Author, Educator, Speaker, Entrepreneur, Learn-it-aller, more at https://xitter.cf/t.co/tHKIHE1vsR and https://xitter.cf/t.co/YetnJP7Z7P

Bangalore , Cambridge, Dubai
Joined February 2009
AI can write a clean @LinkedIn post, generate a hummable song, produce a perfectly structured memo, and make a McKinsey-like slide, It is fluent, smooth, tireless, often near perfect; an almost 10 out of 10. The problem is that we may soon become sick of the 10 out of 10. You can spot this AI slop from a mile away: the smooth opening line, the neat three lessons, the inspirational paragraph, the carefully balanced humility, the “here is what it taught me” ending. It is grammatically correct and emotionally dead. In response, humans have begun hunting for posts that are messy, opinionated, oddly structured, perhaps even badly punctuated, but unmistakably written by someone who has lived that thought. The Japanese have wabi-sabi, the beauty of something that is impermanent, imperfect and incomplete, In India, we have the nazar battu, the small black spot on a baby's face. Perfect beauty feels dangerous, almost inhuman. Persian carpet makers were said to leave a flaw in their carpets because perfection belonged only to God. The flaw was not a failure, but a human signature. In the @EconomicTimes yesterday, I wrote about how the peculiar quest for human imperfection may become the defining truth of the AI age. @Utopiandevil @anujmagazine @ArchanaMuthappa @prernabindra @AIBeyondAI (Link to the original article; and the unabridged version below)
4
1
7
1,792
Jaspreet Bindra : Homo Promptus retweeted
.
1,275
4,858
247
18,633
501,844
Jaspreet Bindra : Homo Promptus retweeted
🌭
115
345
57
5,190
844,081
The Trolley Problem? Solved!
I think @elonmusk just solved The Trolley Problem!
1
257
Jaspreet Bindra : Homo Promptus retweeted
This map shows the population density of Delhi National Capital Region. Busy, busy! HT @visualizedin
8
20
139
14,709
The best read of 2026 Wish I could write even a bit like this. Bravo @gothburz
I am a member of the Norwegian Nobel Committee. There are five of us. Five people, appointed by a parliament most of the planet could not find on a map, who decide, once a year, which human being the world has agreed to call good. I know. I know. I think about it on the tram. We meet in a building on Henrik Ibsens gate, a street named after a man who wrote almost exclusively about people discovering they are frauds, which nobody on the committee finds funny except me. There is a room with a long table and the portraits of the dead laureates looking down, Mandela, the Dalai Lama, a great many earnest men in spectacles, and one portrait we do not discuss, which is Kissinger, 1973, awarded while the bombs were still falling, after which two of our predecessors resigned and the satirist Tom Lehrer said political satire was now obsolete. We keep him on the wall. A reminder. Every family has the uncle. It is October in Oslo, which means the sun gives up around four in the afternoon like a civil servant, and it rains the particular Norwegian rain that isn’t quite falling, just hanging there, judging you. I arrive with wet shoes. I always arrive with wet shoes. There is coffee, because this is Norway and there is always coffee, we drink more of it per person than almost anyone alive, and someone’s wife has sent kanelboller, the cinnamon buns, and we sit, five Norwegians, damp, caffeinated, sugared, and we decide the moral standing of the entire species. Let me tell you how it actually works, because the world imagines a cathedral and it is, I promise you, a book club with a mandate. 287 nominations this year. 208 people, 79 organizations. Anyone can nominate, that’s the secret nobody understands: a professor, a parliamentarian, a former laureate, so the “nominee” list is meaningless, it’s a suggestion box, and every autumn some congressman nominates his own golden retriever and the press writes “SHORTLISTED.” Nobody is shortlisted. There is no short list the public ever sees. There is us, and the coffee, and the rain, and the portraits, and a Norwegian stubbornness that is older than the prize itself. We read reports. The institute’s advisers write them, thick dull documents, and we argue. Our chairman told the BBC once that in the final meeting “there is a high temperature.” High temperature, for a Norwegian, means someone slightly raised an eyebrow and then apologized for it. We don’t do high temperature. We do a long silence, and then Kristin says “well,” and everyone knows exactly what “well” meant, and it’s settled. That’s our shouting. “Well.” You’d have to be raised here to hear the violence in it. Now. This year. I will not say the name, because we never say the name, but you know the name. A certain head of state wanted this prize the way a child wants a thing in a shop window, which is to say loudly, and in public, and with the full belief that wanting it was itself the argument. He said he deserved it. He said he’d ended eight wars, a number that grew most times he said it, like a fish. He had other heads of state phone us. Israel’s prime minister posted it on the internet, “Give him the Nobel.” The leaders of Cambodia and Pakistan announced they’d nominated him, as though announcing it were part of it, as though we tally mentions. A man flew around the globe collecting endorsements for a Norwegian committee the way you’d collect signatures for a petition to the council about a noisy dog. And here, uff da, is the detail I treasure, the one that makes me smile into my coffee. The nomination deadline is the 31st of January. He took office on the 20th. So for all the phone calls, all the posts, all the gilded lobbying, the only nominations that could possibly count for this year’s prize were filed in the first eleven days of his term, before he had, by his own arithmetic, ended a single one of the eight wars. He campaigned all year for a prize whose window had shut while he was still hanging up his coat. We didn’t