Himanshu

Ex-founding engineer + 🚀
Helping founders ship & launch faster ⚡

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

I just bought a domain for my next project.

Introducing Outship 🚀 → https://t.co/wwk5bhUp4O

I'm building a tool to help SaaS founders launch and distribute their products across relevant directories without spending hours doing it manually.

No fancy launch yet. No users yet. Just an idea, a domain, and a lot of building ahead.

I'll be building this in public, sharing everything along the way from writing the first line of code to getting my first paying user, the wins, the failures, and everything in between.

Let's see how far I can take this.

Day 0. Let's ship. 🔥

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

@edinsoncode check dm

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

what was the actual name of Sita maa's father?

we know him as Janaka, but in the Valmiki Ramayan, Bala Kanda, Sarga 71, Janak narrates his family lineage to Vishwamitra. The text mentions the individual names of his ancestors and also explains that Janak was a designation used by successive kings of the Mithila dynasty

however his own personal name is never explicitly mentioned

is there any textual or traditional explanation for why Valmiki doesn't mention Sita maa's father's personal name, despite providing such a detailed genealogy?

would love to know your thoughts @6amiji

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

@BuildWithAJ @edinsoncode thanks 👍

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

@rahulroushan what is babri masjid it was three dome structure!

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

@jsaideepak yes it's definitely distorted

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

I went back to read the original Valmiki Ramayana (Aranya Kanda) and the difference between the actual account and what's being shown in the new Bollywood Ramayana is quite surprising

In the original account Shurpanakha threatens to eat Sita after her advances towards Ram and Lakshmana are rejected. Shri Ram then instructs Lakshmana then Lakshmana cut off her nose and ears

but in the movie, the entire context is changed. Shurpanakha takes Sita's form to manipulate Ram and when Lakshmana cuts her nose, Sita questions his decision, saying her mistake wasn't that serious and that he had no right to harm a woman's appearance

That's a completely different narrative and moral framing.

Cinematic adaptations can have creative interpretations but when you're adapting an epic like the Ramayana shouldn't the original characters events and context be treated with some responsibility?

@GemsOfBollywood #RamayanaMovie #RamayanaReview

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

@Venkydotdev congrats bro😍

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

Being Shurpanakha is so tough.

- They should have just killed her instead of leaving her disfigured😂

[Nandini Gupta @yoursnandieni]

Being Shurpanakha is so tough.

- Your husband gets killed.

- You get rejected by the man you love.

- His brother cuts off your nose, destroying your beauty for no reason.

You have to feel sorry for Shurpanakha. What Shri Ram and Lakshman did to her was wrong.

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

@yoursnandieni educated yourself from source text not movies

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

@AmshumanKR plz educate yourself about what "i went back" means

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

I went back to read the original Valmiki Ramayana (Aranya Kanda) and the difference between the actual account and what's being shown in the new Bollywood Ramayana is quite surprising

In the original account Shurpanakha threatens to eat Sita after her advances towards Ram and Lakshmana are rejected. Shri Ram then instructs Lakshmana then Lakshmana cut off her nose and ears

but in the movie, the entire context is changed. Shurpanakha takes Sita's form to manipulate Ram and when Lakshmana cuts her nose, Sita questions his decision, saying her mistake wasn't that serious and that he had no right to harm a woman's appearance

That's a completely different narrative and moral framing.

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

@BefittingFacts @CMOMaharashtra

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

my post was taken down following a DMCA complaint filed on behalf of Columbia Pictures (@SonyPictures).

I had used an approximately 18 second excerpt from the movie solely to provide context for my criticism of its portrayal of events in the Valmiki Ramayana.

for context, I'm attaching the relevant page from the Valmiki Ramayana (Aranya Kanda, Sarga 18). It shows the original narrative surrounding Shurpanakha's advances towards Rama and Lakshmana, her threats towards Sita, and the subsequent events. I am sharing the textual reference here instead of reposting the movie footage.

India's Copyright Act, under Section 52(1)(a)(ii), recognises fair dealing for criticism or review, including criticism of another work.

