The Wind of 'Proactive' AI Blows into Silicon Valley: Hark Secures $700 Million in Funding

marsbitPublished on 2026-05-28Last updated on 2026-05-28

Abstract

Hark, an AI startup founded in late 2025, has raised $700 million in Series A funding at a $6 billion valuation. Led by Parkway Venture Capital with participation from NVIDIA, AMD Ventures, Intel Capital, Qualcomm Ventures, and Salesforce Ventures, the company aims to develop next-generation human-computer interfaces using a combination of proprietary foundational models and custom-built AI-native hardware. Founded by serial entrepreneur Brett Adcock, Hark envisions a system of multimodal devices equipped with agentic capabilities, end-to-end voice models, and personalized memory. This "active" AI approach seeks to move beyond passive chatbots, creating collaborative companions that anticipate needs and interact naturally within the real world. Adcock's experience with Figure, a humanoid robotics company, informs this hardware-focused venture. The article argues that while current AI is powerful, it remains confined to screens and traditional interfaces like chat. The next paradigm shift requires dedicated hardware that is always-on, possesses persistent memory, and enables intuitive interaction, potentially rivaling the impact of the iPhone. Hark is assembling a team with talent from Apple, Meta, Google, and Tesla to tackle this complex engineering challenge across models, hardware, and interaction design. Finally, the piece suggests Chinese startups may have an advantage in this "active" AI hardware space due to strong manufacturing ecosystems, a vast domestic market, an...

By | Alpha Community

An AI startup founded at the end of 2025, which hasn't even publicly launched a product yet, has secured $700 million in Series A funding, propelling its valuation to $6 billion. This round was led by Parkway Venture Capital, with participation from NVIDIA, AMD Ventures, Intel Capital, Qualcomm Ventures, and Salesforce Ventures.

It's evident that this company has raised a massive amount of capital in a short time and has received backing from the industry's top software and hardware tech giants.

This company, named Hark, has a clear focus: they aim to create the next generation of universal human-computer interface using a combination of "self-developed foundational models + custom hardware."

In essence, this is a new type of artificial intelligence interface. Its form is AI-native hardware, which can be broken down into a series of customized native hardware devices and computing devices equipped with agent capabilities, featuring end-to-end voice models and highly personalized memory. All these AI systems are multimodal, capable of understanding and interacting in natural ways.

When we saw Hark complete its funding round at a $6 billion valuation with simultaneous investment from NVIDIA and Qualcomm, we weren't surprised. Since 2024, Alpha Community has been strategically investing in the "proactive AI" direction—our early investment in Looki has already sold multimodal AI wearable devices to users worldwide, making it the world's highest-volume seller of multimodal wearable general intelligent devices; LightSail Technology has independently developed a native AI operating system for smart hardware and pioneered the category of AI headphones with visual perception capabilities.

Hark's massive funding round once again confirms an increasingly obvious trend: the next decade of AI is not just on screens, but even more so in the real world.

AI Has Gotten Smarter, But It's Still Using Old Shells and Interaction Methods

Hark was founded by Brett Adcock at the end of 2025, initially with a $100 million personal investment from him. Brett Adcock has previously founded companies like Archer, Figure, and Vettery.

Among them, Archer entered the electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft market and successfully went public. Figure is a humanoid robotics company. In 2024, Figure raised $675 million, and in September 2025, Figure completed over $1 billion in Series C funding, reaching a valuation of $39 billion. Its investors include Jeff Bezos, NVIDIA, Microsoft, OpenAI, etc.

Why would Brett Adcock want to start a company in the direction of "proactive" AI-native hardware? Because Figure's own path is essentially a systems engineering project of "AI + hardware + real-world interaction." Fundamentally, this shares a similar underlying technology stack with AI-native hardware; he knows where the pitfalls are. And recently, Figure's live demonstration of robots performing long-duration package sorting tasks indicates they have already solved some of these problems.

Image Source: Brett Adcock's Personal Website

In addition to Brett Adcock himself, Abidur Chowdhury has joined Hark as Head of Design. He was formerly a product design executive at Apple, involved in the design of products like the iPhone and Air. Hark has also attracted engineers from Apple, Meta, Google, Tesla, and leading AI labs to join, covering AI research, hardware engineering, and design.

Looking back at the history of personal hardware terminal development, it's actually a history of alternating advances in hardware form factors, interaction methods, and applications: hardware form factors and interaction methods evolve, giving rise to new applications, unlocking new capabilities, and spreading to a broader user base.

For example, when the PC form factor was established and its size became sufficiently small, coupled with the maturity of interaction interfaces like the mouse and GUI, it became easier for ordinary people to use. And with the proliferation of the internet, it moved from business and creative professional circles into the mass market.

The next breakthrough came with the iPhone. This breakthrough was not only about integrating computer and phone capabilities into a very small form factor but also about the multi-touch interaction method, which further lowered the interaction barrier, elevating the user base of smartphones (including tablets) by an order of magnitude compared to PCs.

