Google Launches 'AI Futures Fund' To Invest In Promising AI Startups
Through this fund, selected startups will receive direct investment from Google, early access to its AI models, and guidance from Google's team of researchers, engineers, and business experts. They will also get credits to use services on Google Cloud.
"Startups get hands-on support from researchers, engineers, product managers, designers and go-to-market specialists from Google DeepMind and Google Labs," according to a blog post on Google.
The announcement of the fund comes as Google tries to get more exposure to the latest AI companies and trends as well as stay on top of competition as Amazon and Microsoft are backing generative AI startups with hefty investments and developing their own technologies, CNBC reported.
In addition, AI startups are looking for alternate funding as the initial public offering market remains mostly dry amid economic woes. Gain Early Access to AI Models, Cloud Support, and Investment Opportunities
Google also noted that the program will provide "Cloud credits and dedicated technical support" from its "cloud experts to help build, train and scale AI-powered products."
Startups chosen for the program will get early access to some of Google DeepMind's most advanced AI models, such as Gemini for general AI tasks, Imagen for creating images, and Veo for generating videos. They may also receive direct investment from Google to help them grow and expand their AI projects. Early Collaborations Highlight Real-World Impact of AI Futures Fund
In recent months, the AI Futures Fund has been working with a select group of startups from different industries, including Toonsutra, a digital comic and webtoon app from India, which is using Gemini's AI translation tools to make comics available in multiple Indian languages.
Viggle, a platform for creating AI-powered memes, is using Gemini, Imagen, and Veo to explore new ways of making videos. Rooms, a platform where users create and share interactive 3D spaces, is working with Google to build more advanced content using Gemini.
These early partnerships show how access to AI tools and expert support can help startups move faster and build innovative products.
The AI Futures Fund is open to startups based in any location where Google's Gemini AI is available. Google is looking for innovative companies that are ready to shape the future of AI. Interested startups are encouraged to apply here.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Int'l Business Times
3 days ago
- Int'l Business Times
YouTube Turns To AI To Spot Children Posing As Adults
YouTube has started using artificial intelligence (AI) to figure out when users are children pretending to be adults on the popular video-sharing platform amid pressure to protect minors from sensitive content. The new safeguard is being rolled out in the United States as Google-owned YouTube and social media platforms such as Instagram and TikTok are under scrutiny to shield children from content geared for grown-ups. A version of AI referred to as machine learning will be used to estimate the age of users based on a variety of factors, including the kinds of videos watched and account longevity, according to YouTube Youth director of product management James Beser. "This technology will allow us to infer a user's age and then use that signal, regardless of the birthday in the account, to deliver our age-appropriate product experiences and protections," Beser said. "We've used this approach in other markets for some time, where it is working well." The age-estimation model enhances technology already in place to deduce user age, according to YouTube. Users will be notified if YouTube believes them to be minors, giving them the option to verify their age with a credit card, selfie, or government ID, according to the tech firm. Social media platforms are regularly accused of failing to protect the well-being of children. Australia will soon use its landmark social media laws to ban children under 16 from YouTube, a top minister said late last month, stressing a need to shield them from "predatory algorithms." Communications Minister Anika Wells said four-in-ten Australian children had reported viewing harmful content on YouTube, one of the most visited websites in the world. Australia announced last year it was drafting laws that will ban children from social media sites such as Facebook, TikTok and Instagram until they turn 16. "Our position remains clear: YouTube is a video sharing platform with a library of free, high-quality content, increasingly viewed on TV screens," the company said in a statement at the time. "It's not social media." On paper, the ban is one of the strictest in the world. It is due to come into effect on December 10. The legislation has been closely monitored by other countries, with many weighing whether to implement similar bans.
Int'l Business Times
5 days ago
- Int'l Business Times
Perplexity AI Offers Google $34.5 Bn For Chrome Browser
Perplexity AI offered Google on Tuesday $34.5 billion for its popular Chrome web browser, which the internet giant could potentially be forced to sell as part of antitrust proceedings. The whopping sum proposed in a letter of intent by Perplexity is nearly double the value of the startup, which was reportedly $18 billion in a recent funding round. "This proposal is designed to satisfy an antitrust remedy in highest public interest by placing Chrome with a capable, independent operator focused on continuity, openness, and consumer protection," Perplexity chief executive Aravind Srinivas said in the letter, a copy of which was seen by AFP. Google is awaiting US District Court Judge Amit Mehta's ruling on what "remedies" to impose, following a landmark decision last year that said the tech titan maintained an illegal monopoly in online search. US government attorneys have called for Google to divest itself of the Chrome browser, contending that artificial intelligence is poised to ramp up the tech giant's dominance as the go-to window into the internet. Google has urged Mehta to reject the divestment, and his decision is expected by the end of the month. Google did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Perplexity's offer vastly undervalues Chrome and "should not be taken seriously," Baird Equity Research analysts said in a note to investors. Given that Perplexity already has a browser that competes with Chrome, the San Francisco-based startup could be trying to spark others to bid or "influence the pending decision" in the antitrust case, Baird analysts theorized. "Either way, we believe Perplexity would view an independent Chrome -- or one no longer affiliated with Google -- as an advantage as it attempts to take browser share," Baird analysts told investors. Google contends that the United States has gone way beyond the scope of the suit by recommending a spinoff of Chrome, and holding open the option to force a sale of its Android mobile operating system. "Forcing the sale of Chrome or banning default agreements wouldn't foster competition," said Cato Institute senior fellow in technology policy Jennifer Huddleston. "It would hobble innovation, hurt smaller players, and leave users with worse products." Google attorney John Schmidtlein noted in court that more than 80 percent of Chrome users are outside the United States, meaning divestiture would have global ramifications. "Any divested Chrome would be a shadow of the current Chrome," he contended. "And once we are in that world, I don't see how you can say anybody is better off." The potential of Chrome being weakened or spun off comes as rivals such as Microsoft, ChatGPT and Perplexity put generative artificial intelligence (AI) to work fetching information from the internet in response to user queries. Google is among the tech companies investing heavily to be a leader in AI, and is weaving the technology into search and other online offerings.
