If you're a founder dealing with what ai safety really costs me, stop what you're doing and read this. Seriously.
After building and selling two AI companies, I want to share what I’ve learned about the real challenges of AI safety. It’s not just about technology—it’s about the people and culture behind it. Here’s what you need to understand.
The Framework That Actually Works
I'm going to share the exact framework I use when evaluating what ai safety really costs me. It's not complicated, but it requires discipline.
Step 1: most founders overthink this and underspend on execution This is where most people go wrong. They skip this step entirely and jump straight to execution. Don't do that.
Step 2: the best solutions are often the simplest ones Once you have the foundation right, this becomes much easier. I've watched founders struggle with this for months when the answer was staring them in the face.
Step 3: Iterate relentlessly Nothing works perfectly the first time. The companies in my portfolio that nail what ai safety really costs me are the ones that treat it as an ongoing process, not a one-time project.
The Reality Nobody Talks About
Most people approach what ai safety really costs me with assumptions that made sense five years ago. The world has moved on. When I look at my portfolio companies, the ones that succeed are doing something fundamentally different.
The first thing to understand is that most founders overthink this and underspend on execution. I've seen this play out across dozens of companies. The pattern is unmistakable.
At RemoteTeam, we learned this the hard way. We spent months going down the wrong path before realizing that the best solutions are often the simplest ones. Once we made the switch, everything changed.
Why Most Approaches Fail
Let me be direct: about 70% of the approaches I see to what ai safety really costs me are fundamentally flawed. Not slightly off. Fundamentally flawed.
The root cause is usually one of three things:
- Copying what big companies do without understanding why they do it. What works for Google doesn't work for a 10-person startup.
- Over-engineering the solution when a simple approach would work better. I've seen teams spend six months building something that could have been done in two weeks.
- Ignoring the human element. Technology is the easy part. Getting people to actually use it is where the real challenge lives.
What I Tell Founders
When a founder in my portfolio asks me about what ai safety really costs me, I usually start with three questions:
- What's your timeline? Because the right approach for a company with 6 months of runway is very different from one with 3 years.
- What have you already tried? Most founders have tried something. Understanding what didn't work is often more valuable than knowing what might.
- Who on your team owns this? If the answer is "everyone" or "no one," that's your first problem to solve.
These questions seem simple but they reveal a lot about where a company actually stands.
This connects to broader themes around responsible AI, AI regulation 2026, AI alignment, AI safety, EU AI Act that I've been thinking about a lot lately.
The Bottom Line
Look, what ai safety really costs me isn't rocket science. But it does require intentionality, consistency, and a willingness to learn from mistakes.
If you take one thing from this article, let it be this: start now, start small, and iterate. The founders who win at what ai safety really costs me aren't the ones with the best strategy on paper. They're the ones who execute, learn, and adapt faster than everyone else.
I've been doing this for over a decade. The patterns are clear. The companies that take what ai safety really costs me seriously outperform the ones that don't. Every single time.
If you're working on something interesting in this space, I'd love to hear about it. Drop me a line.
Frequently Asked Questions
How has this view evolved over time?
My thinking on most topics has changed significantly over the years. Early in my career, I held many conventional views that experience proved wrong. I try to update my beliefs when the evidence changes.
How can I apply this thinking to my own situation?
Start by identifying the core principle behind the opinion, not the specific example. Then ask yourself: does this principle apply to my context? If yes, test it in a small, low-risk way before going all in.
What's the most common pushback you get on this?
People often push back by citing exceptions or edge cases. And they're usually right that exceptions exist. But building a strategy around exceptions rather than patterns is a losing game for most founders.