BelugaOuix

Manutd fan since 2011
ECE VIT 2nd year
Learning Tech
Motivator
#GGMU

[Arpit Bhayani @arpit_bhayani]

If you want to fundamentally challenge an assumption and innovate, try building things from scratch.

Building something from zero takes away every assumption you would otherwise inherit from an existing solution. You naturally start focusing on, "Does this even need to be true?"

That is the real reason greenfield projects (starting from scratch) often produce radical designs. Inherited code comes with inherited constraints. A blank slate has none, so you have to justify every choice from first principles. That, makes you think.

Kafka is a good example of this. Every message queue before it - JMS, RabbitMQ, you name it - agreed on one thing without really questioning it: once a consumer reads a message, delete it. A queue is a mailbox, not an archive.

When LinkedIn built Kafka from scratch, they were not trying to build a faster queue. They asked a more fundamental question: why delete data the broker already has?

So they went in the opposite direction.

On paper, that is a worse deal for a simple use case. More disk. More moving parts for the client to manage. But it made things possible that traditional queues simply could not do: replaying old messages, running multiple consumer groups over the same stream at their own pace, and treating the log itself as the source of truth.

Apache Spark is another example. Instead of optimizing disk-based processing, it did in-memory computation. Columnar databases made a similar shift by rethinking how data should be grouped and stored.

The point is, you do not stumble into designs like these by patching an existing system. You get there by starting over and refusing to accept what has been handed to you.

Hope this helps.

[Santosh Arron @santosh_arron]

I have to push back a little here specifically on Mythos, Fable, and the framing around Anthropic's models.

All of these, including Anthropic's Claude family, are built on transformer architecture. There's no fundamental architectural breakthroughs here that India is locked out of. The transformer is public knowledge. Sarvam, Krutrim, and others are building on it too. So the question isn't just whether we can access these models it's whether we should keep chasing the same architectural paradigm at all.

And my honest answer is: we shouldn't. We should stand on our own and go further.

At Blankline, we've been working on something we call Hope a post-transformer research initiative. The core thesis is that transformers compute the wrong probability operation for general intelligence. They estimate P(next token | context). What intelligence actually requires is P(latent structure | observations), followed by search and verifier-driven reasoning. That's a fundamentally different thing. Our Hope-1 architecture discrete-latent program codes, verifier-driven search, a pre-registered seven-rung validation framework has already cleared four of those seven rungs at 0.69M to 3M parameters, exceeding the closest published baseline by approximately 2× on ARC tasks. The research isn't about building a better LLM. It's about asking whether the whole paradigm is wrong.

This matters for what you're saying. If you're right that technology is now the ultimate sovereignty question, then copying the transformer race whether from American or Chinese open-source models still leaves India downstream. What changes the equation is a research bet that could shift the cost frontier of general intelligence entirely. That's what we're working toward.

I turned down funding that would have made Blankline instantly credible overnight. Those investors wanted US and UK IP transfer as a condition. If I were just building a product, I might have taken it. But the research we've done and what we have internally right now is something I wasn't willing to hand over. The value isn't in the model weights. It's in the architectural thesis and the research direction itself, which we've published openly at https://t.co/SCO8YKcUTD while keeping the implementation proprietary.

India's top investment firms I've spoke with wants profits, not pure R&D. That's a real problem and I've run into it directly. The SF ecosystem understands how transformative foundational research can become. We haven't built that culture here yet but that's exactly the culture India needs if we want to be a source of frontier intelligence, not just a consumer of it.

The goal isn't to make intelligence available only to Indians. It's to make it available to everyone and that only happens if someone builds the thing from first principles rather than licensing access to someone else's architecture.

[Lakshmi R Iyer @LakshmiRIyer]

Justice should be gender-neutral.

[Surajit Dasgupta @surajitdasgupta]

End of a Nightmare

Was Mamata's Fall Inevitable? Journalist Suman Chattopadhyay writes

On the night of 13 May 2011, when the people of West Bengal spilt onto the streets, the smile on their faces was not just the smile of victory. It was a long exhale of relief. The sense that, after thirty-four years, the weight pressing down on their chests had finally shifted, even if only slightly. Anyone born in 1977 turned thirty-four that night and saw a different government for the first time in their life. Their father had voted Left. Their elder brother had too. The very idea of _change_ had been abstract. That night, the abstract suddenly became real — and the joy of that reality was almost physical.