Int'l Business Times
5 days ago
- Int'l Business Times
The Future of AI and Web Scraping: A Feedback Loop in Motion
The term "unicorn" is sometimes used to describe people like Zia Ahmad, whose professional versatility makes them a rare find. A back-end developer experienced in web scraping. A data scientist who is also an AI engineer, contributing to the improvement of Google's Gemini. Yet, Zia says that his true passion is teaching and has over 40 published courses to prove it. Zia teaches on a variety of topics, with a primary focus on data science, web scraping, and AI applications. This motley crew of topics will also come together in his presentation, titled "The AI-Scraper Loop: How Machine Learning Improves Web Scraping (and Vice Versa) ," which he will give at OxyCon 2025 , a web scraping conference organized by Oxylabs . After a very versatile career journey, you have landed at Turing. Please tell us more about your current work? One day, I got a call from Turing saying they wanted me to work on Google's project, and that was really exciting because I was already a user of this product called Gemini. Now they wanted me to work on it, which was a great opportunity. I'm responsible for the aspect of Gemini that deals with data analysis, data science, machine learning, and AI questions. When you feed Gemini an Excel or CSV file and ask it to generate insights, build a machine learning model, or calculate the average of a column, we actively monitor Gemini's responses, analyze what it's doing right or wrong, write reports, and submit them. We also suggest improvements to the back-end engineers based on our findings. You also teach many online courses. Do you have a signature or dream course? One dream course I still want to create is on the very topic I'll be speaking about at OxyCon—how we can merge artificial intelligence and web scraping. These are the two areas I've worked in professionally, and there's a sweet spot where these two fields can complement each other beautifully. And I've found that there are very few "bridge courses" that connect two technologies like this. The topic of web scraping and AI—especially web scraping for AI—is currently quite controversial. There's a lot of tension between content creators, publishers and AI companies that need data to train models. What's your view on this? My view is this: if the data is publicly available, there shouldn't be any question about scraping it. Whether it's an article, product info, or public medical data—if it's viewable manually, it should be scrapable. For example, consider an e-commerce company that lists product details publicly on its website. That information is already out there for anyone to see. Scraping it just makes the process faster and more efficient. If I didn't scrape it, I could hire 100 people to manually go through the site and collect the same information. That's also doable—so why not automate it? However, if the data is private—for example, stored in someone's Google Drive—then it absolutely shouldn't be scraped. In fact, even manual access to private data without permission shouldn't be allowed. That's the boundary I draw. Public data, which anyone can access, should be fair game for scraping. Private data, which is not openly available, requires explicit consent. Zia Ahmad Turning to your presentation at OxyCon, could you give us a sneak peek? What are you planning to share with the audience? AI and web scraping can form a loop. I'll explain how that loop could work, where data scraped from the web helps train AI models, and how those models, in turn, improve scraping. I'll cover both the benefits and the potential downsides of this feedback cycle. While not everything about it is practically feasible just yet, it's an exciting concept. I'll be discussing what's possible today, what might come in the future, what the blockers are, and how we might overcome them. I also run a small business focused on data labelling and annotation. So I'll talk about how data annotation fits into this loop. Why isn't it feasible now? Is it because artificial intelligence is not at that level at the moment? Yes. No matter how intelligent your AI agent is, it's still going to make mistakes. And if there's no one monitoring the process, you can end up in a vicious loop where those mistakes multiply at an exponential rate. That kind of growth in error is really dangerous. There needs to be a domain expert involved. For example, if the data is related to medical science, then a medical expert should validate both the input coming from web scraping into AI and the output going back from AI into the scraping system. When you think about the scale of that—having domain experts label all the data going in and out of AI models—it sounds massive. Of course. That's one of the biggest challenges in data labelling—you need a lot of people. There has to be validation at both ends—before data goes in and after it comes out. When I say "domain expert," it doesn't always mean someone with a PhD. For example, if we're working with traffic image data, a regular person can label that. In that context, they are the domain expert. However, in other cases—like annotating MRI scans or X-rays—we do need medical professionals. That's very expensive. The same applies to financial documents—we need experts to annotate those too, and again, it costs a lot. Wherever real people are involved, the cost goes up. You mentioned that your own business is related to solving this problem. Could you expand on that? Yes. I run a data annotation company called Prism Soft. We have contracts with AI companies, especially those working in computer vision. We receive large volumes of image-based or video-based