The Japanese startup killing the nasal swab

Sometimes it seems like Japan just can't figure out medtech startups. In theory, Japan should be one of the most active startup markets for medical technology. In practice, however, there are relatively few success cases. Today we are going to meet one of those success cases and talk with Sho Okiyama, MD and founder of Aillis, who has developed a minimally invasive flu and covid test that is already in widespread use in Japan. Hopefully, no one will ever need to stick another swab up your nose. We also talk about Sho's time as a rural doctor, what's straining Japan's healthcare system, and how to fix it before it breaks. It's a great conversation, and I think you'll enjoy it. Show Notes Why influenza diagnosis has been so resistant to AI You’ll never get another swab stuck up your nose What practicing as a rural doctor taught Sho about Japan's healthcare system Some Japanese still turn to Shamanism for medical advice Starting an AI startup without a technical founder Building a medical training dataset from scratch The challenge Anthropic and OpenAI face in medical tech Aillis's plans for global expansion Why there are so few medtech startup in Japan and how to fix that How to drive meaningful change in Japanese society Links from the Founder Everything you ever wanted to know about Aillis Learn more about Evidence Finder Connect with Sho on LinkedIn Friend him on Facebook Follow him on Twitter @ShoOkiyama Watch Sho's TEDx talk on AI development in modern medicine Leave a comment Transcript Welcome to Disrupting Japan, Straight talk from Japan's most innovative founders and VCs. I'm Tim Romero, and thanks for joining me. Japan has a real problem with life science startups. I mean, there's no shortage of brilliant ideas and patents. There's no shortage of support programs and investors looking to invest in Japanese medtech and biotech startups. Everyone in Japan wants this to happen. Everyone knows this is about to happen. And yet, everyone is also a bit frustrated at just how slow this is happening. But of course, it is happening. So, today we sit down with Sho Okiyama, medical doctor and founder of Aillis, who has developed an AI-powered throat camera that can actually diagnose both influenza and COVID. It's the first device of its kind ever approved as a diagnostic medical device, and it is already in widespread use in clinics and hospitals in every prefecture in Japan. It's really an amazing success story that is just getting started. Sho and I talk about what it really takes to bring a new medical device to market in Japan, what it's like to be the only doctor on a string of remote Japanese islands, and how we're going to get more Japanese doctors to start startups. But you know, Sho tells that story much better than I can. So, let's get right to the interview. Interview Tim: So, we're sitting here with Sho Okiyama, the founder and CEO of Aillis, who is using AI to make medical diagnosis faster and more accurate. So, thanks for sitting down with me. Sho: Thank you for having me, Tim. Tim: I'm really looking forward to this, because I think there's so much innovation going on in biotech and medicine in Japan right now, and what you guys are doing is really interesting. So, you've got two products, and I'd like to kind of cover them briefly. First, you have the Nodoka diagnostic camera. Sho: We produce Nodoka, which is a medical device. This is a pharyngoscope. In other words, it's a throat camera. So, whenever you go to the doctor, the doctor would take a look at your throat, right? You know, find out whether it's reddish, swelling, or something like that. But all those inspections were based on knowledge inside the doctor's brain. So, what we developed was the database of the pharyngeal photo. Tim: So, when a doctor is looking at someone's throat, they're looking for all kinds of different things. But Nodoka, as I understand it, is looking for two very specific things, right? It's able to diagnose influenza and recently COVID as well, right? Sho: Yes. We used to diagnose influenza and COVID using PCR or similar methods. Tim: How accurate is it compared to the PCR test? Because I would be very, very happy if I never have to get another swab up my nose for testing these things. Sho: Yeah. Nodoka has gone through a clinical trial and has proven that it has approximately equivalent accuracy compared to the antigen testing. Tim: That's fantastic. And it's in widespread use already, right? Sho: Yes. It has been introduced to more than 2,000 hospitals or clinics in Japan. Tim: And is the driving factor just patient comfort? Nobody likes getting the swab up the nose? Or is it more accurate? Is it faster? Sho: Yeah, it's faster. And of course, it's less invasive, right? And what's more, Nodoka only has indications for two different diseases as of now, but it has the potential to have more indications, like cancers such as tongue cancer or pharyngeal cancer. And we also wrote a paper that the AI is able to detect signs of diabetes only through the image of the pharynx. Tim: Really? Okay, I want to get back to Nodoka because it's super interesting. But before we do, I want to talk just really briefly, introduce your other product, which is Evidence Finder. Sho: So, this is an LLM-based tool we developed for doctors. There are tons of medical information coming out. There are hundreds and thousands of papers published every day. So, doctors need to keep up, right? But it's a huge burden for doctors. So, what Evidence Finder does, it's a chat-based tool, such as, ChatGPT or Gemini, but it cites scientific papers. We use multiple techniques to prevent hallucination, which is very, very important in the field of medicine. And it also gives the doctors concrete evidence why the AI had said what he has said. Tim: So, is this more of a research tool, or is it something that could potentially be a diagnostic tool? Sho: It could be used in both ways. If the doctor were to use it in clinical settings, it needs to be approved as a medical device, which also could be the case for us developing the medical device version of Evidence Finder in the future. Tim: Well, I understand that getting certified as a medical device is very much on your roadmap at the moment, right? Sho: Yes. Tim: Okay, I really want to dig into that. But before we do, I want to back up a little bit and talk about you. Sho: Thank you. Tim: So, you graduated from University of Tokyo Med School in 2010. And after graduation, you ended up practicing in some very rural areas of Japan, right? Sho: Yes. Tim: I mean, University of Tokyo Medical School is the most prestigious medical school in Japan. Graduates go into top-tier internships and hospitals all over Japan. Why did you decide to go to Okinawa and these rural areas and work as a rural country doctor? Sho: Yeah, I started my residency in Red Cross Hospital in Shibuya. This is a huge hospital. It has like 20 doctors on duty at midnight. And you can perform MRIs, CAT scans 24/7. But the hospital was too developed for myself. And if I were to work there for 10 years, I would end up as a doctor who is only able to work a developed hospital like the Red Cross Hospital in Shibuya. So, I found in myself that I needed to go to rural areas or small clinics to develop my physical examination skills, as well as not ending up as a niche specialist. I wanted to be a generalist. Tim: That makes a lot of sense. So, I mean, I could see that on one hand, going into prestigious hospitals, it's a very smooth escalator. On the other hand, it sounds kind of like the medical equivalent of being a sour man. Sho: Oh, yeah, you could say it in that way. Tim: I mean, things are decided for you. You sort of get pushed into doing one specific track or rotated through. So, how long were you in Shibuya before you made that call? Sho: I was in Shibuya for three years. And then I went to Ishigaki and Hatsuka Islands for one year. And Hatsuka has only 500 inhabitants on the island. And there is, of course, I'm the only doctor on the island. So, you have to be on call for 24/7. If there are emergency patients, I had to call the helicopter and ride the helicopter with the patient to the main island. Tim: Right, right. Because I imagine you're responsible for a number of the surrounding islands. Sho: Yes, yes, we are. Tim: The lack of rural doctors in Japan, it's a real problem now. Do you see technology as being able to kind of address this? For example, the Ministry of Health and Welfare is pushing hard on things like telemedicine and technology sandboxes to allow new technology to be experimented with. Do you think technology is the solution or is it more getting human doctors interested in going? Sho: It's both technology problem and the doctors themselves. But it's less difficult to solve this problem in a technological matter because human beings or doctors don't switch their ways of thinking instantly. But technology, it's changing every day, every week. Tim: Yeah, that's true. You'll certainly make faster progress on the technology front than on the human front. Sho: Yeah, but the decision I made to go to the island, this was 2012 or so, 15 years ago. So, there was less technology, there was no telemedicine at all. So, I had to go there, I went there, and noticed that there's a huge gap between the medicine practice in Tokyo and on the island. But I was taught in the university that Japan is the top one country which has the least discrepancy between the medical level within the nation. Tim: Really? I believe that, I could see that. That's something to be proud of. Sho: But the reality was that there still is a huge gap. So, after going to the island, I want to lessen this discrepancy. And medicine is not for the rich people. It's for the humanity itself. ...

