HiddenMind

If you're sick, and you die, you are cured

With all these attacks in Dubai, I hope Mia Khalifa is safe

While you are correct about the uncertainty of the job market, buying a house is still a good decision. If you lose your job after a few years and are unable to pay the EMI, you can always sell the apartment and repay the loan. You will still come out on top because you will get back the equity you put (down payment) + 100% of the increase in property value will belong to you.

Today my mom told me: “You have a good job in IT now. Let’s buy a flat on loan. You can easily pay the EMI.” I said no. Not because I don’t want a home. But because I understand today’s reality. In IT, even if you: - work hard - upskill continuously - become the best employee in your team You can still get laid off anytime. - AI is getting better every day. - Roles are shrinking. - Projects are getting automated. - Companies optimize costs overnight. An EMI doesn’t pause when you lose your job. Banks don’t care about layoffs. Stress multiplies when income stops but liabilities don’t. A home bought on heavy debt can turn from a dream into a burden very fast. I explained this to her and told her: If we buy a house, we buy it with cash. This isn’t fear. This is realism.

In every other walk of life, the honest majority bears the punishment designed for the dishonest minority.

@sabeer Deep rooted culture and childhood teachings of subservience.

What is India’s fascination with godmen - Sadhguru, Sri Sri, Amma, Ramdev? In most educated societies, this would simply be called cultism. Can someone explain this to me?

@priteshlakhani Like in every other walk of life, the honest majority bears the punishment designed for the dishonest minority.

Two new recruits joined and left within 2 days after getting their offer letters. Last month, another candidate took the offer and never joined. No drama. No explanation. Just wasted time. So we changed the process. We decided to share offer letters only after people joined. Not to control anyone. Just to protect ourselves from repeat no-shows. And today, we realized it still didn’t matter. This is why hiring feels broken. Not because companies are heartless, but because trust keeps getting abused. Every “rigid policy” is usually a response to something that already went wrong. People say companies don’t trust candidates anymore. True. But trust isn’t lost randomly. It’s lost one offer letter at a time.

3/3 Premium assets grow faster Earlier, the advice was to buy “undervalued” property far from the city and wait. In recent years, putting the same money into a prime, central location has outperformed that strategy. Buying in the outskirts is a bet. Buying in a great central location is buying a proven winner.

2/3 Bigger & premium property beats mass The top 1% in India has seen disproportionate income and wealth growth. Demand for 4/5 BHKs and 4,000+ sq ft plots has far outpaced demand for 2/3 BHKs. In some cities, prices are now inverted. Larger homes command higher per‑sq‑ft rates. Larger ticket size = higher ₹/sq ft.

1/3 Urban residential real estate has shown a few counter‑intuitive trends lately: 1.Poorer public infrastructure → higher valuations 2.Larger ticket size assets → higher ₹/sq ft 3.Premium assets → faster appreciation than mass assets Let me explain: 1. Poorer infrastructure = higher valuations We grew up believing: metro connectivity, wider roads, better infra = higher prices. That logic breaks down in centrally located premium areas. Poor public infrastructure there makes long‑distance commuting impractical. As a result, people must live close to work and social hubs → demand concentrates → valuations shoot up. Scarcity + compulsion > connectivity.

Sitting in a meeting hearing some leader ramble on about 2026 priorities endlessly. The same thing could have been made interesting and covered in just a couple of minutes. In the India corporate space, many people think that speaking a lot is a measure of their value or contribution in a meeting.

I too used to think that reading fiction is useless and one should rather spend time reading more "meaningful" books, but I couldn't have been more wrong. What is more important is the habit of reading. Fiction also teaches one a lot about the world, and it eventually leads you to explore non-fiction books as well.

Yesterday at a bookstore, I overheard a father tell his teenage son, who wanted a fantasy novel, “What good will that book do for you? You have 15 minutes to come up with an answer.” The boy walked away, shoulders low. They left without buying a single book. I’m still sad about it.

@ritujoon2j It is mainly because hiring in india is conducted with a very narrow mindset and requirements of having experience in the very same field. Otherwise, i'm sure people would love to explore different fields.

I have observed one thing while working with people from the US/UK: They explore their work life much more than we Indians do. One of my teammates started his career as a travel agent, then moved to software engineering, later switched to the medical field, and is now back in health AI. This is not so common in India, where people usually stick to the same field in which they studied. Is it because of the fear of learning new things and having to start everything all over again?

