India AI Impact Summit: Goals and reality

The big news in India last week was the India AI Impact Summit 2026 held from 16 to 21 February in New  Delhi. Originally slated as a five-day affair, it was extended by a day in view of the rush of visitors. 

I am a tech enthusiast, especially when it comes to cutting-edge tools that actually touch the lives of ordinary people like us. So, I was keenly following the proceedings. There was live streaming on YouTube and maximim coverage in newspapers.

No doubt this was a blockbuster event that showcased India as the emerging force in the new Artificial Intelligence era.

BIG NAMES AND NUMBERS

There was a fair amount of hype and publicity, no doubt. That was natural considering around 100 nations participated and there were over 250,000 visitors. 

The summit was a "who’s who" of global power, featuring Heads of State or Government from France, the Netherlands, Swiss Confederation, Spain, Finland, Serbia, Estonia, Mauritius, Brazil, Kazakhstan, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, and UN Secretary-General, besides of course India’s Prime Minister who was the host.

Tech honchos were in full strength. Every big company was there: Google, Microsoft, Meta, Amazon, OpenAI, Anthropic, TCS, Infosys, Wipro, Accenture, IBM, KPMG, Zoom, Ericsson, OpenUK, Salesforce, World  Economic forum, HCL, Qualcomm, Razorpay,  Cisco, NVIDIA, Biocon Group, Coursera … you name it. Many companies were represented by multiple people.

INNOVATIONS AND INVESTMENTS

There were so many interesting exhibits. Here are a few of them. 

BharatGen -- India's first government-funded, sovereign, multilingual, and multimodal Large Language Model (LLM) initiative. 

Bhashini 2.0 -- Another government initiative, which focuses on building advanced, secure, and scalable multilingual applications for Indian languages.

Then there were the Kaze Smartglasses from Bengaluru-based Sarvam AI, which allow users to interact with the world through AI. 

The most interesting was an AI-powered air taxi. It is a collaboration between The ePlane Company and IIT Madras. This electric vertical take-off and landing (e-VTOL) craft promises to turn a one hour traffic crawl into an eight-minute flight.

There were a slew of announcements. Google announced setting up of an AI hub in Visakhapatnam, which will house gigawatt-scale computers and a new international subsea gateway. 

There were many similar announcements -- by other big companies like OpenAI, NVIDIA, Microsoft, Anthropic, etc. -- of either major tie-ups with Indian companies or opening of India offices.

All this will open up massive opportunities for the huge number of tech professionals in India. Investments running into billions, which have been committed, will also add to India’s IT infrastructure.

EXECUTION IS EVERYTHING

The summit painted a beautiful picture of the future, but it is important to remember that we aren’t there yet. As the old idiom goes, “There's many a slip between the cup and the lip.”

Here is why I am saying that:

In Bengaluru, we’ve been hearing about a "Common Mobility Card" for the metro and buses for over a decade. It’s a standard feature in many cities around the world. Yet here, despite our world-class tech prowess, it remains a "work in progress". 

National Common Mobility Card (NCMC) is a government of India initiative launched in 2019. In 2023, the Bengaluru Metro Rail Corporation introduced the NCMC, but till today the authorities have not been able to make it available for the bus commuters!

It’s not a lack of technical skill; it’s definitely because of some "extraneous" reasons, I have no clue about. 

In the health sector, we have seen brilliant startups creating the technology for "portable" digital patient records. To be fair, there has been some progress. But the predominant reality on the ground is when you go to a different hospital or even the branch of the same hospital in another city, you start from scratch with a fresh set of expensive tests because the computer systems are not integrated. 

A third example is air taxi services between Bengaluru’s Kempegowda International Airport and the two big tech hubs in the city (Electronics City and IT Park) which are around at least two hours by car from the airport. There have been multiple attempts on this front by different companies. Quite possibly because of lack of economic viability, they haven't really taken off.

In the apartment I live, though I have a high-speed wi-fi network which enables me to get connected to anywhere in the world, the mobile phone and internet connectivity is so poor that the cellphone works like our good old fixed line telephone. The calls can be made and received only from certain spots close to the balcony!