This summer has sent both temperatures and electricity prices soaring. One Japanese startup, however, has found a way to use industrial cold storage to reduce our energy bills. Today we sit down with Takehito Nishiyama, the CEO Greenphard Energy, and we talk about what it takes for startups to meaningfully compete in Japan's energy markets, how hardware startups can avoid the scalability trap, and how to sell to large Japanese industrials. It's a great conversation, and I think you'll enjoy it. Show Notes Why making money from demand response is hard How industrial cooling costs can be reduced by 40% How to start a startup from within another startup Developing a GTM to target Japanese industrial companies A unique electricity arbitrage opportunity How hardware startups can escape the scalability trap How to onboard Japanese industrial clients The future of Japanese energy startups Is the Japanese education system really that conservative? Links from the Founder Everything you ever wanted to know about Greenphard Energy Connect with Takehito on LinkedIn Leave a comment Transcript Welcome to Disrupting Japan, Straight talk from Japan's most innovative founders and VCs. I'm Tim Romero, and thanks for joining me. Good lord, it is hot outside! Of course, maybe you see things differently. I have no idea where you are or even when you are listening to this episode of Disrupting Japan, but here in Tokyo in August of 2026, it is hot. Well, today we're going to sit down with Takehito Nishiyama, founder of Greenphard Energy, a startup that's working to help keep us cool. Well, not so much keep us cool, but keep our food cool. You see, Greenphard works with refrigerated warehouses to significantly cut their electricity costs and to help them actually earn money from their electricity use. Now, in this episode, we talk about demand response, or DR. Now, we don't define it during the interview, but the idea is pretty simple. When electricity demand gets so high that it threatens to destabilize the grid, power companies will pay heavy electricity users to cut back for a while. And strategic use of demand response is a big part of Greenphard's offering. Takehito and I talk about how startups can escape the scalability trap that plagues so many industrial startups, how to start a startup from within another startup, and just why innovation is so slow to come to the energy sector in Japan. But you know, Takehito tells that story much better than I can. So, let's get right to the interview. Interview Tim: So, we're sitting down with Takehito Nishiyama of Greenphard Energy, who's helping reduce customers' electricity bills and balance grid demand. So, thanks for sitting down with us. Takehito: Thank you. Tim: In the intro, I gave a really brief description of what you guys do, but I'm sure you can explain it much better than I can. Takehito: Greenphard provides electricity solutions for mainly a refrigerator or air conditioner user. And also we provide our product for electricity producer side as well. We are IoT and physical AI provider and we are electricity trader as well. We are in a unique position. Tim: So, if I understand it, you're working to, on one side, increase the efficiency of HVAC, of cooling and refrigeration, and on the demand side, take advantage of demand response programs that are being offered by Japan's energy company. Takehito: Yeah, right. We control HVAC system, refrigerate and freeze very deeply. And we have two main value. First one is saving electricity consumption. And our second one is creating new electricity resource from electricity consumption side. Tim: Well, I mean, it's a really good topic right now, because it is suddenly very hot in Tokyo. Takehito: Yeah, right. Today's temperature is crazy level. Tim: Yeah, it's just like rainy season ended and it's been 35 degrees for the last week. Yeah, right. Takehito: And also today, summer area reached 40 degrees. Tim: Oh my God, in Japan, that is crazy. It's not supposed to be that hot here. So, let's break that down. How do you create a new electricity resource from consumption? Takehito: We can control the HVAC system very deeply and we use a timing approach. So, for example, the large-scale refrigerator will do overcooling before the demand response timing. So, during electricity type timing, we can reduce the electricity consumption of large-scale refrigerator. So, we can create a new demand response resource. Tim: Okay, that makes a lot of sense. That seems like a very clear and intuitive way to save electricity. So, for commercial or industrial cooling, how much flexibility do they have to kind of overcool? I would imagine like some of those temperature bands must be pretty, pretty tight. Takehito: It depends on the size of the facility. For example, in large-scale cold storage case, temperature range is larger than all in our air conditioner facility. So, we can use this wide range temperature. Tim: So, how much demand response is there in Japan? I mean, four or five years ago, there was a lot of talk about how demand response was going to be an important part of managing the grid. Is that the case? Takehito: Demand response needs is increasing year by year, but demand response resource provider is still small. Actually, just trading demand response is very easy. Most simple ways change a client-side operation, or for example, stop their factory operation. It's very simple. But our operation is very different from that. In our solution, client-side doesn't need to change their business operation. Tim: But from the grid side, how often are demand response signals being sent? Takehito: Currently, once or twice a year. But there's a potential to change in near future because current global warming effect is really big. Tim: So, only a couple of times a year is when you get to take advantage of demand response directly? Takehito: But demand response needs is increasing year by year. So, current demand response resource price is highest price than before. Tim: So, tell me about your customers. Who's using the Greenphard system? Takehito: Our main client is food factory and warehouse owners. And also, air conditioner control case, a lot of kind of client is there. Almost all building and office has the air conditioner. So almost all type of facility is our target. Tim: Yeah. I mean, that makes sense that the cold storage chain, the food warehouses, it makes sense that they would be your initial targets because they are such heavy users of refrigeration and electricity. So, you mentioned like the two parts of your business model. So, one is the demand response. But if that signal only happens a couple of times a year, most of the savings must come from the operational parts. Takehito: Actually, FTC saving impact is not small. For industrial users, we can reduce around 40% in maximum case. Tim: I mean, that's quite significant. What are you doing to reduce those costs? Because I would imagine that most of these systems, they're designed to use as little electricity as possible. So, what are you optimizing? What are you improving to reduce the electricity costs by so much? Takehito: We use a lot of kind of technology. So, AI and compressor frequency control technology. We control refrigerator as soft as possible. It's like a soft control of car acceleration. So, usual refrigerator control the temperature in some temperature range. So, we use this allowance range. So, usual control case, when temperature reached upper side border, power on and reduce temperature very high speed. But in our case, when reached upper side range, we control the down speed more softly. Tim: So, whereas by default, most of the equipment is designed to maintain a very specific temperature, you're working with the customer to figure out what range it can fluctuate in and then minimizing the effort it takes to stay in that range. Takehito: Yeah, right. We control the refrigerator temperature fluctuation more softly. And one more way, the more data driven way, if we plot this temperature fluctuation in a heat map, it's very different with the season. For example, the factory makes same product all years. But after monitoring and analyze the temperature data, temperature heat map is a bit different with the season. So, we optimize this temperature distribution. Tim: Okay, that makes sense. I want to dive deeper into the technology and the business model in just a second. But before that, I want to talk a bit about you. Takehito: Oh, thank you. Tim: So, you've got a background both in energy and startups. So you were originally with Mitsubishi Power and you left to join Synspective, which is a big Japanese startup. And then you left Synspective to start Greenphard. So, what made you decide to leave Synspective and start your own company? Takehito: Oh, actually, before I joined Synspective, I already started my own business. So, I shared my thought to Synspective side. So, Synspective is very open mind, so they accept. Tim: So when you left Mitsubishi, you actually left to start your own startup. Then why join Synspective? Takehito: Because I really interested in the space industry as well. When that time my own business is not so large scale, so I can do some business as well. Tim: Wow. And the team at Synspective was fine with this? There was no problem? Takehito: Yeah, they accepted my work style. Tim: Wow. And so how long were you sort of working at Synspective and building Greenphart? Takehito: Around 2.5 years. Tim: Alright. And what was the trigger to finally say, okay, now we're making a clean break? Takehito: My own business growing year by year. So, I needed to focus on my business. So, I decided to leave Synspective. Tim: And you're still in very friendly terms with the team back at Synspective? Takehito: Yeah, of course. Tim: Oh,...

Slithering robots sounds vaguely horrifying, but it turns out they're incredibly useful. Soft-robots lack the charisma of their more acrobatically-inclined rigid counterparts, but some startups are betting on the unique role they have to play. Today we sit down with Toru Ichihashi, the CEO Solaris, and we talk about what it takes to turn a university research project into a viable startup, what happens when Japanese VCs decide it's time for a startup to change CEOs, and the most likely path for soft robots to slither onto the world stage. It's a great conversation, and I think you'll enjoy it. Show Notes The creeping problem with pipes How to stuff a robot into an industrial pipe What's driving the early adopters of soft robotics Turning a university spin-out into a business-focused startup When do Japanese VCs decide its time to change CEOs The importance of both funding and marketing partnerships in Japan Can partnerships help Japanese startups go global? Why we don't see more soft-robotics in the real world Why Japanese investors focus more on risk than opportunity Links from the Founder Everything you ever wanted to know about Solaris Watch videos of the Soha soft robot crawling through all kinds of things. Connect with Toru on LinkedIn Leave a comment Transcript Welcome to Disrupting Japan, Straight Talk from Japan's most innovative founders and VCs. I'm Tim Romero, and thanks for joining me. We've been talking a lot about robotics on Disrupting Japan recently, and frankly, that's because there's been a lot going on in robotics in Japan recently. Today, we're going to be focusing on soft robotics. And by soft robotics, I don't mean that they're cute and fuzzy, but that they are non-rigid. Soft robots are robots that can bend and curve and even slither. So today, we sit down with Toru Ichihashi, CEO of Solaris, the makers of the soft robot Soha, which crawls through industrial pipes to inspect and to clean them. It's a natural, real-world use case for soft robots. But of course, things are not quite so simple. Even in Japan, bringing a robot to market is a lot more challenging than you might think. Now, during the podcast, both Toru and I make truly heroic efforts to try to describe how this robot actually moves and manages to crawl through these small pipes, but you really have to see it to understand. There's a link to the videos up on the site of Soha crawling through transparent pipes, so check those out. Toru and I talk about the real challenges of establishing a new market in Japan, why sales partnerships are much more important in Japan than they are elsewhere, and what happens when startups investors decide that it's time for a new CEO. But you know, Toru tells that story much better than I can. So, let's get right to the interview. Interview Tim: So, we're sitting here with Toru Ichihashi, the CEO of Solaris, who's making the Soha robot, a small-diameter pipe inspection and cleaning robot. And thanks for sitting down with me. I really appreciate it. Toru: Yeah, I'm the same here, so I really appreciate this opportunity. Tim: Yeah, in your brand new office too. Toru: Yeah, yeah, just a week. Tim: So, tell me a bit about Soha. What is it exactly? Toru: Okay, so do you have