have to reject him. The calendar did. We just watched. Norwegians are very good at watching. We have long winters. People think we sit there weighing his deeds. We don’t. That’s the thing I can’t make the world understand. We’re not grading his homework. We don’t owe anyone the prize for a ceasefire, however real, however loud the announcement. “He made peace” is not a sentence that ends in a medal, the way he believes it does, the way he believes every good thing ends in his name on it. The will of a dead Swede says the prize goes to whoever did the most for fraternity between nations. A dead Swede, I should add, who made his entire fortune inventing dynamite and selling arms, and spent his last years horrified at his own obituary, which called him a merchant of death, and so bought his way to immortality as a man of peace. The whole prize is one guilty arms dealer’s attempt to launder his name. We are, all of us, administering a dead man’s public relations. I find this clarifying. It keeps me humble. It should keep everyone humble, and it keeps, by my count, no one humble at all. So who did we give it to? An eighty-five-year-old woman. A judge. Born in Durban, under apartheid, granddaughter of a Tamil man who came to South Africa as indentured labor, a bus driver’s daughter from the poor Indian quarter, who became the first non-white woman to run a law practice in her province, who defended Mandela’s people when defending them was dangerous, who sat on the Rwanda tribunal and the court at the Hague, and who, at eighty-five, is right now a judge weighing whether a genocide is a genocide. When we told the world, our chairman said the rule of law “underpins the system we have set up to ensure peace,” and that “peace requires justice.” She wasn’t even in Oslo. She was in Nuremberg. In courtroom 600. The actual room where they tried the Nazis. You cannot stage that. God staged that, and God, it turns out, is a better satirist than any of us. She did not phone us. She did not post. No prime minister demanded it for her on the internet. She had, as far as our deliberations are concerned, the one qualification the loud man could never manufacture, which is that she wanted the work and not the medal. The medal finds those people. It flees the ones who chase it. This is not a rule we wrote. It’s just the only pattern the hundred-odd years of our mistakes has ever shown. The reaction from across the ocean was immediate. His spokesman posted that we “place politics over peace.” Ja. Perhaps. We’re five damp pensioners in a rainy city; of course it’s political, it was always political, it was political when we gave it to a sitting American president nine months into his first term for the promise of things he had not yet done, and we have been quietly embarrassed about that one for fifteen years, so believe me, we had a particular reason this year to prefer a woman with fifty years of verdicts behind her over a man with eight wars in front of him and a deadline already behind him. Here is what he will never understand, the thing I’d tell him on the tram if he ever took one. We are the one prize he cannot buy, cannot post his way to, cannot have a friendly dictator phone in for him. Not because we’re incorruptible, nei, we’re as vain and wrong and human as the portraits on our wall. But because the entire point of the thing, the only power a small cold country’s book club has ever held, is that it goes to the person not performing the wanting. The moment you demand it, you’ve proven you don’t understand what it’s for, and proving that is itself the disqualification. He ran the most expensive campaign in the history of the prize and the campaign was the reason. He was never losing to Navi Pillay. He was losing to the concept. It’s dark now. Four o’clock dark. The buns are gone. Kristin said “well” an hour ago and we all went home. I’m on the tram with my wet shoes, and somewhere across the water a very powerful man is explaining to a camera that the prize is rigged, that we’re corrupt, that he’ll win it next year, and he genuinely might, we’re only five idiots and we’ve been wrong before, Kissinger is still on the wall. But not this year. This year an old woman in Nuremberg, in the room where the law once stared down the exact kind of man who thinks wanting a thing loudly enough should make it his, got a phone call she didn’t ask for. That’s the job. We don’t reward the man who ends the war and announces it. We reward the woman who spent fifty years deciding what a war was. He’ll never see the difference. That’s rather the whole point of him. Takk for i dag. I have to change trams.
2
352
Jaspreet Bindra : Homo Promptus retweeted
“immediately after [trump’s] post, russia launched a targeted strike... it was clear that putin does not read truth social.” - ukrainian president volodymyr zelenskyy
20
102
2
1,167
45,652
Thirty years ago, children walked around feeding a tiny digital creature called a Tamagotchi. It beeped when it was hungry, sulked when ignored and demanded that humans organise their lives around it. At Meta Connect a few weeks back, Mark Zuckerberg unveiled something that looks uncannily similar: Muse Charm, a palm-sized, keychain-like home for Meta’s new personal AI agent. It is the first real 'hardware for AI' people have been talking of. But there is a more important story behind the gadget. After years of chatbots, copilots and voice assistants, with Muse, Instinct and OpenAI's Dots, AI may finally be approaching one of computing’s oldest holy grails: the true personal assistant. Read more in my article in the @EconomicTimes today (The original unabridged article on my @Substack in replies below) @Meta @finkd @Muse @instinct @OpenAI @AIBeyondAI @anujmagazine @Utopiandevil
2
3
392
"Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad." - Sophocoles #Jantarmanatar
4
688
Jaspreet Bindra : Homo Promptus retweeted
Why cancel trains to Delhi? Just get Gyanesh to remove the names from the passenger list.