Yes @theliverdoc people hate you for that. And I am with you on calling out the fraud of alternative medicines. Great job! But they hate you also for being an insufferable person who CHOOSES to be unnecessarily rude and quarrelsome to even the most reasonable, humble and neutral people.

People hate because we make them question their long held beliefs. From Ayurveda, to Homeopathy, to Naturopathy, to wellness fraud & traditional dogmas in nutrition. Like Sam Harris said - “Confusion and suffering may be our birthright, but wisdom and happiness are available.”

@theliverdoc @GermanStrands Why? So you can diss it too?

@GermanStrands Hi which game is this?

OLED is such a huge upgrade. Once you have it, there’s no going back.

100% agree. @theliverdoc is an insufferable attention seeker who CHOOSES to be extremely rude and quarrelsome to even the most reasonable, humble and neutral people.

Big fan of @elonmusk but it is just ridiculous what he says at times. When the "Grok, put me in a bikini" trend was at peak, I got fed up of it and uninstalled X for a week.

@elonmusk Big fan of @elonmusk but it is ridiculous what he says at times!

Exactly

@nixxin Calm down man! @nixxin

Hi Deepi, are you baiting me? Sigh. Here we go again: The phrase “commercial announcements” stands out for me. Which means that you agree that the announcement is done, just not the “commercial” announcement. You know what’s actually funny...you've chosen to announce: 1. before releasing benchmarking data, 2. releasing preview devices, 3. sharing all the science (as you claim) 4. Making all the claims about brain bloodflow publicly. Especially for a product that claims to be somewhat scientific, the onus of proof is on YOU, not doctors. No one need to wait for you. YOU need to publish the research and proof in order avoid the criticism. You need their validation, they don't need yours. It's pseudoscience until you prove them wrong, and science if and after you do. So their criticism isn’t funny Deepi. It’s valid and needed until you prove them wrong. You don’t decide when someone can or should critique especially once you’ve chosen to put it out there. Free as in speech. Your launch playbook for creating demand before supply, announcements before commercial announcements, claims before data, maybe even curiosity via controversy… is kinda backfiring, is it? Maybe a little too much bloodflow to the brain isn't a great idea either. Btw I should clarify that this is not a un/scientific claim: it's sarcasm. It's also fair game. Premature launch will elicit “premature judgement”, and snark will attract snark. That’s life when you’re not surrounded by confirmation bias. I don’t know if you’re friends, but Bhavish is probably thanking you for giving him a bit of a breather. You seem to be grabbing at his Sasta Elon crown. Seriously dude, what’s with the “Until then, be curious, and cheer Indian startups? Your skepticism is valuable, but at the right time.” lol. Who are you to decide what the right time is, and what’s with the “Cheer Indian Startups” defense? You know that bit about “Patriotism is the last refuge…” etc etc, right? I know it didn’t work out well for you the last time you put out data about something, but it might be needed here, since this may be about science and all, and not data for (alleged) algorithmic exploitation that you brilliantly ended up benchmarking publicly as a reference point for all future conversations about the the gig economy. Well done with that btw. However, I’ll still give you mature advice for an immature tweet. Don't worry...it’s AI generated so it’s more mature than my response here. Since you’re using AI for (some) tweets, and probably haven’t hired someone for communications and crisis management advice, or aren't listening to them (I’m saying it again, you should, on both counts: hire and listen) try using AI for Risk Factors. For now, let me, as a wellwisher, do that for you. I’ve included a response from my Risk Analysis custom bot below (which I created after your Green Delivery fiasco btw), which has some free (as in beer) advice (because the subscription cost is externalised to me). This is useful especially when there’s the likelihood of there being some naive little kid on twitter who will tell the emperor he has no clothes. (He means well, btw, and believes in free as in speech). Sincerely, Nikhil P.s.: 1. Still a Zomato investor, despite everything. Thoda udhar business ko bhi dekh lena bhai. Stock price kaafi gir gaya hai, aur thoda focus bhikhra hua lag raha hai 2. Also, for the Rs 10 rupees per tweet people who will troll me with “tune kya ukhaad liya zindagi me?”, let me pre-empt you: nothing much. But, free as in speech. You and Deepi can ignore me. Here’s the Risk Factors AI response: Below is a public-perception risk analysis of Deepinder Goyal’s tweet responding to doctor/influencer criticism about the “Temple” wearable, using the context reported across recent coverage and his own post. Risk assessment (public sentiment + stakeholder reaction) 1. “Condescending tone toward doctors” (UGLY) The phrasing (“That’s funny, tbh”, “gentle reminder”) can read as dismissive of medical caution, triggering sentiment that he’s belittling domain experts rather than engaging with them. This may harden clinician skepticism and invite a “billionaire biohacking vs. science” narrative. Stakeholders: doctors/medical bodies, health journalists, regulators, general public. 