By a skeptic who should really know better by now.
last updated : 8 April 2026
I have a confession.
I have been falling terribly behind at using AI. Not just at using it effectively, I mean at using it at all. Side note – that is not to say I have been using my brain effectively – my brain can confirm that I have learned nothing new after the lyrics to Apna Time Aayega.
But AI and its growth have really thrown me. I can’t even imagine what it’s like in the brain of my machine learning engineer husband, who already finds it hard to keep up with new developments. I mean, I have always been a laggard when it comes to technology/the apps – my 2 year old nephew will probably have his own spotify account before I do – but there’s really no escaping how powerful of a tool AI is, or that it’s here to stay.
I learn something new about how people are using AI to make their lives and businesses better every single day. And honestly, I’m here for (most of) it. In just the last few days, someone I just met told me how she is creating her own personal assistant using openclaw – called Clawdia of course – and someone else advised me at a panel I attended to upload an image featuring the panelists into chatgpt so it could tell me who on the panel I should be reaching out to, given all it knew about me and my work (joke’s on me because it’s not very much).
In the first instance, I was amazed at how accessible creating sophisticated tools has become, if only one is willing to try. The second instance proved to me yet again how quickly and easy it is to fall behind everyone else who is using these tools. Sure, I could argue that I could use my own critical thinking to identify points of human connection, but it sure would be powerful to also add factual context from the internet.
So I write this as I resolve to think more, but also engage more (including critically) with AI tools. I have also been inspired to write thanks to this excellent read by Harnidh Kaur on using AI in the Indian context, using AI critically, and investment in the Indian AI ecosystem.
On AI and context
Harnidh provides tons of real examples of AI models trained in the West being irrelevant in Indian contexts, and also possibly causing harm. This is because the Indian context is significantly different in baselines, behaviours, consequences, resources and language, and hence has different needs than current ‘global’ models can service successfully. The most popular LLMs and agents today also peddle information with the kind of authority that most Indian users are taught to accept without question – with the exception of Gen Zs, of course – or critical thinking.
A few months ago, I dabbled with AI to help me create content on gender based abuse, and it frustrated me that all its ideas, words and indeed context was rooted in the West. The content was still somewhat relevant to my audience, but it was also incomplete – there was little talk of the role of authority, obeisance and imbalance due to scarcity in advancing abuse.
On AI and exhaustion
In her article, Harnidh talks about women using AI for productivity and/or to reduce their mental load. She also urges Indian users to build a habit of being critical of AI’s products. Big YES to both, but also – that sounds terribly exhausting??
For the last few weeks, I have been using chatgpt a fair bit in helping me redesign and implement a CRM system for a nonprofit. While it was funny in the beginning when it would get some things wrong and insist that I was not following its instructions properly, the occurrences have become frequent enough for my fairly fragile relationship with AI to fray pretty quickly.
Most AI interaction makes me want to alternately give in to its hallucinations and recommendations, and give up on using AI altogether. I know that neither is an option.
On AI and the future of work
AI is here to stay, of course, and it will irrevocably change how we work. Some advice that is making sense to me is from Board of Innovation, on thinking problem-first, not tool-first. With new tools being introduced all the damn time, it is very tempting to continue to experiment endlessly with shinier tools and solutions, but I can see myself getting overwhelmed with it very quickly. I also see myself getting dependent on it very quickly – I am tempted to turn to AI to create first drafts without fully having thought through what I want, and that’s a very personal bias I need to keep in check.
Where I differ in opinion from the same article is where it calls out that operating models are built for human intelligence – specially the governance, accountability and structures. And that AI cannot operate as just a layer on top of traditional structures. Maybe not, but the truth is also that AI takes absolutely no accountability of its output right now, so it makes sense for it to sit as an additional layer, and not be embedded immediately.
On AI and convergence of creativity
Do readers deserve to know whether the writer used AI? This opinion piece in the Indian Express says yes. And I agree. Access to advanced AI models is not universal yet, and AI-assisted writing creates a distance between the writer and reader that I’m pretty sure is not intended. AI generated writing is also very prescriptive – it favours certain writing structures, and its vocabulary is limited at best. I have yet to read AI generated writing that truly made me feel anything.
I’ve also found that human communication is becoming increasingly influenced by these specific structures, and more people sound like AI even when they speak or write. What a waste of our unique voices! I wonder if we will see this trend in the design world as well, as more designers start using AI more (it is not lost on me that this is already happening in the physical world as more communities and buildings look plain and boring because that is the least offensive, and the cheapest way of building).
There are obviously times when I can tell that a piece is AI generated. Heck, there are entire influencers on Instagram that are AI-generated. That are being paid to promote products to you and me. Let that sink in. Corporations would rather pay an AI-generated influencer than a real human to sell their products. On one hand it makes perfect sense because the AI-generated influencer will create the perfect ad every time and will be much easier to negotiate with. But on the other hand, I can’t help but lament the ‘unrealness’ of it all. Just how far away we are willing to get away from the potential discomfort of some human interaction, that we are willing to give up on the potential brilliance, connection and reality of it.
The counter argument to some of this is – what if this technology is democratizing expression for those who have ideas but not the quality of expression needed to get them across in the way they have imagined? I can think of many people in my personal circles who have become better at expressing themselves simply because they now have the words to do it. Which is great, but also begs the question of whether it would be more meaningful if the effort was made to get to the point of expressing oneself through the route of hard work. Perhaps, but also perhaps not?
What I will continue thinking about
Every time I read about what AI is enabling – both positive and otherwise, I can’t help but think about what this technology will mean for those living in a world that has not existed without AI. I don’t just mean young people, I also mean those of us who have become used to the convenience of being able to get our answers, food, and everything else on demand. Young people might be more equipped from an early age to use AI critically, but they might also grow up to be much more dependent on it than we can imagine today. Note – I am not an unhealthy skeptic of technology – I love some of it, I just don’t want my life to be more technology than life.
When you don’t have to do the intellectual work, what do you end up doing? Are we doomed to only consume, and demand more constantly?
At a panel of 5 women founders and funders in tech, two confirmed that startups in the third space were going to be the next bet, along with anything in hardware, because we just can’t know software’s trajectory from here on. So…that’s fun.
If AI primarily is not just an efficiency play, what does structural change, or a new system that uses AI beyond efficiency and tool adoption metrics look like?
I need to keep reminding myself that AI is not an actual being, and I should consciously not think of it as an assistant or person. I need to keep reminding myself that it’s a tool, and even though it is unlike any other tool we have known, it is still a tool. If I am not using it like a tool, I’m the product, not it.
In conclusion
There is no conclusion, oops! The point of this piece is to keep thinking, reading and writing about things I find interesting, and to keep adding to it, specially as a tech noob.
Tell me what you think – and what/who I should be reading, listening, and talking to 🙂
✴︎ now this 
Let’s have a conversation :)