
Partner @sequoia. Working w/ founders from idea to IPO & beyond: @airbnb @doordash @citsecurities @kalshi @clay @foundforbiz @Nominal_io @zipline
San Francisco, CA, USA
Joined March 2008
- Tweets3.5K
- Following361
- Followers151K
- Likes1.1K
We've had the pleasure of working alongside Stephanie for over 11 years. She's an incredibly sharp thinker on what technologies will power the future before it's obvious to others. We're excited to support her and her new fund, investing in founders making bold, non-consensus bets.
I’m starting a new early-stage AI fund, doing what I love: partnering with founders from company formation on bold bets, long before consensus.
The fund’s LPs will include Sequoia, Jeff Dean, Sachin Katti, Philip Wong (my Stanford professor and Chief Scientist adviser to TSMC), and others whose work has shaped our industry and how I think about AI’s future.
I’ll remain a partner at Sequoia and keep serving on my boards on Sequoia’s behalf.
Sequoia has been my home for the past 11 years. I joined as the youngest investor the firm had ever hired. I grew up here. Through years of intense debate and shared work, I found lifelong mentors and friends who took me under their wing and taught me this craft. They taught me to aim high and take big swings. I’ll carry that into what I build: outsized ambition, relentless truth-seeking and curiosity, and a refusal to become complacent.
Working alongside founders has made me want to build something of my own: a firm shaped from day one around the convictions I’ve developed over the past decade.
Life has taught me not to take time for granted. This is how I want to spend mine.
Why now
We’re seeing a new way of building companies in today’s AI era. Research and products often advance together. A breakthrough can open a market or accelerate a business far faster than expected. Some companies require extraordinary capital and compute early on. Others reach meaningful scale with remarkably small teams. The rules for how big these businesses can get, and how fast, are being rewritten.
But early on, the technology is unproven, the resources required enormous, and the vision seemingly implausible.
This is what I love most: seeing the potential right from the beginning, and helping founders realize their full scale of ambition.
More than ever, it starts with an extreme willingness to believe early, with bold, independent conviction in a founder’s technical insight before any product or market validation. Then, it means helping founders take the biggest swings, giving the rare, long-term patience to see those bets through uncertainty, ambiguity, and turbulence, and serving as a level head when the stakes are highest.
I learned this kind of partnership at Sequoia. It’s the foundation of the firm I’m building.
Believing before consensus
My fascination with AI’s potential took root at Stanford in the early-to-mid 2010s, studying computer science and working in Andrew Ng’s lab. The friendships I formed connected me to a community whose people and ideas would help shape modern AI and build some of our generation’s defining companies. What stayed with me was the gap between what those people saw was possible and what the wider world could imagine.
I’m drawn to founders pursuing ambitions that sound impossible today.
I start with a simple question: “What if everything goes right?”
Then we work backward together to make it happen.
In 2023, Deepak and Abhinav set out to build a general-purpose robot brain at @SkildAI, before physical AI was a consensus bet. Their sim-to-real breakthroughs gave me conviction where earlier robotics approaches had fallen short. But the data flywheel required deployment at scale. We made commercialization as urgent as research and brought in strategic partners like NVIDIA and SoftBank to support the ambition. Three years in, Skild is advancing the frontier of physical AI with nine figures in annualized revenue.
In 2024, Ioannis and Misha founded @reflection_ai with an insight into scaling reinforcement learning. As that grew into the ambition to build a Western frontier lab for open models, the hard question was how a startup competes with labs spending tens of billions. An introduction to NVIDIA and many compute calls and recruiting events later, the team has built Beam, now one of the leading US open models.
In 2025, Anna and Azalia, the co-creators of AlphaChip, founded @RicursiveAI to design models and hardware together. From day one, we made early customers and ecosystem partners a priority. Today, they are showing order-of-magnitude improvements on real workloads, working with some of the industry’s most consequential players, and reaching a defining inflection point.
The ambition keeps growing as these companies scale.
@linear has always had a kind of magic to it. Now it’s the system a new generation of AI companies builds on, for teams and agents alike.