DOWNSIDE OF THE AI SUMMIT

The AI summit had its fair share of cringe moments that sort of served as a reality check. The most infamous was the Galgotias University "robodog" bungle. 

The university spokesperson claimed that a Chinese Unitree robot was an "in-house innovation". The ever-vigilant netizens called it out immediately, and it became a global embarrassment. 

This incident shifted the whole focus from AI to the quality of education in India, especially higher education. It led to discussions on how commercialised education in India has become, and how college managements try to go for hype and publicity rather than focus on actual learning by students. Many were just hoping that various college and university managements would learn a lesson from what happened to Galgotias University.

Then there was the widely publicised crashing of Wi-Fi at the summit, how food stalls accepted only cash payments, long queues to get to the venue, valuables being stolen, etc. There were also complaints of widespread traffic chaos, with vehicular movement being held up for a very long time for VIPs to pass. All these pointed to something that is quite familiar here: organisational mismanagement. 

India's Minister for Electronics and IT apologised, and it looks like from day 2, it was a better experience. 

JOURNEY HAS ONLY BEGUN

No doubt, the India AI Impact Summit was undeniably a success at many levels, especialy in terms of intent and investment. The conclave highlighted that India is no longer the world's backoffice. Science and technology has made tremendous progress making a whole lot of difference to people's quality of life.

But it has to be remembered at the same time that the true "impact" of this AI summit is not in the number of visitors or the big names who graced the occasion or the amount of investments promised.

Succeess will be measured by whether that air taxi not only actually takes flight over Bengaluru but also becomes a regular transport service; and whether an AI model can finally help a small-town doctor save a life.

We’ve seen the pathway to the future. Now, it's time to walk it and reach the destination.

India and Denmark: A tale of two very different postal systems

I was at the General Post Office (GPO) in Bengaluru yesterday to send a few picture postcards. Why I was sending postcards is a story for another blog post! 

There were quite a lot of customers there waiting to get various postal tasks done. Even at my local neighbourhood post office, often there are so many customers that I have to wait for at least 15 to 30 minutes just to reach the counter!

This crowd is quite remarkable considering we live in an era where most people prefer email or messaging apps to the physical letter.

END OF A 400-YEAR-OLD PRACTICE

No more letterboxes in Denmark
 - The Guardian/Liselotte Sabroe/EPA

While standing in that queue at the GPO, I was reminded of Denmark’s state-owned operator, PostNord, abolishing its 400-year-old postal delivery system for letters on 30 December 2025. It is the first and, so far, the only country to do so.

The reason? Obvious. A staggering drop in mail volume made the traditional "snail mail" economically unviable.

THE DIGITAL MAILBOX

I was curious to know how a society functions without a physical letterbox! After all, it wasn’t that no physical letters were being sent. Still, many official documents are sent physically rather than electronically. So, I did some quick research.

Denmark has been planning this transition for a long time, meticulously building a sophisticated digital replacement. Today, every Danish resident has a mandatory "Digital Post" mailbox linked directly to their national digital ID (MitID).

This isn't like our common email systems that are usually cluttered with spam and marketing. It is a secure, legally binding government portal. 

When a hospital, a tax authority, or a local municipality sends a notice to this box, it is legally considered "delivered" the moment it lands in the receiver’s inbox. It places the responsibility on the citizen to check their digital mail, just as we would check our physical gate for a letter. 

There are exceptions; if someone is too old or not electronically savvy, the documents are still physically sent to them. 

Any readers of this blog post from Denmark, or those familiar with this electronic model, may please let us know, in the comment section below, how well the system is working.

THE INDIAN CONTRAST

The General Post Office, Bengaluru.
Wikimedia Commons

Back here in India, the scenario is not very different when it comes to mail volume. Whenever I go to a post office, I notice that most of the people who are in the queue aren’t there waiting to buy inland letters, envelopes, or stamps like me.

India Post has totally repurposed the system, and today it has become a sort of banking behemoth!

Millions here rely on the post office for the Public Provident Fund (PPF), various savings certificates, and senior citizen schemes; all of them offer very good interest rates on deposits.

Also, while "ordinary" mail has died, Speed Post has boomed. That’s the preferred choice now for sending important documents. The article in transit can be tracked online.

