Tech
The Facebook insider building content moderation for the AI era
When Brett Levenson left Apple in 2019 to lead business integrity at Facebook, the social media giant was in the thick of the Cambridge Analytica fallout. At the time, he thought he could simply fix Facebook’s content moderation problem with better technology.
The problem, he quickly learned, ran deeper than technology. Human reviewers were expected to memorize a 40-page policy document that had been machine-translated into their language, he said. Then they had about 30 seconds per piece of flagged content to decide not just whether that content violated the rules, but what to do about it: block it, ban the user, limit the spread. Those quick calls were only “slightly better than 50% accurate,” according to Levenson.
“It was kind of like flipping a coin, whether the human reviewers could actually address policies correctly, and this was many days after the harm had already occurred anyway,” Levenson told TechCrunch.
That sort of delayed, reactive approach is not sustainable in a world of nimble and well-funded adversarial actors. The rise of AI chatbots has only compounded the problem, as content moderation failures have resulted in a string of high-profile incidents, like chatbots providing teens with self-harm guidance or AI-generated imagery evading safety filters.
Levenson’s frustration led to the idea of “policy as code” — a way to turn static policy documents into executable, updatable logic tightly coupled to enforcement. That insight led to the founding of Moonbounce, which announced on Friday it has raised $12 million in funding, TechCrunch has exclusively learned. The round was co-led by Amplify Partners and StepStone Group.
Moonbounce works with companies to provide an additional safety layer wherever content is generated, whether by a user or by AI. The company has trained its own large language model to look at a customer’s policy documents, evaluate content at runtime, provide a response in 300 milliseconds or less, and take action. Depending on customer preference, that action could look like Moonbounce’s system slowing down distribution while the content awaits a human review later, or it might block high-risk content in the moment.
Today, Moonbounce serves three main verticals: Platforms dealing with user-generated content like dating apps; AI companies building characters or companions; and AI image generators.
Techcrunch event
San Francisco, CA
|
October 13-15, 2026
Moonbounce is supporting more than 40 million daily reviews and serving over 100 million daily active users on the platform, Levenson said. Customers include AI companion startup Channel AI, image and video generation company Civitai, and character roleplay platforms Dippy AI and Moescape.
“Safety can actually be a product benefit,” Levenson told TechCrunch. “It just never has been because it’s always a thing that happens later, not a thing you can actually build into your product. And we see our customers are finding really interesting and innovative ways to use our technology to make safety a differentiator, and part of their product story.”
Tinder’s head of trust and safety recently explained how the dating platform uses these types of LLM-powered services to reach a 10x improvement in accuracy of detections.
“Content moderation has always been a problem that plagued large online platforms, but now with LLMs at the heart of every application, this challenge is even more daunting,” Lenny Pruss, general partner at Amplify Partners, said in a statement. “We invested in Moonbounce because we envision a world where objective, real-time guardrails become the enabling backbone of every AI-mediated application.”
AI companies are facing mounting legal and reputational pressure after chatbots have been accused of pushing teenagers and vulnerable users toward suicide and image generators like xAI’s Grok have been used to create nonconsensual nude imagery. Clearly, safety guardrails internally are failing, and it’s becoming a liability question. Levenson said AI companies are increasingly looking outside their own walls for help beefing out safety infrastructure.
“We’re a third party sitting between the user and the chatbot, so our system isn’t inundated with context the way the chat itself is,” Levenson said. “The chatbot itself has to remember, potentially, tens of thousands of tokens that have come before…We’re solely worried about enforcing rules at runtime.”
Levenson runs the 12-person company with his former Apple colleague Ash Bhardwaj, who previously built large-scale cloud and AI infrastructure across the iPhone-maker’s core offerings. Their next focus is a capability called “iterative steering,” developed in response to cases like the 2024 suicide of a 14-year-old Florida boy who became obsessed with a Character AI chatbot. Rather than a blunt refusal when harmful topics arise, the system would intercept the conversation and redirect it, modifying prompts in real time to push the chatbot toward a more actively supportive response.
“We hope to be able to add to our actions toolkit the ability to steer the chatbot in a better direction to, essentially, take the user’s prompt and modify it to force the chatbot to be not just an empathetic listener, but a helpful listener in those situations,” Levenson said.
When asked whether his exit strategy involved an acquisition by a company like Meta, bringing his work on content moderation full circle, Levenson said he recognizes how well Moonbounce would fit into his old employer’s stack, as well as his own fiduciary duties as a CEO.
“My investors would kill me for saying this, but I would hate to see someone buy us and then restrict the technology,” he said. “Like, ‘Okay, this is ours now, and nobody else can benefit from it.’”
Tech
Copilot is ‘for entertainment purposes only,’ according to Microsoft’s terms of use
AI skeptics aren’t the only ones warning users not to unthinkingly trust models’ outputs — that’s what the AI companies say themselves in their terms of service.