I was on the streets that night, too. And I’ll admit it honestly: I didn’t ask a single question. You don’t question things in the middle of joy. That’s human nature. But fifteen years on, the questions I didn’t ask then need to be asked now.

The Trinamool’s campaign slogan was “Maa-Maati-Manush” — Mother, Soil, People. It could have been the title of a folk opera. In effect, it was a figurative sketch of the new order to come: emotion, the scent of the land, and a vague promise of humanity. In that emotional moment, none of us stopped for a forensic reading. We didn’t want to. All we knew was that we no longer wanted what we had. It took time for the mystery to unravel, though not much time.

When a slogan becomes a government, there’s no room left for ambiguity. Decisions have to be made, sides have to be taken, masks have to come off. For the first few months, there was the buzz of novelty. But in politics, novelty has a short shelf life. The colour changed from red to green. The method stayed the same. Localities run from party offices, the strong-arming by cadres, the distribution of state benefits through a partisan lens — Bengal knew these pictures well. Only the palette had changed. The wary ones saw it. The rest waited. A new government deserved time.

In 2012, Jadavpur University professor Ambikesh Mahapatra forwarded a cartoon. It was about the Chief Minister. He was arrested. Just one year into the new administration. It might look like a small incident. But it contained an entire political philosophy. The message was unambiguous: criticism will not be tolerated. Satire will not be tolerated. Dissent will not be tolerated. Those who understood fell silent. Those who refused to understand said it was an exception that wouldn’t happen again.

It happened. Again and again.

The idea that power changes people is repeated so often that the truth inside it has been buried under cliché. Power doesn’t change people. It reveals them. What was already inside, what circumstances kept hidden, comes out under power’s glare. The distinction seems minor, but it matters. If power changes you, power is to blame. If power reveals you, the responsibility lies with the person — and partly with us, who chose that person.

That question has to be asked of Mamata Banerjee. The woman who lay on railway tracks to stop trains, who rushed alone to Nandigram, who sat in the Chief Minister’s chair wearing rubber flip-flops — was she really what she appeared to be? Or was it a tactic, effective for opposition but irrelevant for governing? I don’t have the full answer. But looking at the evidence, a picture forms. And in that picture, the gap grows wider. The distance between the Mamata of 2011 and the Mamata of 2026 isn’t just about time. It’s about character.

Political amnesia is the eternal habit of rulers. People forget. New events bury old ones. What once seemed intolerable slowly becomes normal. Bengal has seen that process of normalisation over the last fifteen years. What was once unbearable was later endured. What was endured became expected. What was expected began to feel permanent. In those three steps, a society accepts its own decline — often without even noticing.

[Continued in my reply to this post]

[𝐍𝐚𝐮𝐭 @nautfcb]

i have always wanted to ratio a prime minister

[Harsha Bhogle @bhogleharsha]

Allen and Seifert for @KKRiders at the Eden Gardens!

[Karthik 🇮🇳 @beastoftraal]

Unlike Uber's PIN or Ola's OTP, Rapido's 'PIN' (the Personal Identification Number that we customers get, and tell the rider/driver) remains the same, always! I believe Namma Yatri too has a similar system, but it calls it 'OTP' even though it is not a 'one-time' password but a static number. Once you know this, it becomes easier to get into the cab/on the bike and initiate the ride without looking at your phone/app screen. It could become something like a password you memorize once, and conveniently use the same one for all rides/drives.

However, considering Rapido did this by design, they are missing an opportunity to brand it differently, instead of simply using 'PIN or 'OTP' like every other service. After all, Rapido is the one that smartly rebranded 'driver' and called them 'Captain'. Related read: The PR brilliance behind Rapido’s Captain - https://t.co/2pEAASwlS7

A couple of other observations on this design:

1. Because it is a 4-digit number, and since there are only 9000 4-digit numbers possible between 1000 to 9999, I'm assuming that these PINs would not be unique to all customers. Meaning: 2 people could have the same PIN. I hope Rapido's technology team has considered spreading the PINs by region so that two people in the same location do not get the same PIN.