a camera or not? Tim: No, yeah, so for our listeners, it is sitting right in front of us, but this is an audio podcast, so you'll have to explain. Toru: I see. Our target is narrow pipe. Especially diameter is 150 millimeters or less. Just think about social infrastructures. So, many narrow pipes everywhere. Tim: So, is it mostly like water pipes or pipes carrying like chemicals and exhausts in factories? Just all kinds of things. Toru: Yeah, all kinds of. So, we could say this is a kind of veins for social infrastructures. However, these narrow pipes are very small. That is why humans cannot access. Conventional robots also cannot access. So, let's take an example of a factory. When they need to inspect or clean, they stop manufacturing equipment and they... Tim: They like disassemble everything. Toru: Yeah, disassemble pipes. Then by brush, they clean manually. Tim: Okay, so they take it apart and clean section by section. Toru: Yeah, exactly. Tim: And so what does Soha do? Toru: Our robot is -- ket me show you how to move. Tim: Well, it's coming into the same problem of being an audio podcast. Toru: Ah, yeah, that's not good. Tim: But no, no, I get it. I mean, you mentioned before that it was inspired by the way an earthworm moves. So, kind of like sticking out its head and pulling up its tail and sticking out its head and pulling back its tail again, right? Toru: Yeah. So, to move into narrow pipe, conventional robots cannot move. For example, caterpillar, such kind of robot cannot move. People think, okay, that's mimic snake or inchworm. Tim: Because it can't bend in the pipe, right? It can't move up and down. Toru: Yeah, you're right.So, Snake move by winding, so narrow pipe, snake cannot move. Only earthworm can move into narrow pipe because earthworm moves, expand and moving this way. Tim: Pushing, like head pushing forward, pulls up behind, push the head, pull behind. Toru: So, our robot is mimic earthworm movement. Tim: In practice, like how do you get it into the pipe? Can it go in through like an open valve or something, or do they still have to disassemble? Toru: That's a very good question. Such kind of easy operation is very important. So, we have station for the robot to start up. Then this station can be connected with customer's pipe. Tim: Okay. For example, you take off a section of the pipe and the robot can crawl in. Toru: Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Tim: Okay. So you don't have to disassemble the entire thing? Toru: No. In case of factory pipes, some cases at the end, open area is there, and also some connection is there between pipe and pipe. So, just disassemble connection only, then connect our starting stations, then our robot can move into the customer's pipe. Tim: That's cool. And how far can it go? Toru: Currently, 20 meters. So in case of factories, 20 meters is enough. Tim: Yeah, I can see that. It's actually quite far. I mean, there'll be some kind of break every 20 meters. And since it's an earthworm, it can even climb straight up and straight down as well, right? Toru: Yeah, yeah. Vertical climbing, no problem. And also these kinds of complicated curves, also we have no problem to move. Tim: Right. So, it can move through very sharp turns and straight up, straight down. Toru: Yeah, exactly. Tim: Well, what I think is also really astounding about this is that it's pneumatic. It's all powered by air. Toru: Exactly. No electric, only air. Tim: I mean, I can definitely see the advantage in that it would let you go into explosive environments. Was that the main reason for going with air or there are other engineering concerns? Toru: Our main purpose is how to mimic earthworm movement. Air is perfect. Let me explain how it works. So, this is artificial muscle. Tim: So, each segment of this earthworm has a kind of an air bladder, an air segment to it. Toru: Yeah. Then let me -- so, this artificial muscle... Tim: We're going to have to turn this off because you won't be able to hear me out there. Toru: So, you can see once air is inflated, this artificial muscle expands this way only. And this way contracts. Tim: Okay. So, each segment would balloon out. And I guess when it's ballooning out, it's kind of gripping the side of the pipe. Okay. And then pulling everything up behind it. So, it's not an autonomous robot. It's controlled by the person... Toru: Controller. Yeah. This is very simple. Move forward, stop, move back.  So this robot, inspection and cleaning, we can do simultaneously. Tim: So, tell me about your customers. Who's mainly using this robot? Toru: Our current main target is semiconductor factory. Because semiconductor factories manufacturing process by narrow pipes, such kind of dust, they push it out. Tim: Okay. So, just the extreme demands of semiconductor manufacturing means the pipes have to be very clean. Toru: Yeah, yeah. Once this pipe is sealed with dust, manufacturing line is stopped. So, this is a very critical maintenance process. Tim: I can imagine. But it would seem like these kind of pipe inspections are needed, I mean, across all kinds of manufacturing. Toru: Yeah, of course. Tim: Do you have customers in more traditional manufacturing as well? Toru: Yeah, yeah, exactly. Why I said semiconductor is the first target is because once manufacturing equipment is stopped, opportunity loss is huge. Currently, they are doing manually. They need to stop manufacturing equipment for a day or two days. But by using our robot, just one hour or two hours stop is enough. Tim: Okay. So, their cost saving is not so much the cost of the cleaning itself, but of the opportunity costs and shut down the line. But again, I imagine that's true in a lot of industries. Toru: Yeah, you are right. So, also chemical industries, car manufacturers, all kinds of factories, they have same kind of issues. So, currently our deals, which we are working with, 70 or 80% are semiconductor manufacturers. The rest is chemical factory or car industries. As you said, other industries also cleaning pipes is very important for them. Tim: Okay, but perhaps just not quite as urgent. So, they'll take a little longer. Toru: Yeah, that is why I believe we need to make a business model by semiconductor manufacturers. Then we expand our business. Tim: That makes sense. I want to get back to the business model in a minute. But before that, I want to talk a bit about you. So, you've actually been in robotics for quite some time now. You were at Melton and ZMP. Toru: So, my background is I spent about 30 years at Toshiba. And the first decade, I was software engineer....

Japan was once the the undisputed global leader in robotics, but that's simply not true today. In fact, with China and America dominating the spotlight, many question whether Japan is even still in the game. Well, last month I had the chance to find out what the world really thinks. At the inaugural Tokyo Humanoids Summit, I interviewed seven global leaders in robotics, and I asked each of them where exactly Japan stands and what Japan has to offer the rest of the world. I'm compiled all their answers so you can hear the full range of what people are saying about robotics in Japan. There are some great conversations, and I think you'll enjoy them. Show Directory and Links Junghee Ryu,  Founder and CEO of RLWRLD LinkedIn Company Site Leopold Beer, VP Sensing Division of Renesas Electronics LinkedIn Company Site Mehrdad Farimani, Founder and CTO of MERPHI LinkedIn Company Site James Wells, CEO of Sanctuary AI LinkedIn Company Site Rikiya Yamamoto, CEO of Yamariki Edge LinkedIn Company Site Hagen Wegner, Director at FEV Consulting LinkedIn Company Site Terence Bennett, Executive Director of Bay Area Robotics Association LinkedIn Company Site Leave a comment Transcript Welcome to Disrupting Japan, Straight Talk from Japan's most innovative founders and VCs. I'm Tim Romero, and thanks for joining me. Last month, at the Tokyo Humanoid Summit, I had a chance to interview seven of the leading innovators in the field of humanoid robotics from around the world. Now, I'll be sharing the full interviews on Disrupting Japan's social channels, and I encourage you to check them out. There are some really interesting discussions there. Of course, with industry leaders flying into Tokyo from around the globe, there was one question that I wanted to ask all of them. What does Japan really have to offer globally? How can Japan compete and even regain its status as a global leader in robotics? I mean, is this even possible now? Well, I've collected all of their responses into a single, focused episode for you. You'll see that there are some common themes and also a few surprises. But overall, the world is feeling very optimistic about what's happening in Japan. But you know, my guests tell that much better than I can. So let's get right to the interviews. So we're sitting here with Junghee Ryu, the founder and CEO of RLWRLD, who's building dexterity models for robots. Ryu Junghee,  Founder and CEO of RLWRLD Tim: Thanks for sitting down today. Junghee: Thank you for having me today. Tim: You've got an office here in Japan. You've spent a lot of time in Japan. What unique strengths do you think Japan has in the area of humanoid robotics and physical AI? Junghee: One of the biggest pros of the Japanese market is the culture. Think about the US citizens. They hesitate to just embrace the power of the humanoid. But in Japan, I met a lot of their kind of C-suites here. They know the power of humanoid because you guys already experienced the early times and the robot like Ashimo or Aibo. And there are a lot of their animations like Atom, Gundam, Evangelion. So culturally, I think that the Japanese society is ready for embracing the human power. Tim: You know, that's a really interesting point, because in media and popular culture in Japan, robots and humanoid robots in particular are almost always positive and helpful. Junghee: Yeah, the companion of humankind. Tim: Right. And like in Hollywood movies, they tend to be very dangerous. Junghee: Yeah. The enemy of mankind. Tim: Right. You get the Terminator. So that's really interesting. And have you found that in your conversations in Japan and your pilots that companies are more willing and more open? Junghee: Yeah, because the Japanese society suffered about population cliffs since 30 years ago. So it's a long time. So mostly their industry leaders, they understand the urgency, the demands for automation, especially the focus on the humanoid. Already they automated almost everything. But the remaining things should be done by their human level dexterity and intelligence. That's why. Tim: Well, it's definitely exciting times. And it sounds like you guys are doing great things in Japan. Junghee: Not only great things for Japan, great things for all the mankind in this world. Tim: Absolutely. So thanks so much for sitting down. Junghee: Thank you for having me. Tim: I appreciate it. Yeah, thank you. Leopold Beer, VP Sensing Division of Renesas Electronics Tim: So we're sitting here with Leopold Beer, the VP and General Manager of the Sensing Division of Renesas Electronics. So thanks for sitting down. Leopold: Thank you for having me. Tim: So listen, with your time in Japan and at this Humanoid Summit, what unique strengths do you think Japan has to offer the world in terms of humanoid robotics and physical AI? Leopold: Definitely there are lots of things that Japan brings in already today and can bring in in the future. Starting from my company, Renesas, with the broad portfolio of semiconductors, we already serve lots of these applications. But when you look at the specific context of Japan, Japan always has been an innovator in terms of robotics and automization. And I think the Japanese society is much more open to technology than in some European societies. I'm not talking for the US, but in Europe, there's always a kind of skepticism. When you bring in a new technology, okay, what's the risk? And I think Japan is much opener to technology. So having the foundation of these strong technologies companies, and I name Renesas one of them, but there are others playing very strongly in the field of automization. And given this openness of the society, and as we heard this morning, even the willingness of the society to bring in more automation as a solution to solve social problems, but Japan is the perfect environment. Tim: And so do you see this openness on both the industrial commercial side and the consumer side? Leopold: Absolutely. I think there are two sides of the story. On one hand, of course, robot manufacturers, they want to push their solution. On the other side, there needs to be an acceptance and the pull from the market. And I think we have both in Japan. Tim: So Japan might end up being the perfect testbed, the perfect place for proof of concepts to figure out how to make all of this really work. Leopold: I would say yes. That'd be fantastic. Tim: Well, listen, Leopold, thank you so much for taking the time to sit down. Leopold: It was a pleasure. Tim: I've really enjoyed it. Leopold: It was a good talk. Thank you.   