@tavus saw early that we’d one day talk to AI the way we talk to each other. Today, it’s building the human computing interface for a world of AI colleagues.
@Mach_Industries began as hydrogen experiments in an MIT dorm room. It has since become one of the most exciting next-generation defense companies.
Making the ambition possible
Being a first believer is only the beginning. Compute falls through. A deep-pocketed incumbent makes your mission its top priority. A breakthrough changes the opportunity and the capital required overnight.
These are stomach-churning moments, and early belief carries a responsibility to help make the bet work.
This is the partnership I love: turning the full ambition into concrete steps. Raising capital, securing compute and strategic partners, recruiting exceptional people, and winning the first customers together. Thinking several moves ahead while solving what’s in front of us. And as breakthroughs open new possibilities, helping founders dream even bigger.
Thank you
To the founders I’ve worked with: thank you for trusting me and Sequoia to be your first partner and first believer. It’s been the joy of a lifetime, and I can’t wait to keep building together.
Thank you to Alfred and Pat for your leadership of Sequoia and your support of my next chapter. To Roelof, for bringing me into Sequoia and believing in me from the beginning. Alfred and Roelof, you have been mentors in investing and in life. So much of what I know, and the investor I’ve become, comes from your guidance and generosity over the years. To Bill, for the close partnership and wealth of knowledge, always wrapped in humility. To Shaun, for showing me how to think deeply and imaginatively. To Michael Moritz, for inspiring 22-year-old me to dream big. To Doug, for teaching me to keep things simple. To Bogie and Jess, for bringing joy to the everyday and perspective on what matters. And to all my Sequoia teammates, for the friendship, camaraderie, and lessons I’ll carry with me.
To my family, especially my husband and my brother, who have each started companies of their own: thank you for giving me the courage to take this leap.
Let’s get to work!
The difference between a good and a great business leader is the ability to navigate to the right altitude.
First, we have to identify the correct level. Our exploration of the different levels of the problem and the range of solutions should provide the correct altitude, rather than letting ourselves default to the altitude at which we are most familiar or comfortable. Knowing our defaults will help us avoid this trap and adjust when necessary.
Second, we need to understand our audience and provide them with a shared context for the discussion. Board discussions can range from long-term strategic planning to an operational quarter review to a deep dive into a new initiative. Outputs of operational meetings must align with this month's or quarter's goals. Product plans are full of detailed deliverables.
Third, It is crucial to actively listen and adapt the level when appropriate. We have all witnessed great board members move the discussion through inquiry. When meetings are too tactical, ask how the proposed solution aligns with our long-term mission or goals to move the conversation strategically. When a solution needs to consider the medium-term impact, ask whether we need to adjust our annual plans or how we will achieve them to move to the medium altitude. Ask for a deeper data cut or a more granular plan to move the discussion to a lower level.
Tarek and Luana still have much to learn.
But amongst all the noise, they keep their heads down, carry a big chip on their shoulder, and work harder than they've worked on day 1. They also consistently choose to do the right thing, even if the world misunderstands it at first.
They are unwavering in their belief in prediction markets. The numbers are a lagging indicator. Their product velocity is the leading indicator.
This quoted post is unavailable.
I dropped out of my PhD because the internet was happening and I wanted to be part of it. I was wrong about some things like Amazon killing Walmart, but was right on the wave.
Everyone knows AI is the internet equivalent today. But we are still so early in AI adoption and the wave is just starting. Choose your path accordingly.
"What's the slowest thing to move in technology? The humans that work with it."
@Alfred_Lin on why the gap between model capability and real-world use is where the opportunity is at @stanfordaiclub
Great to talk with the Stanford AI Club and the next generation of builders at Stanford. We've posted the full talk. Tune in if you want to hear me ramble about finding the right problems to solve, what's a feature vs a company, the future of math and humanities, and increasing our perspective on the size of the prize.
My main piece of advice to the audience was that they're in a privileged situation to take risk with their whole careers ahead of them, and have the tailwind of the biggest megatrend we've seen since the internet. Dream big and take the risk, before it becomes more expensive to do so.