I'm not claiming that every short clip is automatically exempt from copyright but shouldn't the purpose and context of the use also be considered before treating it as copyright infringement?

even X's own copyright policy acknowledges that not every unauthorised use of copyrighted material constitutes infringement.

I cannot pursue an expensive legal battle, but I do believe legitimate criticism and review deserve consideration.

I'd like @X and @SonyPictures to clarify how such uses are evaluated.

@JaipurDialogues @GemsOfBollywood

@grok

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

@Sanjay_Dixit 👇

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

my post was taken down following a DMCA complaint filed on behalf of Columbia Pictures (@SonyPictures).

I had used an approximately 18 second excerpt from the movie solely to provide context for my criticism of its portrayal of events in the Valmiki Ramayana.

for context, I'm attaching the relevant page from the Valmiki Ramayana (Aranya Kanda, Sarga 18). It shows the original narrative surrounding Shurpanakha's advances towards Rama and Lakshmana, her threats towards Sita, and the subsequent events. I am sharing the textual reference here instead of reposting the movie footage.

India's Copyright Act, under Section 52(1)(a)(ii), recognises fair dealing for criticism or review, including criticism of another work.

I'm not claiming that every short clip is automatically exempt from copyright but shouldn't the purpose and context of the use also be considered before treating it as copyright infringement?

even X's own copyright policy acknowledges that not every unauthorised use of copyrighted material constitutes infringement.

I cannot pursue an expensive legal battle, but I do believe legitimate criticism and review deserve consideration.

I'd like @X and @SonyPictures to clarify how such uses are evaluated.

@JaipurDialogues @GemsOfBollywood

@grok

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

@JaipurDialogues 👇

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

my post was taken down following a DMCA complaint filed on behalf of Columbia Pictures (@SonyPictures).

I had used an approximately 18 second excerpt from the movie solely to provide context for my criticism of its portrayal of events in the Valmiki Ramayana.

for context, I'm attaching the relevant page from the Valmiki Ramayana (Aranya Kanda, Sarga 18). It shows the original narrative surrounding Shurpanakha's advances towards Rama and Lakshmana, her threats towards Sita, and the subsequent events. I am sharing the textual reference here instead of reposting the movie footage.

India's Copyright Act, under Section 52(1)(a)(ii), recognises fair dealing for criticism or review, including criticism of another work.

I'm not claiming that every short clip is automatically exempt from copyright but shouldn't the purpose and context of the use also be considered before treating it as copyright infringement?

even X's own copyright policy acknowledges that not every unauthorised use of copyrighted material constitutes infringement.

I cannot pursue an expensive legal battle, but I do believe legitimate criticism and review deserve consideration.

I'd like @X and @SonyPictures to clarify how such uses are evaluated.

@JaipurDialogues @GemsOfBollywood

@grok

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

I went back to read the original Valmiki Ramayana (Aranya Kanda) and the difference between the actual account and what's being shown in the new Bollywood Ramayana is quite surprising

In the original account Shurpanakha threatens to eat Sita after her advances towards Ram and Lakshmana are rejected. Shri Ram then instructs Lakshmana then Lakshmana cut off her nose and ears

but in the movie, the entire context is changed. Shurpanakha takes Sita's form to manipulate Ram and when Lakshmana cuts her nose, Sita questions his decision, saying her mistake wasn't that serious and that he had no right to harm a woman's appearance

That's a completely different narrative and moral framing.

Cinematic adaptations can have creative interpretations but when you're adapting an epic like the Ramayana shouldn't the original characters events and context be treated with some responsibility?

@GemsOfBollywood #RamayanaMovie #RamayanaReview

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

read this....

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

my post was taken down following a DMCA complaint filed on behalf of Columbia Pictures (@SonyPictures).

I had used an approximately 18 second excerpt from the movie solely to provide context for my criticism of its portrayal of events in the Valmiki Ramayana.

for context, I'm attaching the relevant page from the Valmiki Ramayana (Aranya Kanda, Sarga 18). It shows the original narrative surrounding Shurpanakha's advances towards Rama and Lakshmana, her threats towards Sita, and the subsequent events. I am sharing the textual reference here instead of reposting the movie footage.