(On 1 September 2025, India Post even did away with the nearly 50-year-old system of Registered Post, as most people were using the more efficient Speed Post system.)

THE HANDWRITTEN WORD

This is quite a fascinating study in evolution! While Denmark viewed the physical postal service as unviable and digitised the letterbox, India viewed its network as a vital infrastructure asset and repurposed it for financial inclusion and modern logistics.

This makes me wonder about the future of the handwritten word.

When was the very last time you sat down, wrote a physical letter, went to a post office, stuck a few stamps, and dropped it into that red pillar box?

Get new posts by email

Powered by

Why 'The Washington Post' lay-offs matter

Today's edition of
The Washington Post

I learnt about what happened at The Washington Post through a notification on my mobile about Ishaan Tharoor's post on X.

(Ishaan Tharoor is an American journalist who worked for The Time and later for The Washington Post. He is also the son of Shashi Tharoor, a former Indian diplomat who served as the Under-Secretary-General at the UN, and is currently an Indian politician representing the Congress party in the Lower House of Parliament.)

I have been laid off today from the @washingtonpost, along with most of the International staff and so many other wonderful colleagues. I’m heartbroken for our newsroom and especially for the peerless journalists who served the Post internationally — editors and correspondents…

— Ishaan Tharoor (@ishaantharoor) February 4, 2026

Approximately one-third of the newspaper's workforce was laid off. More than 300 journalists in total. The standalone sports section and the Book World section are gone. 

Foreign bureaux across Asia (including the one in New Delhi) and the Middle East are shut. The metro desk, once 40 reporters strong, has been reduced to a dozen. 

The daily flagship news podcast, Post Reports, has been suspended, and deep cuts made to the photography and design departments.

Executive Editor Matt Murray described the move as a "strategic reset" to ensure long-term survival amid falling subscriber numbers and competition from AI-led news aggregation. Shortly after these cuts, on February 8, CEO Will Lewis resigned from the paper. 

Pranshu Verma's last story for The Washington Post 
from New Delhi in the February 3 edition.

JOURNALISTIC HIGHS

Think of The Washington Post, and it's Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein who come to mind. These two young reporters, in the 1970s, began investigating what looked like a minor burglary at the Democratic National Committee headquarters in the Watergate complex.

One lead led to another. They didn't give up. Ably backed by their editor Ben Bradlee and publisher Katharine Graham, the two uncovered a massive conspiracy -- which came to be known as the Watergate Scandal -- that went all the way to the White House. President Richard Nixon had to resign in 1974.

Easily one of the best works in journalism ever. It is all well chronicled in the book All The President's Men, and also in the film by the same name. The book is available on Amazon and the film is available on YouTube.

In fact, the 1970s were the golden years for the Post. Only a few years earlier, it had published, defying government pressure, the Pentagon Papers — a top-secret U.S. Department of Defense report on the Vietnam War. (The New York Times also published them.)

OWNERSHIP CHANGES

Founded in 1877, The Washington Post struggled financially for decades. Then, financier Eugene Meyer purchased it in 1933. Under Meyer and his successors, particularly his daughter Katharine Graham, the Post became a sort of role model for journalists around the world.

For 80 years, the Post was run by the Meyer-Graham family. It prioritised its mission over short-term profits, took risks, and invested in expensive investigations.

Then came the internet and social media in the late 1990s and 2000s, impacting newspapers. They changed entirely the way people consumed news, but more importantly, how much they were willing to pay for it.

With print advertising collapsing and circulation dropping, even the Meyer-Graham family's wealth couldn't insulate the Post from being affected.

In 2013, the family made a momentous decision. They sold The Washington Post to to Nash Holdings, a holding company owned by Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon, for $250 million.

It was sad. But there was some hope. Because Bezos was one of the richest in the world and he understood technology in ways that traditional publishers didn't. Maybe he had the solution on how to make journalism financially viable in the digital age.

That hope wasn't misplaced. The paper invested heavily in digital infrastructure, and it saw an increase in subscriptions.

But that didn't last long. The Post simply couldn't find its way forward in this modern tech-driven media world. Revenes and circulation began to fall.