Mehrdad Farimani, Founder and CTO of MERPHI Tim: So we're sitting here with Mehrdad Farahmani, the founder and CTO of MERPHI. So thanks for sitting down. Mehrdad: Thank you, great to be here. Tim: With your time in Japan so far and what you've seen here at the Humanoid Summit, what unique strengths do you think Japan has to offer the rest of the world in terms of humanoid robotics and in physical AI? Mehrdad: Absolutely. So when I was very junior, young in robotics, Japan was the place to go for humanoids. We had Asimo and we had all these great robots from SoftBank and we had all these different companion robots and social robots. Tim: That was more than 20 years ago. Mehrdad: It was, right? Tim: It’s amazing. Mehrdad: And there were actually, to be honest, there were two countries who were really leading robotics. One was Japan, the other was Germany. So Germany or DLR in Germany, they created some of the greatest robots out there. So has Japan. And Japan was, of course, leading more. And then one of my surprises over the years was that what happens to both Germany and Japan. Germany also, they really slowed down. And actually, we had this funny conversation with a friend the other day and we were like, okay, is it that they slowed down or the other countries they kicked off? Because I remember in 2012 that there were only six countries that they were building humanoid robots. So of course, US, France, Germany, Japan, and we had Iran and then one more country, I don't remember. China was not even among them, right? And now we see that China is actually leading a lot in the human area only in this 15, 20 years. So one of the things is that for me, what has always been interesting about Japan is the culture that accepts robots. People who live with robots and they like robots. And one of the greatest robots, not a humanoid, unfortunately, but one of the greatest robots created in the history of robotics is a robot called Paro, P-A-R-O. It's a robot for elderly care. It's a companion robot. Tim: Oh, yes, yes, absolutely. Mehrdad: There's an amazing story behind it. Technologically, it's competing very well with today's technology and everything. But so what was the story? There was this research center. They built that robot. They built something around 3,000 units. They distributed all over the world. Actually, in Sweden that I'm living, we have a few of them. And they're in the museums mostly. And then they stopped. They stopped the production because they were like, yeah, this was a research project. Research is done. So we don't want to make money out of it. Tim: I see that happening so much. There's so much wonderful innovation and then it never gets fully commercialized. Mehrdad: Exactly. I have two reasons for that, actually, so today my job is mostly, to be honest, advising investors and startups mostly on the human area. And I usually think a lot about what are the underlying reasons behind this. One of the reasons is that robotic companies has historically been created by roboticists. Even today they are. It's only the few past years that they were created by business people or entering robotics. Engineers and roboticists,...

Japan is much further ahead in real AI deployment than most people realize. Today we talk with David Ha, CEO of Sakana AI, Japan's clearly most valuable, and arguably most innovative, AI startup, and he explains how Japanese enterprises are using AI in production environments today. We talk about selling advanced software to conservative enterprises, how Sakana is customizing existing LLMs to fit Japanese sensibilities, and why smaller, more flexible routing models will likely win out over the massive, expensive frontier models. David also shares some great advice for anyone starting a startup in Japan. It's a great conversation, and I think you'll enjoy it. Show Notes When it's best build for Japan instead of (or before) going global How to raise money overseas as a KK and raise large rounds in Japan It's actually very easy to start a startup in Japan Sakana AI's three-stage go-to-market strategy The tradeoffs between B2B and B2C strategies in Japan How to drive AI adoption in the Japanese enterprise Designing AI workflows that prevent users from outsourcing decision making Why routing models will win in the market over frontier models What "data sovereignty" actually means in practice in Japan How Sakana AI is adapting existing models to make them reflect Japanese sensibilities David's best advice to founders in Japan Links from the Founder Everything you ever wanted to know about Sakana AI Follow them on Twitter @SakanaAILabs Connect with Sakana on LinkedIn Follow David on Twitter @hardmaru Leave a comment Transcript Welcome to Disrupting Japan, Straight Talk from Japan's most innovative founders and VCs. I'm Tim Romero, and thanks for joining me. To say that AI is hot right now understates the mania. AI startups accounted for over 60% of global VC investment in 2025, and things are on track to be even more AI-focused this year. And while investor and media attention remain stubbornly focused on the U.S. and China, things are moving surprisingly fast here in Japan, although things are moving in a slightly different direction. Today we sit down with David Ha, the co-founder and CEO of Sakana AI, Japan's most valuable and arguably most innovative AI startup. Now this episode's a bit longer than usual, but it is well worth your time, because by the end, you'll understand why the frontier model companies, the open AIs, the Anthropics, might be pursuing a flawed and very expensive strategy, and why there's a real chance for Japan to be a global leader here. In fact, as David explains, enterprise AI adoption in Japan is far more advanced than most people realize. And we're talking about actual production deployments here, not just POCs and press releases, but actual daily use. Now David and I talk about raising capital from both Japanese and foreign VCs, the global importance of AI sovereignty, the best way to drive AI adoption in large conservative Japanese companies, and why AI use in Japan is more widespread than you probably expect. But you know, David tells that story much better than I can. So, let's get right to the interview. Interview Tim: So, we're sitting here with David Ha, the co-founder and CEO of Sakana AI. So, thanks for sitting down with me. I really appreciate it. David: Awesome. Yeah, it's actually really great to have a chat with you, Tim. I mean, as you know, I've been following your podcast for more than a decade before I started a company. Tim: I mean, I love to hear that. I honestly do. Nothing makes me happier. David: Yeah. I mean, I have no idea that I would start a company like 10 years ago. Tim: Let's start with the founding, because the Sakana AI team is really an interesting test case in Japan, I think. So, the founding team itself, it's a mixture of foreigners and Japanese. Tell me about it. Tell me how it came to be, how the three of you got connected and thought this was a good idea. David: It's a really unique, I would say, experiment. I founded this company a little bit less than three years ago. It's myself, David Ha, and Llion Jones, my colleague at Google, who was one of the co-inventors of the transformer architecture, the T in ChatGPT. And when you start a company in Japan, it cannot just be two foreigner guys, especially if you want to be the frontier AI company in Japan. But luckily, I was able to recruit my friend Ren Ito, who used to work at Mercari. And he was sent to Mercari Europe as well to run Mercari, one of the original unicorns. Tim: So, how did you know Ren? David: We worked together at different startup events before. Earlier, also, I worked at another startup briefly called Stability AI. At that time, Ren was working in the UK for that company, and I was working as a contractor remotely in Japan. So, we connected there. Tim: And you were kind of like, hey, I've got a better idea. David: Yeah, something like that. The best way to meet co-founders and colleagues is when you're working at other startups. And when you're working at other companies. Tim: I think that's so true because it is being able to work with someone and see how they work and having that experience is invaluable when picking a founding team. David: Yeah, I totally agree. I think in our founding team, not just the co-founders, many of our employees, the founding employees, are people that I've personally worked with at Google, at Goldman Sachs in Japan, also at other companies like Mercali and Yahoo in Japan, like people that we know. And I think when you've worked with someone before and you kind of know how to coordinate different tasks and work together well, it's like a great mix. Tim: Yeah, yeah. There's fewer surprises, the better, right? So, tell me about the kind of pre-seed team. Was it just you three? David: Yeah, it was just us. It was crazy. I think all three of us have different motivations of starting this company. I'll tell you mine. So, our company is founded in Japan to develop AI technology for Japan. Like when I was looking at your podcast like 10 years ago, there's like many founders in Japan, like they really want to go international right away. They want to move to the valley and try their luck. But there's also other companies that are focused on Japan. Remember this, one of your podcast episodes, like you have so many startups in your podcast. One of them are like focusing on developing the product that produced the best invoices for Japan. Like those companies. Tim: That's a need. But you guys, I mean, I think what's unique about Sakana is that you had a product that, I mean, yes, it's targeted to Japan, but it's truly a global market. And when you first raised money, you went overseas. Your first round was from overseas investors rather than Japan. So why? David: Yeah, exactly. I mean, for us, having worked at Google before and Goldman Sachs before, I think like my experience is generally easier to raise money from overseas markets. Tim: Well, I agree with that for sure. David: Especially in the VC ecosystem. I think in Japan, the VC ecosystem is growing. There's a support, lots of government support as well. But at the end of the day, if you want to have a strong funding round, we wanted to go direct to Sand Hill Road. So, I think what happened was when I started this company, I co-founded with Llon at the beginning. We just announced that we're going to start a company called Sakana AI, an R&D company in Japan. And I just basically sat there working on our tech, working out what we're going to do. And from there, we had many reverse inquiries. Like maybe on Twitter, because I have some following on Twitter as well. Tim: So, inquiries from VCs? David: Yes, from VCs. Basically, all of the VCs reached out to us. Tim: Both Japanese and foreign or primarily…? David: Many foreigners as well. I worked at Mountain View for Google for a few years, and many VCs knew me at the time. I also had many personal connections in that community. So basically, if you have a choice, you might as well try to pitch to Deluxe Capitals, the Vinod Khoslas, the Andreessens, and the Sequoias of the world, right? Tim: So, for the seed round, you raised $30 million. But then the next round, you came back to Japan, and you raised something like $200 million from a series of rounds of Japanese investments. And so why the shift back to Japan? David: For our seed round, it made sense for us to raise from Silicon Valley investors. I think also the nature of the VCs, especially in the seed round, when you raise from prominent Silicon Valley VCs, they want to dominate the entire round. Because the seed round of a company is your highest cost of capital. It's the lowest valuation if your company continues to exist. So, if a VC has decided that they're going to bet on you at the seed stage, it makes sense for them to invest as much as possible. So, there was not a lot of room to involve other companies at our seed stage. We did make room for NTT and Sony and KDDI, but we couldn't. Basically, the first year of our existence is primarily R&D driven. There's absolutely no plan for monetization. As we started out, we wanted to build a foundational R&D company in Japan. We recruited many of our top research colleagues from Google, Prefer Networks, Stability AI. And we set out to actually produce pretty amazing research in the first year, like the AI scientists. Something like that didn't exist before. Tim: And it's actually got a published research paper now, right? David: Yeah. I mean, after two years, it got published in Nature magazine, like the top scientific journal. Tim: That's amazing. David: That's not going to make me money directly as a company, but as a researcher, it's kind of proud that a Japanese AI company can publish something in Nature. Tim: Absolutely amazing proof of concept and proof of suitability. David: So,...