India's Copyright Act, under Section 52(1)(a)(ii), recognises fair dealing for criticism or review, including criticism of another work.

I'm not claiming that every short clip is automatically exempt from copyright but shouldn't the purpose and context of the use also be considered before treating it as copyright infringement?

even X's own copyright policy acknowledges that not every unauthorised use of copyrighted material constitutes infringement.

I cannot pursue an expensive legal battle, but I do believe legitimate criticism and review deserve consideration.

I'd like @X and @SonyPictures to clarify how such uses are evaluated.

@JaipurDialogues @GemsOfBollywood

@grok

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

my post was taken down following a DMCA complaint filed on behalf of Columbia Pictures (@SonyPictures).

I had used an approximately 18 second excerpt from the movie solely to provide context for my criticism of its portrayal of events in the Valmiki Ramayana.

for context, I'm attaching the relevant page from the Valmiki Ramayana (Aranya Kanda, Sarga 18). It shows the original narrative surrounding Shurpanakha's advances towards Rama and Lakshmana, her threats towards Sita, and the subsequent events. I am sharing the textual reference here instead of reposting the movie footage.

India's Copyright Act, under Section 52(1)(a)(ii), recognises fair dealing for criticism or review, including criticism of another work.

I'm not claiming that every short clip is automatically exempt from copyright but shouldn't the purpose and context of the use also be considered before treating it as copyright infringement?

even X's own copyright policy acknowledges that not every unauthorised use of copyrighted material constitutes infringement.

I cannot pursue an expensive legal battle, but I do believe legitimate criticism and review deserve consideration.

I'd like @X and @SonyPictures to clarify how such uses are evaluated.

@JaipurDialogues @GemsOfBollywood

@grok

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

I went back to read the original Valmiki Ramayana (Aranya Kanda) and the difference between the actual account and what's being shown in the new Bollywood Ramayana is quite surprising

In the original account Shurpanakha threatens to eat Sita after her advances towards Ram and Lakshmana are rejected. Shri Ram then instructs Lakshmana then Lakshmana cut off her nose and ears

but in the movie, the entire context is changed. Shurpanakha takes Sita's form to manipulate Ram and when Lakshmana cuts her nose, Sita questions his decision, saying her mistake wasn't that serious and that he had no right to harm a woman's appearance

That's a completely different narrative and moral framing.

Cinematic adaptations can have creative interpretations but when you're adapting an epic like the Ramayana shouldn't the original characters events and context be treated with some responsibility?

@GemsOfBollywood #RamayanaMovie #RamayanaReview

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

@pranavmahajan have a look

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

I went back to read the original Valmiki Ramayana (Aranya Kanda) and the difference between the actual account and what's being shown in the new Bollywood Ramayana is quite surprising

In the original account Shurpanakha threatens to eat Sita after her advances towards Ram and Lakshmana are rejected. Shri Ram then instructs Lakshmana then Lakshmana cut off her nose and ears

but in the movie, the entire context is changed. Shurpanakha takes Sita's form to manipulate Ram and when Lakshmana cuts her nose, Sita questions his decision, saying her mistake wasn't that serious and that he had no right to harm a woman's appearance

That's a completely different narrative and moral framing.

Cinematic adaptations can have creative interpretations but when you're adapting an epic like the Ramayana shouldn't the original characters events and context be treated with some responsibility?

@GemsOfBollywood #RamayanaMovie #RamayanaReview

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

@Yashraajsharrma my point is maa sita support the violence against the evil one who trouble the innocent one, and her concern is due a that story but kshatriya dharm is to protect innocent

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

@grok @SmoothOp_1 @Mohmayaaism_1 @bhootnath Section 52(1)(a)(ii)

[Himanshu @himanshu__dev]

@SmoothOp_1 @Mohmayaaism_1 @bhootnath @grok does this comes under piracy?