Is being technical still worth it when AI commoditizes math and coding?
We asked @Alfred_Lin of @Sequoia. We also talked about feature vs. real company, circular money in AI, and the rate of diffusion of technology.
Full talk 👇
youtube.com/watch?v=-MD9NsVj…
We invested in Abby Care because we need better home-based care options. All of us have felt the pain of how long it can take to get care at a medical facility. That pain is even worse for those who need ongoing home care.
@FortuneMagazine just wrote on their $82M Series C, and how they're building the infrastructure to support families caring for loved ones at home. In short, they're applying modern technology to drive higher quality health outcomes. Technology exists to improve our lives, and Abby Care has a real and tangible impact on those receiving, providing, and paying for home based care.
We’re excited to support Abby Care’s next phase of growth and the impact it will have on families across the country.
fortune.com/2026/10/15/start…
It's been incredible partnering with David and team. Those outside the industry may not immediately recognize his name (yet), but he's one of the greats and we're excited for what's ahead. Tune in for more on how they're applying the lessons from AlphaGo, AlphaZero, and more to build a super learner and power the next phase of AI.
David Silver is one of the all-time greats. He was the creator of AlphaGo, which changed the course of history by showing that neural nets could achieve superhuman performance for the first time.
He also has a unique intuition and knack for forecasting when things will happen in AI. With computer Go, he predicted the Lee Sodol outcome 10 years before, right to the year. He got the year right for Starcraft and won a bet inside Deepmind. Same for AlphaProof. Same for the IMO.
David's prediction for superintelligence: 3 years. !!! He has a strong sense that now is the time to build a superleaner, and that superlearners are now possible, thanks to the enormous progress in compute, simulators, autoresearch, and the sophistication of technology in the stack since the AlphaGo days.
What is a “super learner”? A super learner discovers all knowledge from its own experience. Start from nothing (no internet pre-training), and go beyond human knowledge. Drop it into any stream of experience, simulated or physical, and the superlearner learns.
He expects the progress will be rapid. When you get the recipe for a superlearner just right and remove humans from the development loop altogether, a superlearner can learn extremely quickly. Just look at AlphaGo. AlphaGo took two years to develop with humans in the loop. When David and his team at @GoogleDeepMind got the formula for AlphaZero correctly, it surpassed the human-developed algorithms in just a few hours. Human data is a shortcut, but you have to let go of the human data to shoot beyond it.
In January, David left GDM to found @IneffableLabs, a research-led lab with one mission: build a "super learner" that discovers all knowledge from its own experience, and make first contact with superintelligence.
He joins us with co-founder Lasse Espeholt, who built IMPALA and SEED RL, the foundations of scaled-up RL, and now runs Ineffable's compute.
A few things we cover in this conversation.
— What a super learner is: depth (start from nothing, go beyond human knowledge) and breadth (drop it into any stream of experience, simulated or physical). The human brain is the only existence proof
— Why they're giving up human data: AlphaGo took two years with humans in the loop. AlphaZero outperformed it in a few hours. "You have to let go of the human data to shoot past the competition"
— Crucibles: simulated worlds with enough emergent complexity (physics engines, millions of interacting agents) for an agent to rediscover technology, science, maths and language on its own
— Simple rewards, emergent complexity: evolution optimized fitness and got all of life. Don't breadcrumb the objective, give the agent something simple to optimize in a world with a lot to learn about
— Go as the existence proof: one agent is the most boring game imaginable, two agents is "an infinite onion of layers of complexity"
— Why human language is probably not the endpoint for reasoning, and how training on it bakes in a flat earth and the four humors
— Can superintelligence be built in simulation? If the sim is Turing complete, computation, economics, language and maths are all expressible, and it happens 10-100x faster and safer
— Alignment: language-based monitoring is reaching its limits as agents learn to say one thing and do another. Shadow actions, superintelligences monitoring superintelligences, and building a real science of how they interact peacefully
— Accelerate in simulation, pace in the real world: Ineffable will gate real-world deployment on evidence that it goes well
— Timing as the determinant: Silver called Computer Go to the year, then StarCraft, then the IMO. He thinks this is the moment
— Predictions: True superintelligence within three years.