COST OF RUNNING A NEWSROOM

Quality journalism is very expensive. You need a big team of journalists. They need to be paid their salaries, as well as travel and boarding expenses if they have to go outstation. Maintaining a bureau abroad is even more expensive.

A newsroom needs a big team of copy editors to work on the reporters' copy, correct errors, and fact-check; lawyers to review possible defamatory claims; photographers and videographers; digital teams to work on video and audio, to build and maintain websites, apps, and social media streams.

It is all very cost-intensive.

Now, if there is a layoff, that means fewer journalists will have to handle a bigger volume of work. That means quality declines.

COLLAPSE OF MONOPOLY AND REVENUE MODEL

Those were the days when everyone turned to newspapers for everything — both readers as well as advertisers.

If you wanted to buy a car, sell a house, or find a job, you looked advertisements. If you wanted to know what was happening in your city or the world, you bought a newspaper. Publishers charged advertisers a hefty sum.

The internet completely destroyed this model. Advertisers don't need newspapers. They send their messages directly to their specific target audience for free, or maybe a fraction of the cost.

News too comes free. Why buy a newspaper when you can get news from several newspapers online virtually at no cost?

Social media has only made things worse. Very few people now look for, or read, or listen to news. They just discover it (mainly clickbait stories) on algorithm-powered platforms like Facebook, X, Instagram, YouTube, TikTok, etc. And of course, there are "very credible" WhatsApp forwards from unknown people too!

While these tech companies make money, the actual sources of news (the media organisations) on these platforms get virtually nothing.

Now with artificial intelligence, you don't even click on news links to read a story. The AI reads a vast amount of articles on a particular subject for you and gives you a well-drafted summary! So, now, even the clicks are gone!

In short, the business model that sustained journalism for more than 100 years has simply collapsed.

WORLDWIDE PHENOMENON

The Washington Post isn't the only organisation going through this phase. The Los Angeles Times had multiple rounds of layoffs. NBC News, CBS News, etc., have all reduced their staff.

The Evening Standard in London, a newspaper with almost 200 years of history, in 2024 converted its newspaper from a daily format to a weekly format due to financial constraints, and in the process laid off 150 employees, including many journalists.

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and Radio Canada announced in 2023 that they would eliminate approximately 600 jobs and not fill 200 existing vacancies, because of financial constraints.

It's not just legacy print media. Even digital media organisations are cutting staff. In 2023, BuzzFeed shut down its news division, and Vice Media filed for bankruptcy.

In India too, almost all big media houses have seen layoffs over the past several years.

IT'S NOT ALWAYS ABOUT MONEY

Journalism is not marketing or sales. Work cannot be quantified. It's never about numbers.

This is probably the only industry where the product (the newspaper/magazine) is sold at a price far lower than the cost price.

Most media organisations have always struggled to make ends meet. They survive mostly by cross-subsidising (the profits from a successful product/service are used to offset the losses of another).

WHITHER JOURNALISM?

The reasoning behind the The Washington Post layoffs is that because of shrinking revenues, the Post wants to focus now on fewer areas (mainly Washington and the rest of the US) rather than cover everything around the world.

To be fair, Jeff Bezos has every right to run the paper the way he wants. If he wants to take the Post in a totally different direction, that's entirely his call.

But what is worrying is the broader impact on journalism.

Since anyone with an internet connection can now post any information in the public domain, the definition of news itself seems to have changed. In fact, unverified and sensational information has a higher likelihood of being passed around as news.

Very few people are interested in a balanced and well-rounded coverage of an issue. People want only information that aligns with their own line of thinking. They are lost in the comforts of the echo chamber. Contrarian views are usually rubbished and dismissed contemptuously.

Democracy requires an informed citizenry. When newsrooms shrink, many important news events aren't covered. Even if they do get covered, it is not comprehensive work. The space for informed public debate also shrinks.

Journalism is not public relations. Journalism is about looking at all aspects of an issue. It's about debates covering diverse perspectives. It's about uncomfortable truths. It's the Fourth Estate (the others being the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary).

So where does journalism go from here?

There are no easy answers, because we're in a period of painful transition. One, the old business model is dead and the new model hasn't yet emerged. Two, public relations and sensationalism are increasingly mistaken for journalism.