2. “Anti-science framing: ‘judge later’” (BAD) Saying “we will share all the science if and when we decide to sell” may be interpreted as conditional transparency—i.e., science is a marketing asset, not a foundation. In health-tech, audiences often expect early validation signals (study design, IRB/ethics, methodology) even pre-launch. Stakeholders: scientists, research community, investors, regulators, consumer advocates. 3. “Streisand effect: amplifying the controversy” (MODERATE) By addressing “concerned doctors/influencers,” the tweet can broaden attention, converting a niche critique into a bigger storyline and encouraging more experts to weigh in publicly. This can intensify memes + skepticism cycles already visible around the podcast moment. Stakeholders: media, social audiences, competitors, potential customers. 4. “Perceived attempt to silence criticism / gatekeep timing” (BAD) “Your skepticism is valuable, but at the right time” can be read as “don’t criticize until we’re ready,” which tends to inflame watchdogs and medical voices who see early warning as their duty. That dynamic is already present in reported expert reactions. Stakeholders: doctors, patient-safety advocates, journalists, policymakers. 5. “Brand spillover onto Zomato/Eternal reputation” (BAD) Even if he says it’s not a Zomato product, public perception may still tie the founder’s conduct to Zomato/Eternal leadership judgment and ethics. Any ‘pseudoscience’ label can splash onto the parent brand and invite broader scrutiny of credibility. (mint) Stakeholders: Zomato/Eternal employees, customers, partners, investors. 6. “Pseudoscience headline risk (gravity ageing hypothesis adjacency)” (UGLY) The tweet’s defensiveness may inadvertently validate the frame that this is “claims running ahead of proof,” especially since media narratives connect Temple to the “Gravity Ageing Hypothesis” debate. Once “pseudoscience” becomes a shorthand, it’s hard to reverse. Stakeholders: mainstream media, scientists, regulators, investors. 7. “Regulatory attention risk: implied health/medical utility” (BAD) Even without selling, public discussion about measuring cerebral blood flow can trigger questions about intended use, claims, and whether the product may fall under medical-device regulation when commercialized. A combative public stance can make regulators more cautious. Stakeholders: regulators, legal/compliance teams, investors, partners. 8. “Trust gap: no pathway details (validation, trials, ethics, privacy)” (BAD) “Months away… if at all” plus “we’ll share science if/when” leaves a vacuum: people fill it with suspicion about validation rigor, ethics approvals, and data practices. In wearables, privacy and data governance are major trust drivers even pre-release. Stakeholders: privacy advocates, consumers, regulators, enterprise partners. 9. “Influencer backlash + creator economy pile-on” (MODERATE) Calling out “influencers” can trigger creator communities to respond defensively, turning it into a status/ego conflict rather than a scientific discussion. That tends to produce viral dunking and oversimplified narratives. Stakeholders: influencers, social platforms, journalists covering online culture. 10. “Elitism optics: ‘cheer Indian startups’” (MODERATE) The “cheer Indian startups” line can be read as equating skepticism with being anti-India or anti-startup, which can alienate neutral audiences who see scrutiny as part of responsible innovation—especially in health. (X (formerly Twitter)) Stakeholders: general public, policy commentators, startup ecosystem, medical community. 11. “Investor confidence volatility (signal of maturity/discipline)” (MODERATE) Investors may read the tone as reactive and worry about governance, claims discipline, and comms control in a high-risk category like health-tech. That concern is amplified by reports of significant funding/investment chatter around the initiative. Stakeholders: current/prospective investors, board/advisors, analysts. 12. “Employee morale/internal comms risk” (MODERATE) Employees (at Zomato/Eternal or the separate initiative) may worry leadership is picking fights with doctors online, increasing reputational exposure and making hiring harder for scientific roles. This can create internal unease about priorities and decision-making. (mint) Stakeholders: employees, candidates, leadership teams. 