Things don't always go as planned. In fact, they usually don't. Four years ago, femtech was both a rapidly-growing product category and a nationwide movement vocally championed by politicians, industry, and the media. As the market began to grow, however, Japan's incumbents took note and took action. The femtech social movement began to decouple from the products. Today we talk with Amina Sugimoto about the future of femtech in Japan, the fragile nature of public promises in the face of corporate lobbying,  the likely impact of Prime Minister Takaichi on femtech, and how, despite aggressive lobbying by the incumbents, foreign femtech products are starting to enter the Japanese market. There is a lot of important advice for anyone thinking of entering the Japanese market. It's a great conversation, and I think you'll enjoy it. Show Notes What femTech means in Japan Why its hard for men to invest in femtech -- even when they want to The transformation of femtech in Japan Massive social and political support does not always translate to sales How Japanese incumbents (still) stifle innovation The core challenge in introducing new innovation in Japan Prime Minister Takaichi's likely impact on femtech in Japan What other innovators should learn from femtech in Japan WHat's next for femtech in Japan Links from the Founder Everything you ever wanted to know about Fermata Follow Fermata on Twitter @hello_fermata Friend Amina on Facebook The Kegg Crowdfunding Page Leave a comment Transcript Welcome to Disrupting Japan, Straight Talk from Japan's most innovative founders and VCs. I'm Tim Romero, and thanks for joining me. FemTech is, well, it's just different in Japan. FemTech in Japan is part market disruption, part social movement, part technological innovation, and part bureaucratic red tape. It's something that everyone seems to get behind and support, but at the same time, that support is often slow, sometimes very slow, to translate into real action. Well, today we sit down once again with Amina Sugimoto, founder of Fermata. And Amina is absolutely on the forefront of Japanese FemTech, women's health, and the regulatory challenges that these products face in Japan. Now, since we last had the chance to catch up with Amina three years ago, Fermata has had a change of fortunes and a change of strategy. Amina saw the growing social movement that powered FemTech in the early days start to decouple from the technology and take on a life of its own. And so she restructured Fermata, shrinking the team of 35 down to a small core team, and then refocusing and rebuilding. Amina and I talk about why FemTech is having so much trouble crossing the chasm in Japan, what happens when Japanese incumbents decide they don't want you in their market, and what's really going to be at stake for women's health in Japan over the next five years. But you know, Amina tells that story much better than I can. So, let's get right to the interview. Interview Tim: So, we're sitting here with Amina Sugimoto, the founder of Fermata, and one of the most active advocates for FemTech in Japan. So, thanks for sitting down with us and welcome back. Amina: Thank you so much for having me again. I'm super excited for this. Tim: So, we've got a lot to cover because so much has happened in I guess the last three years since you were on the show last. Just to kind of set the stage, like the word FemTech, it means a lot of different things to a lot of different people. So, what is FemTech? Amina: So yeah, it does mean a lot of different things for different people. Initially, the term itself, people started using it around 2017, I think 18-ish. And it used to be a term that being used between investors and entrepreneurs. And at the time, a lot of sort of entrepreneurs working in sort of women's health, they were having a hard time getting investment. So, they came up with a term to communicate with investors. And it literally sort of back then means the latest technology being applied on women's health. So, it was very broad back then. Tim: So originally, it was more of a financing, an investor-focused term, rather than a consumer-focused. Amina: Yes. It really was. Tim: Interesting. Amina: Because back then, FemTech, edotech, I think all these terms started to sort of appear. Back then, and it still is, the majority of people working in finance are men. And it's not like men's fault, but it's just difficult to communicate about the industry. Like this product is for menstruation, this product fertility, rather than saying that the FemTech sounded a bit easier for investors to sort of... Tim: And I see what you mean. It's not really discrimination exactly. It's just investors tend to invest in what they know. Amina: Or what they like, or what... Tim: What they understand, I mean. Amina: Exactly, exactly. So, there was a gender imbalance within the investor world. And so the term then was used to raise money. Tim: But now it's taken on a much, much broader use. Amina: Yes. So interestingly, the term, so just sort of like around the same time as COVID. And I think that's when the people start to get more interested about their own well-being or wellness. So, when Fermata started, it was in 2019, we started to use the term FemTech for consumers. It was during COVID, so we started to events on women's health, and we started to use the term FemTech. And I think that sort of, it was the right timing. So, the term itself in Japan sort of spread really quickly. All these major magazines, newspapers started to pick up. But sadly, compared to what's available in the US or Europe, there are not many tech products available in Japan yet. It's just that the word simply became a lot more popular than the actual industry. Tim: Is that because of regulations around medical technology? Is it just a Japanese consumer's reluctance to try new things? Why do you think it's? Amina: Well, I think there's a lot of things. And one of it is, of course, deregulation, which I can tell you more about later. Another thing would be that we have a pretty good health system. So, for people in Japan, compared to let’s say Americans, we are less interested in purchasing new products, because it's easier and cheaper to go to a doctor. So, the mentality and sort of the industry itself is a lot different. However, there is a trick. The Japanese health system only covers clinical stuff, not prevention. And women's health, most of it is related to prevention. So, we can only get covered by government if we have a breast cancer. But to prevent breast cancer, the only way to prevent it is to go to the checkup provided by the government. But there's no intention. There's no motivation to create something in between. Something that maybe we can track something at home. Tim: So, last time we spoke, Fermata was experimenting with a lot of different business models and business directions. You were working with a lot of imported products. You had some pop-up stores, a couple of physical stores in e-commerce, and doing B2B consulting. And where is Fermata today? Amina: I made a decision in February 2024 to shrink the size of the company to just myself. The market didn't grow as fast as I predicted. So, February 2024 is when Fermata hosted our signature event called FemTechFest. We had over 6,000 people coming and we rented out the entire floor of Roppongi Hills. But then I realized soon enough, the market in Japan when it comes to women's health and FemTech will hit the chasm. So, we managed to just capture those individuals who's early innovators or those who's interested in this kind of product. But we struggled enough to get into the mass market. So, the women's health industry was hitting the chasm. And then I felt that when I hosted the event of over 6,000 people, we can host an event and bring in loads of people, but it doesn't directly link that with our sales. And there's something wrong is happening. Tim: You know, it is. I mean, one of the things you told me last time we spoke really stuck with me about FemTech in Japan. And I think it goes directly to what you're telling me now. Last time you mentioned that FemTech is more than a product category in Japan. It's more of a social movement. It gives people kind of social permission to reexamine gender roles and to reexamine these conversations that were once considered settled about what's appropriate for women to do and things like that. Can you talk a bit about if that's still the case? And is it more that the interest was more on the social dynamic side than the product side? Amina: I think it still is. So, we couldn't get any of the signature tech products out in the market in the last five to six years because of the regulation, because of the market dynamics were spread. And then people had this high expectation and motivation. Yes, we can now freely talk about our own health issues, period, menopause, whatnot. And that did get to a certain level in Japan, there's a TV shows and stuff. So, the environment around it has changed. But yet it has a lot stronger social movement connotation to it. And then not so much of the business industry side. So, when it comes to B2B business, we get a lot of inquiry from companies. Okay, we would like to do something about FemTech. And I'm like, what do you mean by something about FemTech? And for me, I'm like, whenever we speak with the Japanese, especially the big companies, it's not their fault, but they're just very general. And I guess those people who's responsible leading this project, they're often women. And they have something that they want to communicate. They have these passions and maybe the struggle that they have gone through over the time working in the company. But it's usually like more of a social side and the product development. Tim: Yeah,...