95
2,113
98
13,470
161,676
The OG of startup investing in India and the one man whose sheer energy could power an entire datacentre. Or two! Proud to call him a friend, mentor, and now author. Congratulations on the launch of Lift-Off Nation, @RajanAnandan , a manifesto of India's startup liftoff moment. I wish I could have been there; look forward to read it
1
1
8
2,584
Jaspreet Bindra : Homo Promptus retweeted
Thank you, Rahul. This is indeed troubling.
Welcome to India, Elon. Wait till you discover the other guy.
17,936
20,308
5,972
135,303
17,789,172
Jaspreet Bindra : Homo Promptus retweeted
Welcome to India, Elon. Wait till you discover the other guy.
Starlink is licensed in over 165 countries and has spent five years complying with every single law and requirement of the government of India, so why still no license? Is Ambani the real boss of India?
21,356
22,507
8,116
125,695
21,051,160
The Bengaluru Roadies #73 : Freedom Park, Bengaluru Today's Roadies can only be about one place, though it not strictly a road or a locality. What sort of city turns a prison into a park—and then appoints it as the official address for dissent? On Seshadri Road, amid the buses, colleges and perpetual negotiations of Gandhinagar traffic, Freedom Park offers a particularly Bengaluru answer. Its lawns occupy the grounds of the old Central Jail, its watchtower once helped guards observe prisoners, and its open spaces now receive rallies, festivals and citizens with placards. The architecture has changed sides, although it has kept the evidence. Unlike many Bengaluru place names, “Freedom Park” involves no forgotten chieftain, elusive tree or disputed translation. The name was chosen when the former prison became a public park. It is less an etymology than an argument: a place created to confine people would henceforth belong to them. The jail was built in 1867 under British administration, near the division between the old city and the Cantonment. Its plan followed the radiating—or panoptical—principle then favoured in prison design. Barracks extended from a central watchtower, allowing a guard to survey the compound from one commanding point. It reflected the reassuringly imperial belief that order could be achieved if someone was always watching. The complex included long barracks, individual cells, workshops, a hospital block, high walls and gallows. Its history soon became entangled with the political history of the region. During the Quit India movement of 1942, Congress leaders from Mysore—including Kengal Hanumanthaiah, later chief minister—were imprisoned here. During the Emergency of 1975–77, opposition figures such as Atal Bihari Vajpayee, L. K. Advani and Ramakrishna Hegde also passed through its gates. Freedom, it appears, took a rather indirect route to Freedom Park. The prison remained in use until 2000, when its inmates were transferred to the newer Central Prison at Parappana Agrahara. Bengaluru was left with roughly twenty acres of valuable land and a set of buildings carrying an uncomfortable history. Demolition would have been the simplest option—and, in a rapidly growing city, probably the most familiar one. Heritage campaigners argued for preservation. In 2003, the city corporation and the Bangalore Agenda Task Force held a national competition to reimagine the jail. Architects Nisha Mathew Ghosh and Soumitro Ghosh won with a proposal that did not disguise the site’s past. Their design treated the surviving prison structures as fragments within a new public landscape. The barracks, tower, cells, hospital block, entrance building and gallows were retained or adapted. Lawns, pathways, performance areas, galleries, an amphitheatre and a children’s space appeared around them. Walls that once directed prisoners now guide visitors; the tower remains at the centre, but its authority has been quietly cancelled. This is what makes Freedom Park more interesting than a conventional garden. It does not cover a difficult history with decorative shrubbery. The prison remains legible. Visitors can understand its architecture of surveillance and then wander away from it—to a lawn, a cultural programme or a heated discussion about government policy. The park opened to the public in late 2008 and was formally inaugurated in February 2009. Five acres were set aside for demonstrations. That provision eventually gave the park a complicated civic role: under Bengaluru’s regulations, reinforced by Karnataka High Court orders in 2022, protests in the city were to be confined to this designated venue. The old jail had become a park called Freedom, and Freedom had acquired an enclosure. The space has hosted gatherings by farmers, workers, students and political groups. It became a prominent stage during the anti-corruption movement of 2011. It has also accommodated exhibitions and literature festivals, with authors and audiences occupying barracks built for an entirely different category of captive gathering. Yet limiting protest to one approved patch raises an obvious question: if dissent can be heard only where it has been officially parked, how free is it? Freedom Park does not resolve that argument. It gives the argument an address. The next time you pass it, look beyond the rally banners and traffic barricades. Behind them is a nineteenth-century prison, a record of political detention, an experiment in adaptive reuse and a continuing debate about who may speak—and where. (I have recently relocated to the city of gardens and traffic, and what intrigues me most are the road names, each of which has a fascinating history. This series of posts will unravel the historical origins of the roads and localities of BLR.) By the way, on popular demand, I have started archiving all my Bangalore Roadies posts at blrroadies.substack.com/ , in case you missed a few
1
323