110 pointsby hek2sch3 hours ago18 comments
  • LeonM2 hours ago
    The title makes it sound like they just did a seed round, but the seed round was announced in August of last year [0].

    Their website landing page is now also showing the software is no longer maintained. No mention of why they made this decision, my best guess is they burned through their seed money and were unable to attract further investments.

    [0]: https://www.tensorzero.com/blog/tensorzero-raises-7-3m-seed-...

    • RobotToasteran hour ago
      Burning through $7m in 9 months? That's an impressive amount of avocado toast.
      • rfgplk2 minutes ago
        $7m actually isn't a whole lot, especially if they hired a (larger) engineering team. Assuming their cali based, that's easily 150-200k per engineer, a team of 20 easily eats through that. Idk the specifics, but I don't the organization was fradulent, it could also be that they're going commercial and no longer want to maintain their oss stack
      • yettan hour ago
        And AI tokens
        • api5 minutes ago
          That would be a lot still. That’s a lot of money.

          I’d bet on extreme irresponsibility.

        • mmaunderan hour ago
          And poached eggs.
        • RobotToaster42 minutes ago
          Avocado intelligence.
          • Noaidi38 minutes ago
            Please don't bring Reddit brain here...
      • raverbashing36 minutes ago
        Those Claude tokens are not cheap you know /s
    • pnwan hour ago
      The company was started in January 2024, so the seed financing is likely a roll-up of two years of fundraising. $7m for ~30 months of running an AI startup in NYC is not that unusual.
    • hoppp2 hours ago
      The project was probably just built to raise funds, a bait, and after thats done it's dead.
      • Blackthorn5 minutes ago
        Sometimes things just fail.
      • jnovek34 minutes ago
        Were the thousands of commits and hundreds of feature branches over the last 9 months just to keep up appearances, then? Were the 850 people who forked it in on the scheme, too?
        • pqtyw31 minutes ago
          Well.. if that's it it's not really much to shown for if you spent $7 million on it.
        • armchairhacker17 minutes ago
          Did Claude make the commits and branches?

          (Honestly I don’t think so here, but I predict that will happen eventually)

      • an hour ago
        undefined
      • realsarman hour ago
        You can call it a bait but where is VCs due diligence for this. Most VCs where out there defending their infra layers investment. Just look at YC batches and see the inflated number of infra startups.
        • Noaidi37 minutes ago
          A great way to launder money then?
          • jazzyjackson14 minutes ago
            Which step of “VC firm with millions to invest” and “fresh grads blow millions on AWS bills, sushi delivery and ketamine” is dirty money being washed?
        • root-parent44 minutes ago
          The due diligence report just come back:

          The report says, the CEO and founder, is a Ketamine addicted weirdo, who does Nazi salutes in public, is know to have at least 24 kids, and lives in an isolated farm in Texas, with at least 5 to 7 female partners, and got sued for calling a guy who saved kids a Pedophile.

          You in?

          • CuriouslyC40 minutes ago
            Only if the CEO is the first man to step foot on mars. He gets to be immortalized, we get to watch him die living his best life.
        • jnovekan hour ago
          Right? I’ve been through due diligence and it’s neither a quick nor simple process, even for seed.
        • ajrossan hour ago
          "Failure" is the expected median though. You can't due-diligence your way out of "startup ran out of runway"!

          The discussion here isn't about funding, it's that there's a presumptively useful community tool which got abandoned because its owners took their toys and went home when the money ran out (instead of making a sincere effort at transitioning to community governance). That's on the IP owners being selfish jerks and/or grifting losers. It's not the VC's fault.

          • skeledrew15 minutes ago
            At least the repo is still available. Anyone can fork and carry on, create a community, etc.
          • jnovek43 minutes ago
            While most startups fail eventually, failure in less than a year with over 7 million dollars is not the expected median. It’s the exact sort of thing that due diligence is supposed to prevent.

            Also the whole project is open source. If you want, you could take it over.

            • gwerbin14 minutes ago
              Are there cases when VC investors actually went after founders for fraud or embezzlement or misrepresenting the business or something like that?
          • thih9an hour ago
            Which toys exactly were taken? The repo seems open source, is any component missing?
            • kaonwarb24 minutes ago
              In response to sibling: > It's still open source because you can fork it if you really want

              Yes, that's exactly what it means!