Timestamps:
0:00 – Introduction
1:09 – What held true from Go to today, and what the LLM era changed
3:35 – Why leave DeepMind to start a new lab
5:58 – Why "Ineffable" (and the secret second reason)
7:03 – Lasse's path: scaling RL at DeepMind and Google Brain
9:31 – Defining a super learner and first contact
12:35 – Super learners vs. LLMs that make discoveries
13:59 – Day to day: the RL stack, crucibles and human-journey milestones
16:13 – Don't breadcrumb the objective: simple rewards, emergent complexity
21:16 – What a crucible looks like
24:14 – Go: one agent is boring, two is infinite
25:41 – Will agents rediscover language?
27:22 – Removing human priors: AlphaGo to AlphaZero
32:05 – Keeping human bias out of the crucibles
33:35 – Confidence, timing and super forecasting
36:24 – Is compute the driver?
38:13 – The ceiling on simulation and Rich Sutton's objection
43:44 – Alignment and the science of superintelligence
47:45 – Monitoring agents that don't think in English
51:01 – Pacing the frontier
52:54 – The compute setup: Vera Rubin on GCP
55:18 – Training, inference, simulation and RL scaling laws
57:40 – IMPALA and SEED RL
1:00:58 – 20 people and the compute-per-person ratio
1:04:49 – A research-led culture
1:05:47 – Predictions
At a past talk, Satya Nadella shared that technologists have a substantial pre-existing condition called NIH (Not Invented Here).
I’ve always loved this term since hearing it, and it is a failure mode for small and large companies alike. Some ways he shared to counteract it:
1) Ensure you have a complete thought - don’t only start with the product, but also how it connects to your strategy, your right to serve the customer, your distribution advantages, your business model, and your right to win
2) Know when to partner - young startups tend to shy away from partnerships with large tech giants due to the power imbalance, but some of the iconic companies of today leverage partnerships early
3) Be ok with swallowing your pride - sometimes you must acknowledge that another company has you beat, and it is better to join forces with them
Alfred Lin retweeted
For the second time in Google Chrome’s history, Google awarded a $250,000 bounty for a full-chain exploit… to @XBOW. Here’s the full story:
At an all-hands at the start of 2026 in Malta, I set the team a crazy challenge. A full-chain exploit of Chrome by the annual Black Hat cybersecurity conference in August.
I believed there were few better tests of whether @XBOW could move beyond web applications to desktop software, servers and devices.
Chrome is one of the most hardened pieces of software on the planet, used by more than half the world’s population.
A full-chain exploit lets an attacker take total control of a machine, where they can read every email, password and bank login the user types. You don’t need to download anything or click a phishing link. Visiting the wrong site is enough.
So @moyix, Andres Luksenberg, Baul Lee, and Willem Pinckaers took on the challenge along with a fifth teammate: OpenAI's GPT-5.6 Sol.
They built a chain they thought would win, but Google told us they already knew one of the bugs.
We were already in Las Vegas for Black Hat and DEF CON, and the team didn’t want to go home without the win.
So Brendan and the agents built a new exploit in just 6 days.
We submitted it to Google and waited.
The news came through that we'd done what should’ve been impossible. A full-chain bounty of $250,000, the first awarded under Google’s 2026 rules.
It took just 6 days and $40,000 of compute to construct an exploit that affects a billion users of Chrome on Windows. An intelligence-agency veteran told me his team used to spend 6 months on this kind of vulnerability.
My takeaway: the cost of finding truly critical vulnerabilities is collapsing, for attackers and defenders alike. Restricting powerful models is not the answer; GPT-5.6 Sol is already public.
But defenders have one advantage attackers never will: they can test their own code first.
Assume your software is exploitable. Whoever is hunting your bugs has the same building blocks we did.