data—sometimes even text or audio—and our job is to annotate it. That means we prepare the data so it's ready to be fed into AI models. Before we implemented our AI-assisted workflows, everything was done manually. For example, if there's an image with 20 cars, and the client wants bounding boxes drawn around each car, someone would have to draw all 20 boxes by hand. That takes time, and time means money. When you're working with millions of images, the costs skyrocket. That's exactly what we've worked to solve, and with considerable effort, we were able to automate roughly 60% of the process. I think that's the best we can achieve for now, given current technologies. However, we're working on increasing that percentage, and the pace of AI development is truly remarkable. If I predict something will happen in five years, it might actually happen in five months. You never know. There are so many factors involved—data, computational power, and engineering capabilities. The speed of AI development makes people uneasy. Some fear we might soon lose control over AI. What is your opinion on this? That's actually the most frequently asked question. Whenever I'm on a flight and someone asks what I do, the follow-up is usually, "Do you think the Terminator scenario will come true? Will AI destroy us?" If you interview 10 AI experts, you'll likely get 10 different opinions on this. But the world is already taking steps to control AI. One important development is something called XAI, or explainable AI. When new models come to market, they're trained not to respond to harmful or inappropriate questions. When we train a model like Gemini, the first question is always: "Is it safe?" Safety is a top priority. Large, reputable organizations put a lot of focus on this. Smaller players may not, but they often don't have the data or computational power to create models that could be dangerous at scale. That said—again, a potentially controversial point—we don't know what military or intelligence agencies in powerful countries are doing with AI. If we can build models like ChatGPT or Gemini, then obviously, AI can also be used in ways that raise serious ethical concerns. Another source of concern is the changing job market. People fear that their jobs will be taken from them. AI has already transformed many industries. Think about content creation. We used to have teams of ten content writers. Now, one person can do the job by asking AI to write the content and then simply proofread it. AI isn't taking jobs away; it's shifting the job market. And this has happened throughout history. New technologies create new types of jobs, and those who don't evolve with the changes risk being left behind. So yes, this is just history repeating itself—but at a much faster pace. I think evolution is the only thing that can keep us relevant. If I sit still and think my current skill set is enough, there's a 99.9% chance I'll be replaced. If not by AI, then by someone more up-to-date with new technologies. Even AI itself is constantly evolving. It's not the same as it was in 2015. There are tons of new models being developed, and AI is now one of the most active research areas globally. That means new technologies are being introduced daily. If you don't keep up, you will fall behind. Some say that AI is developing so fast now that even if it stopped evolving for a whole year, we'd still struggle to catch up with everything. Do you think we even have a chance? That's true. AI is evolving so quickly that even now, I find myself learning about tools and models that were released two years ago. The sheer volume of development is massive—there are only 24 hours in a day, and it's hard to keep up. I think the key is to stay focused on your area. Whatever your profession is—whether you're a content creator, developer, or analyst—just make a habit of exploring AI tools relevant to your field once a week. Some people believe, although I don't agree, that AI won't continue evolving at the same pace because it has already consumed most of the high-quality, human-generated data available. The argument goes: now that AI has absorbed the historical data, there's not as much new, meaningful information being produced, especially if most of the new data is AI-generated. Why do you think that's not the case? Because every day, we see a new AI model that's better than the one that came out yesterday. Especially in areas like agentic AI—models that can perform daily tasks—we're seeing rapid improvement. If AI can start handling routine tasks for employees, that's a significant leap. So if we've already fed AI the last 100 years of history, feeding it again doesn't help. Now we're just adding new data one day at a time. And while that's happening slowly, AI is still getting better. So what's still driving this rapid improvement? Engineering. Every day, researchers are coming up with new techniques for how to train AI using the same data in smarter ways. Think of it like a classroom: there's one teacher and 40 students, but each student learns differently. Some will score 95%, others 70%, and some maybe 30%. Everyone has a different learning technique. Same with AI—there's the same data, but with different architectures, training strategies, and optimization techniques, you can extract new value. Some approaches require powerful hardware, such as GPUs and TPUs. Others are more hardware-efficient. The techniques are constantly evolving, which is what drives AI forward. So the big question now is: how long can we keep coming up with better, more revolutionary models? And my answer is—there are six or seven billion people in the world, and that means there are six or seven billion possibilities.