13. “Media framing: ‘Founder attacks doctors’ vs ‘Founder clarifies’” (BAD) The same tweet can be covered as a clarification or as a clapback; the “funny, tbh” increases the probability of the latter. Once the “clapback” frame sticks, subsequent scientific releases get viewed through a conflict lens. (NDTV Profit) Stakeholders: journalists, general public, investors, policymakers. 14. “Future launch risk: receipts will be used against you” (MODERATE) If/when Temple launches, any shortcomings in validation, accuracy, or claims will be compared to this tweet’s posture (“judge later”), making criticism sharper (“they asked us to wait—now look”). It raises the reputational stakes of the eventual evidence package. Stakeholders: future customers, reviewers, regulators, medical experts. Strategic recommendations (how to reduce backlash and keep sentiment constructive) 1. Reframe tone from “pushback” to “shared goals.” Replace “That’s funny, tbh” with a calm acknowledgement: “Doctors are right to demand evidence; we’re not asking anyone to trust claims.” This keeps experts from feeling attacked and reduces the “founder vs doctors” headline risk. 2. Offer “pre-commercial transparency,” not conditional transparency. Without making marketing claims, publish a short technical note: sensor modality, what it can/can’t measure (e.g., “indirect estimates vs direct CBF”), known limitations, and a validation roadmap. This directly addresses the “if/when we decide to sell” trust gap. 3. Create an independent clinical/scientific advisory signal. Announce a credible advisory board (with disclosed roles) and a plan for peer-reviewed publication or pre-registered studies. Even if early, “we’ve submitted protocol to ethics review / IRB equivalent” is a strong safety-and-seriousness cue (without overpromising outcomes). 4. Stop debating “who gets to critique when.” Swap “at the right time” with “critique anytime—here’s what we can share today, and what we’ll share next.” That de-escalates the gatekeeping perception and invites good-faith scrutiny. 5. Separate “Indian startups” pride from scientific validation. Keep patriotism out of evidence disputes. A safer line: “Innovation thrives with rigorous skepticism—especially in health.” This avoids the “skepticism = anti-India” interpretation. 6. Pre-empt regulatory concerns with a claims discipline pledge. Publicly commit: no medical claims until validated; clear intended-use boundaries; and compliance planning for whichever regulatory category applies at launch. Regulators and health journalists respond well to “we will not overclaim.” (mint) 7. Add a privacy/data governance teaser early. Share principles: user ownership, opt-in research consent, de-identification, retention limits, and no sale of sensitive health data. This reduces suspicion even before product availability. 8. Use a structured “Q&A” format instead of open-ended threads. Publish a pinned explainer: “What Temple is / isn’t,” “What we measure / don’t,” “Why we’re testing,” “What evidence we’ll publish and when.” It reduces rumor oxygen and helps media copy accurate framing. 9. Invite credible third-party replication pathways. Announce plans to provide devices/data access to select independent labs under controlled protocols. The perception shift is: “We want to be proven wrong/right transparently,” which is the opposite of “trust us later.” 10. Internal alignment: one spokesperson, one narrative, one glossary. Ensure all channels (X/LinkedIn/press) use consistent language: avoid “brain blood flow precisely” if the device estimates proxies; be explicit about limitations. Mixed precision invites “caught exaggerating” narratives later.

@GabbbarSingh Not seeking external validation is the biggest stress reliever

10 years ago when someone asked me what do I do, I would be glad someone asked, and I would rattle out my fancy designation followed by the org name. Frequently referring to the employer as “We”. Taking pride in acquisitions and new launches someone 3 pay-grades above me was responsible for. With time when someone asks what do you do? you be more humble, take a pause, check the context, to recollect what to say, to attract the least attention, yet sufficient respect. You keep it brief & resist the urge to discuss the business model of your company with the Foofaji.

Buying a big beautiful house in a great location, even if it requires debt and serious short-term cash flow pressure, is one of the strongest power moves you can make in your mid-career years. You upgrade your lifestyle and mindset, give your family a great life early, gain social capital, and live well while sitting on an appreciating asset that often outgrows the leverage used to buy it. 10–20 years later, you’ll realise it was the smartest financial decision you ever took.