This is cause for urgency but not panic.
XBOW is now developing an autonomous product for testing compiled software (desktop applications, servers, embedded devices), and partnering with the world’s top organizations to design that product.
If you’d like to be one of them, get in touch.
P.S. Restart Chrome whenever the Update button appears!
Be part of the 5000 today. It’s amazing
The lucky thing is the price will come down and more people will see this, and get a chance to bring it to the world
Greatest alpha fountain in the history of man
Dusting off this tweet from April because this gap in shared understanding of LLM capability is *widening*. It's now less "two groups of people speaking past each other" and more a sharp funnel.
- Napkin math somewhere around 6B people (~75% of the population) have barely come in contact with LLMs at all.
- Around 1-2B (~20%) are casual and infrequent users of free-tier ChatGPT-like products. This group sees derpy chatbots and treats them a bit like a better Google search, a writing aid, or etc. Maybe an agent tries to book you a flight. I have non-tech friends who (reasonably, imo) say they have not much use for it at all. Even many professionals outside of math&code are in this tier. For example, execs and many other functions spend a lot of their time talking to other people, so while they understand what is happening intellectually, it is still second-hand and a bit abstract.
- Now we get to professional use of frontier-grade LLMs in math&code. Somewhere around 20M people (0.2%) see first-hand that large, complex projects that used to take them weeks/months can now be completed by agents with a prompt. Building apps, copying apps, translating apps, decompiling apps from binaries... This has all happened very quickly and recently - less than 1 year ago, I was writing code manually by hand, typing memorized computer code commands into a code editor character by character, occasionally pressing Tab to autocomplete a little chunk of code.
- And finally we get to the ~5,000 people (~0.00006%) with access to frontier-grade systems internally. The external world has seen the preview. It looks like swarms of thousands of agents collaborating over weeks on software mega projects: minting zero days, running cyber attacks and defenses at machine speeds, discovering new science, advancing the frontier of mathematics. Things that would have taken top professionals in the industry years of work. Meanwhile, human review and comprehension are starting to fall behind. For example, people are still involved in the "archeology" of the OpenAI-HF incident from many months ago. Mathematicians may be poring over the 722 manuscripts on frontier mathematics for a while.
The funnel is driven by a combination of factors:
1. The impact scales with ambition, problem size, and horizon. A question with a paragraph answer barely stresses the system. You need a reservoir of big, difficult problems that you really care about. This aspect drives the consumer / professional dimension of the funnel.
2. The jaggedness of the system (which I have written about a lot separately). Capability peaks in domains that are digital, verifiable and economically valuable. This is because LLM capability emerges from reinforcement learning on verifiable rewards on a curated environment mixture driven by revenue potential. This aspect primarily drives the area (e.g. math&code) dimension of the funnel.
3. Access. Free-tier, paid-tier, internal.
So this is the weirdness of the moment. The general public has mostly not interacted with these systems. When they have, it looks like a derpy chatbot. The majority of professionals still see only a modest uplift. And a small sliver of professionals are experiencing the vertigo of the curve going vertical. And it is all happening at the same time.
Alfred Lin retweeted
Technical moats are mostly over at this point. If you’re building something that is meant to be durable, the only moats now are:
• Proprietary data
• Network effects
• A physical component
Major paradigm shift incoming. Thoughtful predictors of the future like @paraga are building for when agents become the primary users of the internet. What happens when they also become the sales prospect, the recruiter, the scheduler, the enforcer, and more?
Alfred Lin retweeted
personal agents, the end of friction, economic consequences of finally getting around to it
The best founders and builders:
1. Dream about the dent they will put in the universe
2. Stay grounded in their reality
3. Build a plan that connects these two worlds
Though this is broadly applicable to anyone.
Don't confuse motion with progress. Many startups are very busy, but they aren't actually moving the needle. Velocity is speed with a specific direction.
Just like data has fueled the initial AI revolution, data is going to fuel the physical AI revolution. We're excited to partner with @MeckaAI on their new round.















