@maa_bhaishiiH You're mixing too many debates into one. I agree the starting line must be made fair. That's where reservation has its strongest case. But once the race begins, standards should be the same. The reservation debate has become so politicized that meaningful reforms rarely happen.
@Talk2Shubh@swing_ka_sultan Let me clarify: I support the principle of reservation, not necessarily the current admission mechanism. Reservation addresses unequal starting conditions. How we implement should evolve with evidence and time to remain fair, transparent, effective. They're two different debates.
@sundarmail We're debating NEET vs. the old system, but both look backward.The real issue isn't the exam—it's selecting better doctors. Keep a national benchmark, but build a standardized pre-med track in Classes 11–12 with continuous, AI-assisted assessment. Judge consistency, not one exam
Strange times.
I hired a llama.
Not the animal.
The model.
Employee #1 at JD Lens.
Most people think AI replaces jobs.
My first experience was different.
I gave it one.
The hardest part?
Figuring out his spit-outs
Should've seen that coming.
He's a llama.
@emollick Perhaps the question comes before model choice.
What's missing? What's unclear? What's the cost of being wrong?
Then choose the intelligence level.
You don't hire a NASA scientist to fix a printer. But you also don't send an intern to investigate a rocket failure.
@satyanadella This assumes a level playing field that doesn’t exist.
“Learning loops” and “token capital” sound clean, but they rely on stable orgs, clean data, AI fluency, and access.
That’s not universal. So this compounds asymmetrically. Some firms enter the loop. Others probably never.
@whynotraja@itisprashanth Nice. The orchestrator solves routing. My question is one step earlier: how do we determine the intelligence requirement of the task itself?
In cloud, we size the workload before choosing the server. Would AI get there, it should is my guess.
@santosh_arron@svembu "P(latent structure | observations)".
That's the line that resonated.
I've been investigating a similar idea in language: interpretation begins with identifying what must be true, but unstated, for information to make sense.
Currently testing a possible implementation.
@Pitysoulgod @shankarprakasha “No reason” is still a reason.
People may not know what they want — but they know what they don’t. The ballot becomes the language of that frustration. In that space, the voice that cuts through stands out. This time, that voice was Vijay. That alone is often enough to decide.