2. Is there a potential security loophole with the static password? Consider a scenario (or edge case) where a driver/rider frequently notices a customer and remember her/his PIN. Could they then use the PIN on their own without the knowledge of the customer, initiate a ride and seek money? I assume Rapido would have a second layer embedded in this system, say, at the app level or the user ID level, that cross-checks a ride initiated by a captain.

#UX #userexperience #marketing

[BelugaOuix @Aaditya_1237]

@v_computer hey i want to try

[Stretford Post @StretfordPost]

Letter To @AndyBurnhamGM Mayor Of Manchester.

Dear Mayor Burnham,

I am writing to you not only as a football supporter, but as someone who believes deeply in Manchester’s identity, heritage, and future.

I urge you in the strongest possible terms to reject the regeneration application put forward by Sir Jim Ratcliffe and the Glazer family. This proposal is not about the people of Manchester, nor about football, nor about genuine regeneration. It is about power, vanity, and profit at the expense of a historic institution that helped put this city on the global map.

For nearly 20 years, Manchester United has been systematically hollowed out by the Glazer family. Since their leveraged takeover in 2005, the club has been burdened with over £1 billion in debt, interest payments, fees, and dividends. While rival clubs invested in stadiums, training facilities, local jobs, and community infrastructure, Old Trafford was allowed to decay its roof leaking, facilities falling behind, and safety repeatedly questioned. This neglect was not accidental; it was the predictable outcome of an ownership model designed to extract wealth rather than build value.

During this period, the Glazers paid themselves hundreds of millions of pounds in dividends while the club’s competitiveness, reputation, and relationship with supporters steadily eroded. This is not regeneration. This is extraction.

Sir Jim Ratcliffe and INEOS now present themselves as saviours, yet their actions raise serious concerns. This project increasingly appears to be a vanity-led redevelopment, using Manchester United’s cultural and emotional capital to secure planning permissions, public goodwill, and long-term commercial upside without clear guarantees that the club, its supporters, or the local community will truly benefit.

Manchester United is not a property asset.
It is not a branding exercise.
It is not a financial instrument.

It is a civic institution, woven into the social, cultural, and economic fabric of this city. The club’s name is synonymous with Manchester across every continent. To allow those who have demonstrably damaged it to now reshape large parts of our city in their own image would be a profound failure of stewardship.

You have long spoken about protecting Manchester from decisions imposed by distant elites who do not live with the consequences of their actions. This is one of those moments. Approving this project would reward two decades of mismanagement and signal that global financiers can exploit our greatest institutions, then return asking for civic approval when it suits them.

Regeneration must be done with the people of Manchester, not to them.
It must be rooted in transparency, accountability, and community ownershipnot debt, leverage, and legacy-polishing.

Manchester deserves better.
Manchester United deserves better.

I ask you to stand with supporters, residents, and future generations by rejecting this application and demanding a vision for regeneration that genuinely serves the city and protects its soul.

Yours sincerely,
A concerned Manchester United supporter

[Vipul @Sporty_Baba]

My wife asked me to take her to a place of worship.

I took her to Eden Gardens.

[Bengal's untold tales @Gramergolpo]

You can't leave without giving a 💕 for beautiful Eden Gardens, One of the best in the world.

[BelugaOuix @Aaditya_1237]

@nitesh_singh5 Interested

[BelugaOuix @Aaditya_1237]

@bRutTe_forc3 CP

[Rahul Kanwal @rahulkanwal]

#NewProfilePic #NDTV @ndtv @ndtvindia

[BelugaOuix @Aaditya_1237]

God bless I have an option of dropping back to electronics industry 😭

[IEEE VIT Vellore @ieeevitvellore]

Started Web Dev thinking how hard could it be?

Then AI said Need code? gotcha.

But it can’t feel the scroll, sense the flow, or build vibes.

Frontend isn’t dead. It’s just getting smarter.

#WebDev #AI #frontenddevelopment #UX #UI

[BelugaOuix @Aaditya_1237]

@sukinoeigawa No Ece without Linux 😭😂

[BelugaOuix @Aaditya_1237]

@sukinoeigawa Enjoy conference league 😂

[BelugaOuix @Aaditya_1237]

@aditya_reds @TweetHelperBot download this

[BelugaOuix @Aaditya_1237]

@MartienBall @TweetHelperBot download this