Welcome to Disrupting Japan, straight talk from Japan’s most innovative founders and VCs. This is our 250th episode, and I wanted to give you something special; something I have been thinking about more and more as my career in startups and venture capital has developed. Leave a comment Today we are going to talk about a group of people who are perhaps the most reviled and maligned by technologists and innovators worldwide. People who stand in opposition to everything innovators hold dear. Today we are going to talk about the Luddites — those individuals who through a combination of ignorance and shortsightedness opposed technology and change. But that’s not really true. The Luddites were not who you think they were. In fact, almost everything you have ever been told about them is wrong. In truth, the Luddites were not really opposed to new technology. Not even when it threatened their livelihoods. There is growing concern today about AI taking our jobs, but if AI had emerged 220 years ago, the Luddites would have embraced it. Far more important, they would have held a much better understanding of the true dangers posed by today's new business models than do most of the AI advocates or critics talking about it today. Although the Luddites are accused of opposing the very technology that resulted in the incredible progress and the rise of living standards that we have experienced over the past 200 years, that’s simply not the case. In fact, as you’ll see, although the higher living standards and shared prosperity enabled by the technology of the industrial revolution are undeniable, we actually have the Luddites, and not the technology, to thank for that. The Luddite in the Mirror So who exactly were the Luddites? You have probably heard that they were cloth workers in late 18th century England who, early in the industrial revolution, saw their livelihoods threatened by the new textile factories, and they tried to shut down those factories by destroying automated looms and other textile equipment. That much is completely true. The important question, however, and the one with a wildly misunderstood answer is “Why?” “Why were the Luddites breaking machines and shutting down textile factories?” The mythology is that Luddites rejected the new technology because they benefited from the old system. Rather than embrace technology which would lift millions out of poverty, lengthen lifespans, and lead to greater shared prosperity, the Luddites selfishly wanted the world to stay as it was. They were backward-looking rubes who simply could not see the bigger picture. And that, all of that, every single word of that, is simply wrong. If anything, the Luddites were alarmed because they saw the big picture far too clearly. So let’s take a quick step back into the world of the Luddites and see just how much like us they really were. And also see that although the technologies are completely different, how the new business models of the industrial age changed society in very much the same ways as the new business models of our emerging AI age. As the industrial revolution was gaining momentum in the closing decades of the 1700s, textiles were one of England’s most important and profitable exports, and they were manufactured using what was called the “domestic system.” Textile workers worked with their own machines in their own workshops. Some of the more enterprising had multiple machines and employed others. The work was distributed, done mostly at home, and the finished product delivered to merchants. This system is where the English term “cottage industry”comes from. By and large, these clothworkers did not have leisurely or even particularly comfortable lives, but it was a better living than agricultural work and much better than most of the newly emerging factory jobs. What these clothworkers did have, however, and what they were very afraid of losing, was a degree of economic freedom. The freedom to negotiate fair prices with their customers and, based on those negotiations, the freedom to decide what and how much they would produce. These proto-Luddites had no problems with machinery or technology. They used and maintained machinery. They experimented with and developed technology. What they objected to was not the new technology, but the new business models. To understand the Luddite’s position here, we need to understand that new technology was not the only thing powering England’s industrial expansion. These new factories were also powered by some of the most horrific forms of child labor imaginable. Children as young as six were forced to work 14 to 16-hour shifts crawling under machinery to recover scraps of cloth and reaching into running machines to untangle threads and remove debris. Some business owners even made deals with the government to take orphans off public hands and put them to work in their factories. And to be absolutely clear, these children were not paid. They were given enough food to keep them alive and only allowed to sleep a few hours a day. When children tried to escape, they were brought back in chains. These children would either die in one of the frequent industrial accidents or they would literally be worked to death. Working conditions could have easily been made safer, but pausing or turning off the machines would lower profits. The whole point of this innovative new business model was that it produced textiles continuously, 24/7. Things like idling machines or buying safety equipment would cut directly into shareholder value.  Since there were always more bodies to feed the machines, it would have been unfair to the shareholders not to leverage that resource. No one knows how many children died in those factories. Neither the politicians nor the business owners benefited from that kind of record keeping. Slaughtering children has always been bad optics. Today we usually try to gloss over this behavior with the rejoinder that “attitudes and values were different back then”, but that’s not really the case. Even by the standards of the day, these new business practices were appalling. Many religious, social, and political groups were outraged and worked to force business owners to respect social norms and basic human decency. Many business owners did, of course, but they were quickly outcompeted and bankrupted by the business owners who chose not to. Working children to death was just so damn profitable. William Blake famously referred to these factories as the “Dark Satanic Mills”. Our proto-Luddites were not simply worried that their way of life was changing, but that it was changing into something horrible. The Broken Legal Shield It’s also important to understand that these business owners were actually breaking the law. Not just social norms, but the actual law. Labor protections in that era were not exactly robust, but some basic rules did exist. When challenged on their illegal labor practices, the new business owners responded in exactly the same way today’s new business owners do. They claimed that since no one imagined this new technology when those labor laws were created, they clearly did not apply to them. Forcing them to abide by the law would only slow progress. And just like today’s business owners, they had legions of supportive journalists and caravans of lobbying money to amplify that message. It’s quite impressive how effective and unchanged this strategy has remained. Over the past decade, Uber and other gig-economy companies executed this playbook exactly. They claimed that since their new technology did not exist when the relevant labor and licensing laws were passed, those laws should not apply to their new business model. They argued that if they were forced to pay minimum wage or comply with licensing and insurance laws, their business model would collapse and that would slow the march of progress for everyone. Interestingly, that playbook worked well in the US, but not everywhere. There are many markets where Uber is required to follow local labor and licensing laws. And you know what? Uber does fine in those markets. They are a little less profitable, of course, but they do fine. Their business model never required them to ignore labor and licensing laws, it is simply more profitable if they can do so. For over 200 years, business owners have used this slight of hand to sidestep both criticism and regulation. They simply assert that any criticism of their business practices is actually hostility towards and fear of progress and technology. Right now, this “old laws don’t apply to new technology” grift is being used by AI companies to deflect copyright concerns. I’m not talking about using copyrighted works to train AI. Admittedly, that’s a grey area. Rather, I‘m talking about the simple fact that I can pay OpenAI $20, and with a bit of prompting, it will sell me all kinds of copyright-infringing images and whole passages lifted from books and screenplays. That is straight, blackletter-law copyright infringement for profit. It makes no difference what the user does with the image they paid OpenAI to generate. OpenAI is violating the law when they sell it without permission. It’s a commercial transaction. The AI companies usually imply that the customer is at fault for requesting the images. But again, No!  The law is clear. Asking a company to create a work that could infringe on someone's copyright is not illegal. However, creating and selling that work without securing the necessary rights? That’s illegal. My point here is not that AI companies should be shut down for copyright infringement. I don’t think they should be. The point is that we need to stop falling for this 220-year-old slight of hand where the existence of a new technology is used as an excuse to violate any laws or social norms that might reduce profitability. I’m not anti-technology. I’m just anti-bullshit.   ...

I have a short in-between edition for you today. Last month at Venture Cafe's big global gathering in Tokyo, I had a chance to sit down on stage with two old friends of the podcast, and we talked about where physical AI is heading in Japan. This conversation is with Chiamin Lai, general partner of First Light Capital, and Kaname Hayashi, founder and CEO of GrooveX, the makers of the absolutely adorable Lovet robot. Chiamin is one of the most savvy physical AI investors in Japan, and Kaname has been pushing the boundaries of human-robot interaction for years. It's a fascinating discussion, and there's some wonderful insights about Japan's unique strengths and challenges near the end. But don't skip to the end. The whole conversation is great, and I think you'll enjoy it. Leave a comment Transcript Tim: Okay, thank you so much, and thanks for coming. We're going to be talking about Japan and physical AI today. And it was not that long ago that Japan was the undisputed leader in robotics innovation. And while some people claim it still is, that claim is highly disputed today. So, we're going to talk about where we are and where we're going. And we're going to start with some brief, brief introductions, so you'll know who we are and why you should be listening to us for the next 40 minutes or so. So, my name is Tim Romero. I've been in Japan for about a little over 30 years now. I've started four startups here of my own. I've done a lot of angel investing. I helped TEPCO and JIRA spin up their CVC units. I've taught entrepreneurship and corporate innovation at NYU's Tokyo campus. I ran Google for Startups here for about four years. And I run a podcast called Disrupting Japan, which is just a labor of love. I've been doing it for 12 years. It's interviews with Japanese founders and VCs about innovation and what it's like to be an innovator in a culture that prizes conformity. So please give it a listen. Chiamin: Hi, everybody. My name is Chiamin Lai. I'm a general partner of a VC fund here at First Light Capital. A little bit of introduction about myself. So, my parents are Taiwanese, but I grew up here in Japan and studied here and also work here in Japan. But then I actually, after working in Japan for a few years, I was in Europe and then had the fortune to join venture capital. So, it's about 15 years ago, which I think it's hard for you guys to believe at that time compared to today. And then decide to do startups. I was a startup operator in China and Japan for seven years and came back to the industry five years ago. And right now I'm actually the board member of Japan Venture Capital Association, as well as running up my own fund here in Japan. Quick introduction about the fund. We are running two funds right now in Japan, about 120 million US dollars. And we're focusing on early stage and investment thesis is mainly focusing on Japan's demographic challenge, innovation for startup. And what we believe is, or what I believe is physical AI could be a very, very good potential for Japan, especially under the label shortage. So, I'm very excited to have opportunity to talk to you guys today. Thank you. Kaname: Yeah. My name is Kaname Hayashi. I’m the founder and CEO of GrooveX. GrooveX is a company that develops LOVOT. LOVOT is L-O-V-O-T, which you may see on our website. It’s kind of a small robot. We call it a family-type robot. Currently, around 18,000 units are working. Even though we shipped just a little bit more than 21,000 units, 18,000 are still working. This shows very good user retention, meaning the churn rate of our robot is just 0.4% per month. So, we believe our robot has achieved social implementation. And our aim is to enhance the resilience of people. It’s completely different from other robots that improve productivity. And the reason why I’m chasing this area is, I worked on Pepper before, which was a humanoid robot 10 years ago. And I learned a lot about humanoid robots and conversations between computers and people. So, I thought probably this area is interesting, but we can do something else in the non-verbal area. That was the reason why I founded the company 10 years ago. Before I worked on Pepper, I was working in the automotive industry. So, I worked in aerodynamics or product planning. I worked for Formula One in Germany or product planning for the European market or something like that. That’s all, thank you.  