing with overwrought AI ballyhoo, I've got just the tool for you to sift through that sea and seek out some surprising shiny pearls amid all the overwhelming noise. Be the first to find all sorts of little-known tech treasures with my free Cool Tools newsletter from The Intelligence. One useful new discovery in your inbox every Wednesday! Deep research, done right So, you've probably heard all about ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, and the likes, right? They're all generative AI chatbots, which means they use a snazzy-sounding word prediction engine to analyze language patterns and answer your questions, among other more ambitious tasks. 🔎 One of their biggest recent advancements is the ability to perform what everyone's calling 'deep research'—a fancy way of saying they'll dive deep into a topic for you and create a detailed report of info, almost like a custom-made dossier, based on knowledge from all over the web. Again, I can't emphasize enough: The info here isn't infallible. These systems can—and do—get stuff wrong and sometimes even flat-out make up nonsense out of thin air. 🧠 But, as a starting point—especially when they include links to their sources so you can confirm info on your own and use it as an entryway to research as opposed to the final product—it really can save you time and give you a great way to get into a complex topic. And the tool I want to show to you today makes that feature far more powerful, useful, and also affordable than it's ever been before. ⌚ It'll take you 20 seconds to try out for yourself. ➜ It's called, amusingly, Ithy. (Try saying that 10 times fast!) And all it does, in a nutshell, is bring together the 'deep research' tools from a slew of different AI engines—including ChatGPT and Google's Gemini along with Perplexity, Meta AI, and more—into a single streamlined prompt. That means you can use 'em all together to create a single super-report on any subject imaginable. ✅ It couldn't be much easier to make happen, either: First, open up Ithy in any browser, on any device you're using. Type your question or the subject you're thinking about into its box and tap or click the arrow icon within that same line to get going. Select either 'Fast,' if you don't feel like waiting, or 'Deep,' if you've got time and want this thing to go especially in-depth. (Even the 'Fast' path is pretty darn deep, if you ask me.) And, well, that's about it. Ithy will think for a bit, then serve up an impressively detailed dossier on whatever it is you requested—with info coming from a mix of all those AI engines, combined and seamlessly blended together. And I mean seriously detailed, too—with all sorts of sections, graphics, FAQs, and external links for original sources so you can do your own reading and see exactly where it got its info. 📌 Here's a link to the sample report shown here, if you want to look even more closely. ☝️ Now, for the especially cool part: Ithy lets you do all of this free of charge —up to a point. The site gives you five report-creating credits to start, even if you don't sign in. Once you create an account (for free), you'll get 10 credits per month and can optionally then bump up to an unlimited Pro plan—which includes access to the typically pricey pro levels of Gemini and OpenAI—for seven bucks a month, if you go for the annual setup. But even if you don't go that route, 10 in-depth reports per month from all the web's leading AI engines together is a pretty powerful perk to have at your fingertips, without so much as dropping a dime. Ithy is entirely web-based —no downloads or installations required. It's free for up to 5 reports total or 10 reports per month, if you create an account—and optionally available in $7-per-month (paid annually) or $20-per-month (paid monthly) plan for its fully featured, limit-free Pro version. Like most AI engines, Ithy does use questions submitted to its site as training to further improve its AI systems. The questions are also being shared with the associated third-party AI sites, of course. So you'll want to think carefully about what you ask and avoid sending anything especially sensitive or personal (but really, it's designed to answer questions and provide info, so hopefully you wouldn't be submitting your banking info and Social Security number, anyway!).