Moreover, its App Store ecosystem directly became the software standard of the mobile internet era. In 2024, the global App Store ecosystem facilitated approximately $1.3 trillion in developer billings and sales.

Now, the problem with AI is that it has intelligence, strong software capabilities, but currently primarily operates and interacts through chat interfaces and non-AI-native devices like computers/phones. It lacks persistent memory of user identity and hardware specifically designed for intelligent interaction.

A preliminary industry consensus is that the next stage requires intelligent agent systems that can naturally interact with people and the real world. These systems need to anticipate needs, reduce cognitive load, and operate like collaborative partners rather than waiting for commands like traditional software.

Currently, at the software level, AI has already spawned super-startups like OpenAI and Anthropic with valuations approaching a trillion dollars. Once AI-native hardware further develops, its impact on the tech industry is likely to be on the scale of the iPhone.

However, for "proactive" AI-native hardware to mature is a complex engineering task. For instance, Hark needs to build this entire system across layers like models, AI hardware, interaction, and memory.

First, their models will possess agent capabilities, multimodal capabilities, and memory capabilities, able to remember who the user is, what they've said, and work across products and services the user already uses.

They will design AI-native hardware, integrated with Hark's foundational models. And judging from their recruitment for real-time voice infrastructure positions, their interaction interface is likely to start with voice.

Developing "Proactive" AI: Chinese Startups Hold an Advantage

Current AI, whether ChatBots or Agents, are temporarily just tools because they are trapped on screens. Only when people need them do they issue commands and get results.

Compared to these "passive" AIs, why is "proactive" AI important? Because it transforms AI from a tool into a collaborator. AI can, to a certain extent, independently think for people, act for people, and accomplish tasks.

Building a "proactive" AI system requires an AI-native hardware that combines software and hardware. It needs to possess perception, memory, intelligence, new and lower-barrier interaction methods, and needs to be always by the user's side (always on).

During the previous exploration period for AI hardware (e.g., smart speakers, etc.), it had perception but could only store, intelligence was insufficient, and interaction was rigid.

In the current new AI boom period, perception capabilities have further improved, AI memory and intelligence have made huge leaps, interaction is still being explored, but the exploration path has become initially clear.

True "proactive" AI has already taken a big step forward.

And for "proactive" AI to mature further, it's not a race for single-point breakthroughs. It requires the joint development and progress of foundational models, agent operating systems, personalized memory, and hardware terminals. The competition in AI-native hardware is a comprehensive one.

In innovating and exploring this field, Chinese startups have a greater chance of success. They possess three unique advantages: first, the manufacturing ecosystem advantage, with places like Shenzhen having the world's most complete supply chain foundation; second, the market scale advantage, as China is both the largest manufacturing country and the largest application market; third, the policy support advantage, with the country listing AI as a strategic priority, providing certainty for long-term investment.

Related Questions

QWhat is the main focus of Hark as described in the article?

AHark's main focus is to create the next-generation general human-machine interface using a combination of self-developed foundation models and custom hardware, aiming to develop AI-native hardware with agent capabilities, multimodal understanding, and personalized memory.

QWhich major technology companies participated in Hark's $7 billion Series A funding round?

AThe funding round was led by Parkway Venture Capital, with participation from NVIDIA, AMD Ventures, Intel Capital, Qualcomm Ventures, and Salesforce Ventures.

QAccording to the article, why does the founder Brett Adcock have relevant experience for starting Hark?

ABrett Adcock has relevant experience because he previously founded Figure, a humanoid robotics company, which operates on a similar 'AI + hardware + real-world interaction' systems engineering approach, giving him insight into the challenges in the AI-native hardware space.

QWhat does the article suggest is a key limitation of current AI systems that 'active' AI aims to solve?

AA key limitation of current AI systems is that they are primarily 'passive,' trapped behind screens (like chatbots or agents) and require explicit user commands. 'Active' AI aims to transform AI from a tool into a proactive collaborator that can think and act independently to assist users.

QWhat three advantages do Chinese startups have in developing 'active' AI, according to the article?

AAccording to the article, Chinese startups have three advantages: 1) Manufacturing ecosystem advantage, with complete supply chains in places like Shenzhen; 2) Market scale advantage, as China is both the largest manufacturer and a huge application market; 3) Policy support advantage, with AI being a national strategic priority providing long-term investment certainty.