            • ajross32 minutes ago
              The project name, its community center and hosting environment, the active participation and consent of the copyright holders of the software was withdrawn. This is a dead project, we can all see it. If you want to use it and contribute and get help, you have no where to go.

              "It's still open source because you can fork it if you really want" is a specious and unhelpful attitude, and it tells me that you, like the owners of this thing, are not to be trusted to manage such a thing.

              • skeledrew2 minutes ago
                The project is Apache2 licensed. You can literally do anything you want with the code. Stop trying to push guilt on people for no longer providing free services.
          • singpolyma3an hour ago
            It's not on anyone to set up your favourite "governance" system. If anyone honestly wants to keep maintaining or using it the code is still there.
            • ajross30 minutes ago
              Part of the social contract of putting a free software project up for public use and convincing Microsoft to host it for free (!) is indeed that you're going to maintain it in good faith for the people who consume it, and that if you can't you'll make a good faith effort to help the people who do.

              There are good and bad ways to extract yourself from maintainership obligations. This is the bad way.

              • skeledrew7 minutes ago
                No, there is no social contract here. Microsoft gives free hosting because it's cheap and also provides a path to their paid offerings. People share stuff they work on for fun, to help flesh out their resume, to get help, etc. There's no reason for a maintainer not to drop a project in a heartbeat if it becomes the slightest bit of a burden.
  • kmac_an hour ago
    About one year ago, I created an LLM gateway with metrics, provider fallback and switching, tools support, injecting, etc. etc., and unique features like acting as an MCP tools client and server, all streamed, with low latency.

    It was a simple project in terms of technical complexity. I didn't publish it as I counted several similar projects in the field.

    Putting $7.3M into such a project would make sense only in the case of a precise growth plan with already declared customers and an promising sales funnel. There is no technical moat.

    • jnovek18 minutes ago
      The calculus in “buy or build” has shifted for me over the last six months especially. If I can make an agent build it, I get the version that’s tailored for me.

      > It was a simple project in terms of technical complexity.

      That’s the thing, though. The version I build for myself sheds all the features that get in my way. I don’t share them either because they’re only useful for me.

      Perhaps in the future big tech projects will be delivered with a common “core” and the expectation that agents fill in the use-specific stuff.

    • zackify33 minutes ago
      That's literally every project around AI. All the agent sandboxes. Hosting cron jobs that just hit ai rest endpoints for model completions etc
  • indigodaddy12 minutes ago
    Just use Plexus [1]. The maintainer is not trying to be a hero or raise seed dollars or even really trying to promote it. He's just making an excellent, useful product. (Unaffiliated, just a happy user). It's not a full-on "LLMOps" platform (whatever that is), it's just a proxy that works very well and has some nice features.

    [1] https://github.com/mcowger/plexus

  • jdw64an hour ago
    VCs think, 'Apps are risky, infrastructure is safe,' so they invested in AI infra.

    "infra is safe" Hmm, but that wasn't a good idea. because if an open source infrastructure project like TensorZero gets shut down this quickly, won't they start to realize that those investment theories are also risky?

    The difficult thing about AI infrastructure is that, unlike other industries, it will not become fragmented. It will likely remain tied to specific big tech models. What does this mean? It means that because AI models are not yet standardized, the infrastructure itself is actually riskier. In other words, the privatization of standards is happening.

    The challenge with AI infrastructure is that an independent, stable standard layer has not formed, unlike in other software infrastructure markets such as databases, web servers, cloud, and containers. Over time, those ecosystems developed relatively standardized interfaces and operational layers. But the LLM ecosystem is still evolving rapidly. Models themselves change fast, APIs differ, pricing differs, context windows, tool calling, structured output, evaluation, fine tuning, caching, routing, everything keeps changing.

    So even if an infrastructure startup tries to build a common abstraction layer across multiple models, before that common layer can stabilize, big model or cloud providers like OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, AWS, or Azure can just absorb the same functionality directly. In the end, AI infrastructure is at high risk of becoming an attached feature of model providers rather than solidifying as an independent layer.