Tim: Excellent. And I want to emphasize, so they brought one of their Lovet robots with them today. And after the session, it's over there in the corner and it is absolutely adorable. I encourage you to go play with this thing. It's just, you'll see what I mean. It's just something different about that. But to kick us off, to make sure we're all on the same page, physical AI is a term that's thrown around a lot these days. It's a little bit of a trendy term, but to make sure we're all talking about the same thing. When you're talking about physical AI, what do you mean? How's it different from traditional robotics or IoT? Kaname: Right. Probably there are several understandings, but for me, a robot working in an open environment could be an important point. Because before the physical AI boom, a robot was typically working in a designed condition, a controlled condition, like a factory or some certain closed area. But for example, in our case, LOVOT is shipped anywhere, sometimes overseas, and we never know what kind of environment it is. But still, LOVOT has to keep working. The ratio of daily active users remains high, over 90%. And it means a robot can adapt to the environment somehow. Surely AI has big potential to adapt to more various environments, but using AI is not the purpose.  Tim: Okay. Chiamin? Chiamin: Since I'm an investor, so I'm going to use through you different kind of words there. But so basically what I see physically AI right now, if you read a lot of news, people were putting physical AI equal to humanoid. And I have a totally different definition. For me, physical AI equal to the system, that the system will have see, thinking, and action. And everything needs to be automated. That's my definition of physical AI. What do I mean by that? Existing robots, as what Kaname-san was saying, it doesn't really actually understand the environment. That's one. Two is it doesn't have any action. When I say action, it doesn't necessarily mean that you need a humanoid to do the action. Action means that the machine, anything that can help you to finish the action. It could be picking something from the shelf. It could be holding your coffee, whatever. That's how I define physical AI in the personal level. But at the business level, you can also consider if you have a software, that the software can actually help human to do an action. That is also physical AI from my point of view. Tim: Okay. So, it sounds like we are in a surprising amount of agreement here. So, physical AI, it requires a certain amount of autonomy. It requires a certain amount of flexibility and the ability to deal with new and unprogrammed environments and situations. Excellent. It's nice when we agree. I think things are about to diverge. So, with that in mind, robotics in general, IoT are really well established. They're deep global markets. So physical AI, this ability to interact autonomously and flexibly, what are the new markets that this opens up? Why is this an important new development? Kaname: Basically, if we would like to use a robot in your home, then a robot must have a capability to adapt to any environment and stay always-on. So, humanoids look like they can do it. I mean, you can easily dream it because of the human shape. So, you naturally expect it could work like a human. So, that was very good as a trademark for physical AI. But current humanoids are different from the expectation, because they are focusing on a few tasks with precise kinetics. So, for example, you already can see lots of movies of very great backflipping humanoids, but all of the robots have an issue with heat for always-on. You never see a humanoid robot working eight hours continuously under autonomous control. While I worked on Pepper, I learned a lot about how motors are very sensitive. If you’d like to use a leg instead of wheels, the leg must keep supplying motor power to keep posture. The motors consume power and generate heat. So, in all the demonstrations, it’s working for 10 minutes or maximum 30 minutes, but after that, cooling down is still important even nowadays. But for the future, of course, all the technology evolution will solve these issues, and we can expect to have a robot which can work like a human. But before that, probably being without legs might be a better solution for most cases.  Tim: But so, I mean, Pepper's a really good example, because that was fascinating technology that they couldn't bring to market, really. Boston Dynamics, kind of facing the same problem. They're developing this amazing technology, which has some of the most viral YouTube videos. But it's really hard to bring a product to market beyond kind of a proof of concept stage. So physically, I mean, what are the markets that are opening up for this? Are we looking at healthcare? Are we looking like home helpers? Chiamin: So, I know where you want to head into. So, because all of you pop out in the tech industry, so I kind of want to give you a kind of overview. I don't believe the physical AI will be such popular if we don't have a chat GPT, if we don't have a transformer. So basically, the momentum change is in 2020 to 2023 after ChatGPT. And what does that mean? And everybody today using LLM to do your work. And a lot of developers are using LLM to develop your code. That also means software become commodity. I know a lot of you reading like X, you know that SaaS is dead, software is dead. I think one thing what I want to say before I come back to your question is,...

New technology is always introduced with the promise of the good it can do for humanity. Most of the time the promised good never come to be. This is largely a structural problem ib how startups are funded, and some founders are creating a better way. Today we talk with Yosuke Kaneko, founder of  Sora Technology, who is using drones to fight malaria in Africa. The technology is a perfect fit, but it was hard to address this problem as a startup. We talk about the challenges of using technology to solve important, but only marginally profitable problems, and why the unique nature of Japan's startup ecosystem might provide the solution. It's a great conversation, and I think you'll enjoy it. Show Notes How drones can find mosquitos that humans can’t Why real done innovation continues to come from the global South Why it's getting harder to build a drone startups in Japan Moving from a good idea to getting the first contract The difficult business model of doing good How to continue growing long-term The impact of regulations on drone innovation The truth about the startup scene in Nagoya and Aichi The current state of drone startups in Japan How to get Japanese companies exporting again Links from the Founder Everything you ever wanted to know about Sora Technology Friend Yosuke on Facebook Connect with him on LinkedIn Leave a comment Transcript Welcome to Disrupting Japan, Straight Talk from Japan's most innovative founders and VCs. I'm Tim Romero, and thanks for joining me. Fortunately, most of us never have to think much about malaria, but it's one of the most deadly diseases in human history. Malaria was responsible for up to 5% of all the deaths of the 20th century, and it killed tens of billions of people before that. Even now, the disease continues to kill around 600,000 people every year. Well today, we sit down with Yosuke Kaneko, founder of Sora Technology, and we talk about a new approach to startup business models that can actually help save lives. Sora uses drones in Africa to identify water bodies with the highest chance of being mosquito breeding grounds, and then they work with government agencies to ensure that those water bodies get sprayed with insecticide. Yosuke and I talk about the challenges and the opportunities in working with global and national health organizations, when to pivot from solving the problem you want to solve onto solving a problem that actually needs to be solved, and the challenges involved in making a profitable business that is actually focused on doing good in the world. But you know, Yosuke tells that story much better than I can. So, let's get right to the interview. Interview Tim: We're sitting here with Yosuke Kaneko of Sora Technologies, who's using drones to combat malaria in Africa. So, thanks for sitting down with me. Yosuke: Thank you, Tim. Tim: Now, I explained very briefly what you guys are doing, but you can explain it much better than me. What is Sora Technology doing? Yosuke: Okay, so it's using drone, satellite, and AI, then analyzing environment data, such as the water and also the surface data. Then one of our flagship projects is, you mentioned, the malaria. Tim: So, how are you using drones to combat malaria? Yosuke: So ,do you know where is habitats of mosquitos? Tim: Well, I know when they're little, when they're larvae, they grow up in these shallow ponds and shallow pools. Yosuke: Yeah, you are right. You are right. Exactly. So we are searching the water bodies where mosquitos larvae is habitat. So, we are firstly searching from the sky, so satellite and drone. Then after that, we will find out high risk breeding site of mosquitos. So, the highest breeding site is only 30% of all water bodies. After that, we will spray insect site by drone and also by human. Tim: So, why is it important to do this by drone? Are the water bodies changing every year? Are they coming and going and evaporating? Are they hard to find? Yosuke: So, existing way is that they have to treat mosquito larvae, but they don't know where is the water bodies. So, that's why they open the maps. Then from their experience, okay, maybe this point, there are the water bodies. So, only their experience, they imagine where is the water bodies. And also they are spraying the 100% of the water bodies. So, that's why 70% of the insect site is just a waste of money. It's not good for environment. Tim: Do these water bodies form in different places every year? Yosuke: Almost decided place, but the detail is different by season and also the rainy volume, also the climate. Tim: Your drones are trying to identify the highest risk pools, what are the factors you're looking for? Yosuke: We are taking the water body sites and also depths and temperature and also the water bush information based on that we are put to our AI, then classify the highest breeding site. Tim: Now, you originally didn't start out doing anti-malarial activities, right? You started out with last mile drug delivery. Yosuke: Exactly. So, we slightly pivoted from original. Tim: Well, actually, then let's back up a bit and talk about that pivot and also talk about you. So, you started out interested in economics rather than communicable diseases or technology. So, how did you end up involved with drones and malaria? Yosuke: Before I established Sora technology, I worked at JAXA, Japanese NASA. I was the senior researcher of drone, flying car, and also low altitude control. Then actually in Japan, research and development, R&D is enough, but drone, the real data on ground and on site is the most important. That's why I believe the new tech, especially drone, will be started not from Japan, but global South, especially Africa. Tim: Yeah, I mean, it makes sense. Any new technology, you want to be deploying it where you're solving a real problem. But with your work at JAXA, was that also involving using drones for maybe agriculture or surveys, or was it a similar application space? Yosuke: Yes, similar. I was belong to disaster management team. So, before disaster, we took GIS data from satellites, Eros, which is a satellite named by JAXA. Then after the disaster, we will send the drone, then getting more detailed data, then overlay on the GIS. Tim: That sounds like a really worthwhile area of research. Yosuke: Yes, but this is for only disaster case. So, special case, not commercial case. So in regards of the commercial side, for example, drone delivery, we tested one time each quarter by NATO or something. It's not enough. R&D level is enough, but the commercial level not enough. So, I said our benchmark is Zipline, the San Francisco venture. They started medical drone delivery from Rwanda. Their valuation is around 7 billion US dollars. So global level, using Japan technology, then starting the global south, it's very general strategy. Tim: That makes sense. So, yeah, I can understand, well, not so much frustration, because as you meant, if your goal is research, having one test flight a quarter might be perfectly sufficient, but completely impractical for commercial development. So, once you got the idea of what you wanted to do, how did you move from that idea to your first contract to actually deliver these medicines? Yosuke: The first project is work with UNICEF, United Nations UNICEF, in Sierra Leone, Western African country. Project name, it's Medical Drone Delivery Project. We went to Sierra Leone based on this contract. Then we discussed, okay, that we have drone, then where's the medicine? Then they said, we don't have medicine. Tim: So, the problem is further upstream, yes. Yosuke: Yeah, because we don't have money. Then our counter partner is Science Technologies Ministries, so not Ministry of Health, so they don't have the real needs. That's why we discussed with Ministry of Health to know the real needs. Then Ministry of Health person said that we don't have enough items. So, if we can use technology for reducing the item, then I asked what is the current biggest issue? Then they said the malaria. We don't have enough items, so enough spray and insecticide. So, that's why if we can find out only high-breeding site, then reducing the insecticide, it's good for environment, good for health, and it's good for money. So, they said yes. Tim: So, they were willing to fund that pilot, or was that pilot also funded through UNICEF, philanthropic? Yosuke: Unfortunately, we could not with UNICEF, but Japanese METI supported our project. Then the same year, 2023, June, we started the pilot project. Tim: And what have been the results of the pilot? Yosuke: Actually, I was pretty surprised that we took the data from the drone, then we created POC level of the AI. Accuracy is over 80%. It was very good. Tim: So, did it allow them to spray more ponds? Did it decrease the cases of malaria in the coming year? Yosuke: So, in that time, we could not prove that level. We could prove only AI accuracy. But this year, we published work with Ghana University, and Noguchi Memorial Institute, which is very famous for infection disease, and Harvard Infection Disease Team. Then we already proved reducing the volume of the insect sites. And also the mosquito count is also reducing, and the suffering person is also reducing. Tim: I mean, that's fantastic. Is the government of Sierra Leone going to continue this program and expand it? Yosuke: Yes, we also testing in Ghana, more big sites, POC with JICA. JICA is a Japanese International Cooperation Agency. Now we are trying to update WHO manual. WHO agreed our strategy. Now we're working with them, more data we're getting in Mozambique. Also, last month, Ghana Ministry of Health explained to over 10 country Ministry of Health person this solution. It's very good. So, you must use that. Tim: Oh, fantastic. That is just really great to hear. I mean,...