Related Reads

Six Complaints from an Ethereum Developer

A disgruntled early Ethereum developer and token holder presents six core criticisms of the project's trajectory, contrasting it with Solana's rise. 1. **Premature Complacency**: The Ethereum Foundation shifted from a "building" to an "infrastructure" mindset too soon, adopting a passive, "retired chairman" posture before securing market dominance, reflected in ETH's ~65% decline against BTC post-Merge. 2. **Misguided Messaging**: The Merge was marketed primarily on ESG (99.95% energy reduction) rather than user benefits like speed or yield, appealing to internal ideals instead of market demands. 3. **Delayed Execution**: Proof-of-Stake, on the roadmap since 2015, took seven years to launch, ceding critical narrative and development windows. Competitors like Solana built entire ecosystems in that time. 4. **Poor Native Staking UX**: Years after the Merge, there is still no first-party, user-friendly staking application, forcing reliance on centralized services like Lido and undermining ETH's "sound money" narrative. 5. **Managed Decline**: The rollup-centric roadmap deliberately weakens the base layer's fee capture, outsourcing value and profitability to L2s like Arbitrum and Base, which issue their own tokens and fragment capital. 6. **Ideology Over Product**: Ethereum culture prioritizes philosophical purity ("credible neutrality," "public goods") over competitive product delivery that meets user demands (e.g., financialization), while Solana's ecosystem focuses on coordinated execution. The diagnosis is accumulated execution debt, not a coordination failure. Ethereum possessed a structural advantage in 2021 but spent years in governance debates, while Solana efficiently executed. The current market cap reflects these specific strategic failures, not abstract theory.

marsbit1h ago

Six Complaints from an Ethereum Developer

marsbit1h ago

Six Complaints from an Ethereum Developer

Six Grievances from an Ethereum Developer The author, an early investor and developer still building on Ethereum, expresses deep frustration with its trajectory and declining ETH/BTC price since the merge. The core argument is that Ethereum's current market position stems from concrete failures in execution and strategy, not abstract coordination problems. The first grievance targets a shift in the Ethereum Foundation's mentality from builders to "infrastructure," adopting a premature posture of a retired victor. Second, marketing the Merge around ESG (99.95% energy reduction) is seen as talking to its own conscience rather than the market, which prioritizes user experience and yield. Third, the seven-year delay in delivering Proof-of-Stake (PoS) ceded critical narrative and development time to competitors like Solana. Fourth, three years post-merge, there is still no user-friendly first-party staking application, forcing reliance on centralized services like Lido and undermining ETH's monetary narrative. Fifth, the rollup-centric roadmap has strategically surrendered base-layer fee capture to L2s, fragmenting value within the ecosystem while Solana demonstrates an integrated L1's value accrual. Finally, the author criticizes an institutional culture that prioritizes philosophical ideals (credible neutrality, pluralism) over competitive product delivery focused on what users actually want. The diagnosis is "accumulated execution debt." Ethereum possessed a structural advantage in 2021 but spent years in governance debates, while Solana's ecosystem coordinated efficiently to deliver and capture the next wave of value. The conclusion is that Ethereum's market cap reflects its abandonment of the fight for asset appreciation.

链捕手1h ago

Six Complaints from an Ethereum Developer

链捕手1h ago

Token Budget Wars: Enterprise AI Enters the 'Accounting Era'

Token Budget Wars: Enterprise AI Enters the "Accounting Era" Enterprise AI is shifting from the question of "whether to adopt" to "how to account for it." As AI inference costs evolve from experimental budgets into ongoing operational expenses, CEOs and CFOs are demanding proof of value: what tangible results does each dollar spent on tokens deliver? The core of "Token Budget Wars" is not simply about reducing AI bills, but about intelligently allocating compute resources. It involves determining which business processes warrant more computational power, which tasks can use cheaper models, which can be outsourced or handled manually, and which are merely inefficient consumption. A key insight is that AI usage (token consumption) does not equal value. While SaaS usage indicated software adoption, AI token usage only indicates the "meter is running." The same workflow can cost vastly different amounts due to factors like prompt quality, context, model choice, and retries. The critical metric for scaling is "marginal token utility"—the business value created per additional dollar of inference cost. However, this is difficult to measure due to challenges like the long tail of retries, context inflation (where costs can scale quadratically with context length), and inefficient model routing (defaulting to the most powerful model for all tasks). The competition for token allocation is intensifying because, in the AI era, influence is tied to how much intelligence one can command, not just team size. AI spending is essentially competing with labor costs, whether for replacing external BPOs, internal staff, or generating new revenue. BPO contracts provide a clearer benchmark as they are priced per completed unit. The missing layer is attribution from tokens to business outcomes. Companies need a system that connects inference spending to completed work and results, capturing the agent's decision trajectory—what it saw, retrieved, tried, and why it succeeded or failed. This recorded rationale becomes a valuable asset. Ultimately, those who master token-to-outcome attribution will control the allocation of AI resources within enterprises, deciding which workflows get more compute, which are capped, or which revert to humans. The first phase of enterprise AI proved models could do the work. The next phase will determine how much of that work is worth paying for.

marsbit1h ago

Token Budget Wars: Enterprise AI Enters the 'Accounting Era'

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures

Hot Articles

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of AI (AI) are presented below.

活动图片