    But if a startup that raised 7.3 million dollars fails this quickly, who would trust and invest in such things? That aside, it seems AI startups are all the rage these days. I also want to learn AI and get funded like that. Does anyone here trust me enough to invest? About one hundredth of that would probably be enough

    • realsarm7 minutes ago
      I also believe the same. Many VCs are obsessed with moat that they clearly got wrong. To me the value created at app layers are so much that gives them the flexibility to diversify their infra layers. Good harnessed do not depend on a specific model provider or memory layer or etc that when it is taken down like anthropic fable they get no risk exposure. Many even after growing train their own model like what cursor did with composer. There’s many more examples in other verticals like manus, superhuman, fireflies, lovable, replit, cursor, nouswise, cline windsurf and kilo but many are concentrated in coding because again I think VCs have preferred this definition of moat.
    • pqtyw27 minutes ago
      Infra is perhaps somewhat safe but realistically it's a really low margin capital intense business long-term unless you can lock-in customers with hundreds of services like AWS. So not a lot of space for a huge ROI.

      > are all the rage these days

      Are they? Overall it seems kind of tame compared to 2020-21 since VCs are somewhat risk average outside of a few outliers. Funding looks much more concentrated these days.

      • jdw6423 minutes ago
        You're right. Looking at recent indicators, there are more stable investments than I thought. But please understand that, as a human, I haven't achieved ROI in terms of marriage, relationships, a stable job, etc., so my perspective might be mixed with a bit of envy
  • SamDc736 minutes ago
    I'm glad I used litellm in my last project

    https://github.com/BerriAI/litellm/

  • pavlovan hour ago
    This is the claim in the repo readme that presumably unlocked the VC investment:

    “TensorZero is used by companies ranging from frontier AI startups to the Fortune 10 and fuels ~1% of global LLM API spend today.”

    One percent seems like a lot. Anyone on HN use this?

    • spmurrayzzz14 minutes ago
      I used it, but only briefly to evaluate it. It had some overlap with a tool I built myself, was curious if any of the extra features would be useful.

      Ultimately I found the data model and UI to be both cumbersome and unintuitive. Langfuse ended up being the observability tool I went with instead over the one I built (and still use today).

    • sebmellenan hour ago
      Generally speaking, every YC company post ~2020 is forced to make pathologically false claims to compete in the (fundraising) market.
    • croes22 minutes ago
      Rounded to the nearest percent >0
      • lostmsu18 minutes ago
        ceil(market_share)
    • ojosilva11 minutes ago
      Just tell AI to write your copy and that's what you get, overhype-as-a-service.
  • bz_bz_bz2 hours ago
    Seed was in Aug ‘25 and website simply says the project will no longer be maintained: https://www.tensorzero.com/
  • hmokiguessan hour ago
    There was a high severity advisory last week https://github.com/tensorzero/tensorzero/security/advisories... though these days can't even tell if this is related or just routine
  • MonstraG2 hours ago
    For people like myself, who didn't understand the timing of events - raised in august 2025, archived yesterday without any notice.
    • an hour ago
      undefined
  • variety8675an hour ago
    Open source powers the business of many large corporations and they give essentially nothing back - why would maintainers refuse an offer for money in this environment?
  • ianm218an hour ago
    Guessing that the founders got 7 figure offers from AI labs or similar and decided that was an easier path.
  • hek2sch3 hours ago
    Most VCs avoided application layer believing it is too risky with few player would emerge as winner over application layers calling them GPT wrapper (now called Harness) and pouring money into infra layer. Would love to see your opinion about how this thesis would turn out going forward.
    • _pdp_an hour ago
      Not my experience. I think most VCs thesis is around the application layer - not much around the infrastructure.

      That being said, while I am biased, there is a lot of work around infrastructure so calling it "just a wrapper" massively underestimates the effort - this is purely from my own experience building this space.

      Besides, if it is true how come OpenClaw is spending so much money on a open source project. Salaries alone will cost 7 digit sum for a harness and I have first hand experience dealing with companies doing exactly this.

      Shameful plug - we are building cbk.ai, better known today as chatbotkit.com.

  • feverzsjan hour ago
    At least it's not a pig butchering scam.
  • BoredPositron2 hours ago
    Holy burn rate.
  • villgaxan hour ago
    Just switch to Bifrost already
  • rvzan hour ago
    But it is written in Rust™.
  • shevy-javaan hour ago
    Guys - skynet is winning the war. We oldschool humans are left behind here.

    Wasn't GitHub once a place for humans? Now we could rename it SkyHub.

  • pannyan hour ago
    LOL, there's a sucker born every minute!