Take Microsoft, which is currently focused on getting corporate customers to pay for Copilot. But it’s also been getting dinged on social media over Copilot’s terms of use, which appear to have been last updated on October 24, 2025.
“Copilot is for entertainment purposes only,” the company warned. “It can make mistakes, and it may not work as intended. Don’t rely on Copilot for important advice. Use Copilot at your own risk.”
A Microsoft spokesperson told PCMag that the company will be updating what they described as “legacy language.”
“As the product has evolved, that language is no longer reflective of how Copilot is used today and will be altered with our next update,” the spokesperson said.
Tom’s Hardware noted that Microsoft isn’t the only company using this kind of disclaimer for AI. For example, both OpenAI and xAI caution users that they should not rely on their output as “the truth” (to quote xAI) or as “a sole service of truth or factual information” (OpenAI).
Tech
Polymarket took down wagers tied to rescue of downed Air Force officer
A Democratic congressman had harsh criticism for Polymarket for allowing users to bet on the date the United States would confirm the rescue of Air Force service members shot down over Iran.
In a social media post on Friday, Representative Seth Moulton wrote, “They could be your neighbor, a friend, a family member. And people are betting on whether or not they’ll be saved. This is DISGUSTING.” (President Donald Trump announced early Sunday that the second service member, a weapons system officer, has been rescued.)
Moulton also described Polymarket as a “dystopian death market” and noted that Donald Trump Jr. is an investor. The congressman recently banned his staff from participating in prediction markets like Polymarket and Kalshi.
Polymarket responded that it had taken the market down “immediately” for not meeting the company’s integrity standards.
“It should not have been posted, and we are investigating how this slipped through our internal safeguards,” the company said.
Polymarket previously saw hundreds of millions of dollars traded on contracts tied to the bombing of Iran by the United States and Israel.
Tech
Embattled startup Delve has ‘parted ways’ with Y Combinator
The controversy around Delve appears to have cost the compliance startup its relationship with accelerator Y Combinator.
Delve is no longer listed among YC’s directory of portfolio companies, and the Delve page seems to have been removed from the YC website. In addition, the startup’s COO Selin Kocalar posted on X that “YC and Delve have parted ways.”
“I still remember the day we took our YC interview at MIT,” Kocalar said. “We’re so grateful to the community and every founder friend we’ve made.”
YC isn’t the first investor to distance themselves from Delve. Insight Partners also appears to have deleted posts about its investment in the company, although its primary blog post was later restored.
Meanwhile, Delve continues to push back against anonymous claims that it misled clients by telling them they were compliant with privacy and security regulations while allegedly skipping important requirements and auto-generating reports for “certification mills that rubber stamp reports.”
Those claims were first published in an anonymous Substack post attributed to “DeepDelver,” who described themselves as a former Delve customer who became suspicious after receiving leaked data about the startup’s clients.
DeepDelver published subsequent posts sharing what they said were Slack and video posts from the company, as well as accusing Delve of passing off an open source tool as its own, without giving credit or reaching an agreement with the developer. A security researcher also said he was able to access sensitive Delve data.
Techcrunch event
San Francisco, CA
|
October 13-15, 2026
Meanwhile, Delve became part of a related controversy when malware was discovered in an open source project developed by Delve customer LiteLLM.
In the company’s latest blog post, Delve’s COO Kocalar and CEO Karun Kaushik declared their intention to set “the record straight on anonymous attacks.” Among other things, they claimed that the company has hired a cybersecurity firm “to help us understand what happened,” and said the “evidence points to a malicious attack rather than a genuine whistleblower.”
“It appears that an attacker purchased Delve under false pretenses, maliciously exfiltrated data, including Delve’s internal company data, and used it to launch a coordinated smear campaign against us,” they said. The blog post also includes a screenshot that they said “shows the attacker exfiltrating our audit tracking spreadsheet via file.io.”
Beyond this accusation, Delve also described DeepDelver’s criticism as “a mix of fabricated claims, cherry-picked screenshots, and data taken out of context.” For example, they said DeepDelver “dismisses our AI while acknowledging it automated 70% of a security questionnaire.”
On the question of using open source tools, Delve said it “built on an Apache 2.0 open-source repository, which explicitly permits commercial use, and significantly rebuilt it for compliance use cases.”
However, the executives also said they’ve been taking steps to ensure customers “feel confident in our platform and compliance outcomes.”
Those steps supposedly include cleaning up the company’s network to remove auditing firms “that don’t meet our standards,” “offering complimentary re-audits and penetration tests to all active customers,” and making it “unambiguously clear” that Delve’s templates for things like board meeting notes “are designed to be starting points only.”
In a post on X, Kaushik made many of the same points but also said, “[W]e grew too fast and fell short of our own standard. To our customers, we deeply apologize for the inconveniences caused.”
TechCrunch has reached out to Y Combinator and DeepDelver for any response to Delve’s comments.