You might think that large Japanese companies have trouble innovating. Unfortunately if you believe that, you would be correct. Recently, however, there are a few reasons for hope. The first step to recovery is admitting you have a problem, and Japan Inc. now largely understands that their traditional R&D methods are broken, and are looking to startups for help and inspiration. Corporate venturing (spinning out internal projects as startups) is one such approach. But it's not an easy one. Today we sit down with Kenji Tateiwa and discuss the rewards and challenges of spinning Agile Energy X out of TEPCO. We talk about why it's hard to bring renewable energy onto the grid, how to nurture a startup inside very conservative organizations, and the future of corporate venturing in Japan. It's a great conversation, and I think you'll enjoy it. Show Notes Why it's hard to get more renewable energy onto the grid Introduction to demand response and demand management How to nurture a startup inside a conservative enterprise and how to spin out The financial challenges in the core business model The competitive landscape in energy services Why its hard to raise funds as a corporate spin-out Staffing challenges in corporate venturing Maintaining strategic independence from the parent company Can corporate venturing drive innovation back to the parent Links from the Founder Everything you ever wanted to know about Agile Energy X Japanese homepage Connect with Kenji on LinkedIn Yuri Group's paper on using Bitcoin Mining to support renewable energy Info in Japanese Kenji's article on how Stanford creates an innovative mindset Denki Shimbun's series on bitcoin mining Leave a comment Transcript Welcome to Disrupting Japan, Straight Talk from Japan's most innovative founders and VCs. I'm Tim Romero and thanks for joining me. Who says, large enterprises can't innovate?! Well, most people actually, and overall they're right. The larger an organization becomes, the more barriers to innovation it puts in place. It's almost a form of self-defense for the enterprise. Well, today we sit down with Kenji Tateiwa of Agile Energy X, and we explore corporate venturing in Japan. Kenji was a decades long employee of TEPCO, Japan's largest energy utility. And also my old employer. Kenji had an idea that he developed into a small internal project, but one that was simply not practical to run inside of TEPCO. So, he convinced leadership to give him the seed funding to spin it out into a new startup. But there have been some bumps in the road, both the things that all founders face, like customer acquisition and also challenges unique to corporate venturing, like transitioning from a subsidiary to a true startup. Kenji and I dive into the challenges of maintaining independence from the mothership and the mixed incentives of corporate ventures, how he convinced conservative management to take a chance on his startup idea. And why, despite all the challenges, this kind of corporate venturing is going to prove absolutely essential to innovation in Japan. But, you know, Kenji tells that story much better than I can. So, let's get right to the interview. Interview Tim: So, I'm sitting here with Kenji Tateiwa of Agile Energy X, who's helping get more renewable energy onto Japan's grid via Bitcoin mining. So, thanks for joining me. Kenji: Yeah, you're welcome, Tim. My pleasure. Tim: Now I gave a really brief introduction to what you do, but I think you can explain it much better than I can. So, what is Agile Energy X doing, and what's the problem you're trying to solve? Kenji: Yes, founded Agile Energy X as an inhouse startup within TEPCO with a mission to introduce as much renewable energy in Japan as possible using a flexible demand, including Bitcoin mining. Tim: So, how does having flexible demand help get renewables onto the grid? Kenji: So, the issue with renewable energy, and I mean variable renewable energy, like solar power and wind power cannot control how much power you supply from these energy sources. Tim: When the wind's blowing, the sun's shining, you got a lot of electricity. And when it's not, you don't. Kenji: That's right. And the issue of electricity is you always have to match the demand with the supply or else the grid frequency will fluctuate, and in a severe case, it will lead to a blackout. And the issue of balancing the grid, it's very challenging for the utilities. So, if there's not much demand to soak up the power generated by these variable renewable energy you have to shut down the renewable energy resources, which leads to curtailment or a wasted energy. Tim: Unlike you and me, most of our listeners have not worked for years in the energy industry, but the process of grid balancing is just fascinating. And I think people don't appreciate what a wonder of engineering it is. Basically, every electron you push onto the grid anywhere has to be taken off somewhere else in real time. It's moving almost to the speed of light. You just have to balance these power generation with the load caused by millions of millions of people randomly switching things on and off in real time. So, with Agile Energy X, when you've got excess energy, you spin up bitcoin mining? Kenji: That's right. The push for renewable energy has accelerated in Japan after the 2011 FIMA nuclear accident. Before that Japan used to depend about 25% in nuclear but then it dropped almost to 0% after 2011. And then the Japanese government pushed for renewable energy before the push for renewable energy power utilities. Primary function was to match the demand with the supply. So the power demand came first, and in order to match the demand, the fluctuation was controlled by mostly thermal power. But then we had this generation coming in independent of the demand. The utilities have now been tasked with something that they hadn't done before to match the demand with a uncontrollable supply from the variable renewable energy. Tim: So, suddenly they find that they have to manage both sides of the equation. Kenji: That's right. And the issue is the power demand is the utilities customers so you cannot control what the customer does, the customer behavior, it's up to the customers. If they want to use electricity, it's their choice. But there's a flexible customer, like a Bitcoin miner. Utilities can ask Bitcoin miners to turn up or turn down to match the supply. Tim: So, there's two things there. First is traditional demand response. As you said, they never really manage the demand side too much, but there was always a case where if the load was too big, the power companies could call up factories and say, Hey, we'll give you some money. And if you shut down for a while, are you taking advantage of demand response as well? Kenji: Yes, utilities have been taking advantage of demand response to some extent. However, the economic incentive was not sufficient to have enough resources that could cope with the amount of variability of renewable power generation. And also in Japan, utilities don't really want to force customers to change their behaviors, even if there are contracts that allows utilities to do. So, it's a Japanese way of doing business. Tim: Well, let's talk a bit about what curtailment is and why it's important. Kenji: Back in 2018, the first curtailment of renewable energy started in Japan in the Kyushu Island, the southern part of Japan, where there's abundant solar energy resources. The demand during the spring and fall during the daytime, when it's sunny and a lot of solar power generation happening, but not much air conditioning demand, then curtailment happened, meaning the utilities had to ask the renewable generators to stop generating because there is not much demand. And if they continue to generate power, it's going to overshoot the grid frequency. Tim: Actually, in Japan, curtailment rates are still very, very low. It's around like 2%, 2.5%. Kenji: It's increasing by the year. And depending on the location, the Kyushu area, it's getting quite high. April or May, during the daytime, some solar power generators are asked to curtail more than 50% of the time during April, May. Tim: And, and so with so much curtailment, it means that these project developers who want to put up wind farms, solar farms, can't make money. So, that really slows down the renewable development. It slows down people putting in renewable power. Kenji: Absolutely. So, it's not just the issue of existing solar generators or wind generators. It hinders the new development because as you mentioned, it will make the renewable generators difficult to finance because of the curtailment. The banks will not be willing to lend money to set up a project financing, because the uncertainty with the curtailment is a big issue for the profitability of the renewable projects. Tim: And so Agile Energy X acts as sort of a buyer of last resort. Instead of having to shut off the generation, you can say, hey, we're located close by. We'll use whatever energy you have and we'll buy it from you. Kenji: That's right. So Bitcoin miners like ourselves, we can be the buyer of last resort, but as well as buyer of first resort. Meaning like nowadays, everyone's trying to build AI data centers when it's going to take time. And depending on if the solar or wind or whatever generators come into line before the data centers are built and ready to offtake the power, Bitcoin miners can first take the electricity from the generators. And if the AI data centers comes along, then Bitcoin miners can move on to another place. Tim: Now this model's been used in other places, Texas in particular. Is this the first in Japan? Kenji: I think it'll be the first in a large scale at least, however, just solving the curtailment issue, there is not enough profitability....