@fortelabs thread on GPT-4 Vision's skill in reading handwritten text intrigued me. It shows how Large Language Models excel in contextual comprehension, leading me to create a handwriting assistant that effectively transcribes notes
What if NEET leaked on WhatsApp instead?
Would govt dare to touch it. Never. Too big to topple the govt.
But Telegram? Temporarilly ban the whole thing.
Never mind the leak came through papers and mobile calls.Papers and phones. So logically, ban telecom next?
This is peak incompetence !
Statement : Shutting down Telegram is a band aid solution and is a disproportionate answer to exam fraud
The Internet Freedom Foundation objects to the directions announced today in the National Testing Agency's press release on action against the Telegram platform. On the NTA's recommendation, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology has, under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, restricted access to the whole of Telegram in India until 22 June 2026, and has separately ordered the platform to switch off message-editing for every Indian user until 30 June 2026. This is a blunt, nationwide measure aimed at the conduct of rampant fraud rackets, and on the Government's own admission is constitutionally incompatible.
At the outset it is important to note that Section 69A and the Blocking Rules of 2009 framed under it allow the Government to block access to specific “information” on a computer resource. They do not extend to switching off an entire intermediary, still less to ordering a company to redesign its product by removing a feature for a whole country. In Shreya Singhal v Union of India, the Supreme Court upheld Section 69A because it is narrow and hedged with procedural safeguards. Reading it to authorise shutting down a platform that lakhs use is an overbroad restriction by the NTAs own admission. For the message-editing direction the release identifies no source of power at all. If one exists, the order must say so.
The release argues against itself
A restriction on access has to be the least intrusive measure that achieves its aim as per the constitutional test of proportionality laid down in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) and applied in Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020). The NTA's own narration shows the block fails its nodal agency, the release says, “has secured the prompt take-down of a substantial number of Telegram channels, groups and bots”, and this targeted work “is the reason the harm caused by these rackets has been contained to the extent it has”. If channel level takedown contained the harm, the case for a blanket block collapses and hence the Government has reached for a heavier tool while conceding that a lighter one was working. The collateral cost sits on the record too as noted in the press release. The block, the NTA accepts, “affects lakhs of citizens who use the Telegram platform for legitimate personal, educational, professional and informational purposes”. The release also says there is "no such paper available outside the secured examination chain" and that “the security of the examination is unaffected by the action taken”. If the exam is secure and no leak exists, what is being suppressed is rumour, and rumour cannot justify closing a platform when specific blocking and criminal prosecution remain available.
Students use of Telegram
The block of telegram is reactive and ineffective and will punish ordinary users instead of addressing the systemic source of exam leaks. This blocking comes in the final days of NEET preparation, when thousands of students depend on Telegram for study groups, doubt-clearing, and shared resources. Also, it is important to consider that the source of exam papers leak will occur from inside the system, among insiders and across the printing and logistics chain, with the platform being the most downstream channel for distribution. Hence, switching off Telegram, is merely a deflection from the repeated failures that will continue while media attention is directed towards this Telegram ban.
Lack of transparency
At present only a press release from the NTA has been provided, which recommended the block but the reasoned order of MeitY, the authority that issued it, has not been released. The Anuradha Bhasin decision requires that orders restricting access be published so they can be tested in court. Here the order, and the reasoning of the committee behind it, stay out of view, and we do not know whether Telegram was heard at all. An announcement of a block is no substitute for an order the affected party can challenge.
Blunt to enforce and very easy to evade
Usually, app-level blocks run through IS-level DNS and IP filtering. They are over inclusive, sweeping in lawful use, yet simple to evade as a determined exam leak racket moves to a VPN or a mirror within minutes while ordinary users lose the service for a week.
We ask the Government to:
1) Publish the MeitY Section 69A order and the NTA recommendation behind it, with reasons;
2) State the legal basis for the message editing direction, or withdraw it;
3) Confirm whether Telegram was given a hearing under the Blocking Rules, and place the committee's record before any court that hears a challenge; and
4) Lift the platform-wide restriction and rely on the targeted takedowns the NTA itself credits with containing the harm.
We emphasise that the NEET (UG) 2026 re-examination is worth protecting and it concerns the future of lakhs of aspirants. It requires securing the entire process of examination rather than reaching for purported band aid solutions that instead cause more harm. The State cannot switch off a service used by lakhs to answer the wrongdoing of a few, and cannot do it through an order no one affected is allowed to read. On its own facts, the Government has done both.
New Delhi, 16 June 2026.
One of the few things I’d done yesterday was use @shadcn /improve skills for two of my repos. So when the Fable got axed, my plan was already in place and Opus executed it perfectly.
This is big: all access to Mythos and Fable AI models disabled for everyone outside America.
First thoughts:
1. Technology is the ultimate weapon. National sovereignty, national security, all of it is now about technology.
2. Globalization is dead and Bharat must find her own way ahead.
We must keep these two ideas in mind.
What can our government do right now? Ensure that orgs in India embrace smaller models, both Indian and Chinese open source ones. With a bit of effort, we can make them work. Anyway, why pay money to people who don't even want to sell to you?
We must deepen our R&D. Sarvam has been on it and we have been on it but remember that the latest models cost not only huge GPU budgets to train, the GPUs themselves are restricted. So we can't afford the scale of money (of the order of $100+ billion to even get in the game!) and even if we could come up with the money, we can't get all the GPUs. I would not like to ask the government to fund tens of billions of dollars on this anyway - the money has far better uses.
Zoho has been pursuing alternative R&D approaches that are far, far less expensive but by its nature cutting edge R&D takes time and we are patient. I am confident we will get there.
Any remaining people in India who have delusions about globalization should wake up now.
AI will disproportionately benefit ADHD minds because it externalizes the boring, parts of cognition like planning, sequencing, drafting, remembering, prioritizing and amplifies the parts ADHD minds often cook at: rapid association, novelty-seeking, pattern recognition, emotional intensity, and divergent synthesis
Tried Paxel from @ycombinator on one of my repo
Really nice idea, neatly implemented. a much better signal about how you actually work than an outdated resume.
Although, the "code never leaves your machine" line was overstated; derived data does get uploaded. YC should just say this plainly.
Fix the framing and this is a glimpse of where hiring goes. I'd bet reports like this get adopted more and more.
A minimal phone where the home screen is the agent. No grid of apps fighting for your attention.
Home screen = one agent that does the important stuff and gives your attention back. I’d buy that today.
I read it before replying. Your piece is mostly about group chat and how it pulls us apart. Agreed.
What I don’t get is how you’d actually interact with agents. Isn’t that still chat?
If the bet is that better models mean agents run long tasks on their own, fine then chat stops being the right interface. But right now, Claude Code and Codex are chat. You talk to them the way you talk to a person.
You drop instructions in a thread. It comes back if it needs clarity. Has something to show? You open it right there.
Or maybe it’s not a thread at all. Maybe it’s a board. You watch the work move across it like Basecamp, Linear, a kanban of tasks and their status. The agent stays quiet until it needs you and it pings you in a chat.
That’s the part I’m still chewing on.
Today we're launching @QuiverAI SVG generation inside Paper
A breakthrough SVG model that lets you explore logo ideas and illustrations quickly in vector format.
It's very strong at using reference images too.
Try it out and send us feedback!