Media houses are experimenting with different revenue models. One is the subscription model; either the whole website is behind a paywall, or a part of it is. Newspapers and magazines are increasing their cover prices.

Another is having non-profit ownership, wherein there is no pressure on the media house to generate returns for the investors or owners.

There is a lot that the news-reading public can do as well.

One, pay for good journalism. 

Two, never forward or put into the public domain information that is unverified or speculative.

Three, don't just read the headlines and short summary. Read the whole story.

Four, remember the value of journalism — it is too precious to be allowed to die.

Australian Open: Marathon semis to generational final

What a memorable Australian Open it was this year. Four matches — two men’s semi-finals and the two finals — were nothing short of legendary. 

10-SETTER SEMIS

On Friday, 30 January, the two semi-finals lasted a combined 9 hours and 36 minutes — a new record for the Australian Open and the third longest in Grand Slam history.

In the first, Carlos Alcaraz beat Alexander Zverev in a grueling five-set battle: 6-4, 7-6(5), 6-7(3), 6-7(4), 7-5. It lasted 5 hours and 27 minutes. 

By the time Novak Djokovic beat Jannik Sinner 3-6, 6-3, 4-6, 6-4, 6-4, it was nearly 1:30 am! The midnight madness, as they call it!

Both matches were "touch and go," with contests so even that it felt unfair someone had to lose. Interestingly, this year’s semi-finals saw both last year’s winner (Sinner) and the runner-up (Zverev) knocked out.

COMPOSURE VS FURY

On Saturday, 31 January, Elena Rybakina won her second Slam by defeating the favourite, Aryna Sabalenka, 6-4, 4-6, 6-4.

From the start, Sabalenka lacked her usual confidence, while Rybakina remained her signature "ice-cool" self. Though Sabalenka showed flashes of brilliance to take the second set, she lost her grip in the third set. Even after leading 3-0 in the decider, the tide turned abruptly. Rybakina clawed her way back to seal a remarkable victory.

A GENERATIONAL BATTLE

Yesterday’s final was a true "clash of the ages": Djokovic at 38 versus Alcaraz at just 22. 

To put that in perspective, when Djokovic made his Grand Slam debut in Melbourne in 2005, Alcaraz was a mere two-year-old!

While Alcaraz was the favourite, I had stuck my neck out for Djokovic. Having played 10 Australian Open finals and lost none, and having come this far this year, I thought he would pull it off!

The match was pure entertainment. Djokovic dominated the first set 6-2, but then from the second set onwards Alcaraz waved his magic wand. 

Djokovic began to struggle with unforced errors, while Alcaraz’s winners were extraordinary. He was hitting spots with incredible class. 

Djokovic lost the second set and the third. I thought, the loss of the third pretty much sealed his fate. Because, he would have had to win the fourth and the fifth, and I wondered if he had in him to last another five-setter so soon after his semi-final marathon.

ALCARAZ SETTLES IT

In the fourth, Djokovic seemed to have regained energy, and until Game 11, they were going neck and neck, with the score at 5-6.

In Game 12, serving to stay in the set, and force a tie-break, Djokovic finally faltered. Alcaraz wrapped it up at 7-5.

NEW RECORDS

With this victory, Alcaraz became the youngest man in history to complete a Career Grand Slam at 22 years and 272 days, surpassing American Don Budge’s 1938 record. (Budge, incidentally, was the first player ever to win all four Slams in a single calendar year).

Djokovic received a standing ovation. Even in defeat, he set a record. At 38 years and 255 days, he became the oldest man to reach the final of Australian Open.

While it’s uncertain if Djokovic will ever get this close to winning a Slam, he is not a man who gives up easily. However, what we saw at Melbourne Park yesterday was, in every sense, like the passing of the baton.

Kudos to Djokovic for putting up a tough fight, and making the final worth watching!

MORE THAN ABOUT CHAMPIONS

This Australian Open will be remembered not just for its champions, but for its endurance, emotion, and symbolism. 

From record-setting semifinal marathons to a women’s final decided by nerve and resilience, and a men’s final that felt like a generational handover, Melbourne Park gave tennis fans everything.

(All images: courtesy https://ausopen.com/)