I build trust infrastructure for AI.

What I build now

Three products, one idea: keep AI answerable to people.

Who really controls what AI decides about you?

Three positions I hold. Under each, the evidence that would change my mind.

Play it: how do simple rules build a world nobody designed?

Set the rule, seed a pattern, watch what emerges, and notice the only thing you actually chose was the rule. That's AI, too: a few people pick the rules, and the rest of us inherit the world those rules grow. New to this idea? read how the game works ↗

It starts running on its own the moment you reach it. Draw your own cells, drop a classic, or change the algorithm, and watch everything change with it.

Here's the catch, and it's the whole point: in Conway's world you can see the rule. Three numbers, right there. In a real AI model, you can't. That's exactly what makes "who sets the rules" the hardest question in the field, and harder than this toy makes it look. It's the question I work on.

Could you actually catch AI's mistakes? Take the oversight seat.

The model has already decided. You get a few seconds per case to override it, or let it stand. A shift of eighteen decisions. Watch what happens to you. The real metric, the Meaningful Override Rate, is harder to earn than this toy shows. That is the point.

Who is raising the AI?

A model is not manufactured. It is raised. Fed a childhood of data somebody selected, corrected by trainers somebody hired, given values somebody wrote down in a document you will never see. Every model in production grew up in someone's house.

We interrogate parents about schools and screen time, then hand our decisions to systems whose upbringing nobody can name. Ask who raised the model that screens your loan, reads your scan, or filters your news. There is an answer. It is written down somewhere, in someone's language, serving someone's interests. You were not in the room.

My work is making the raising visible and answerable: values written where you can read them, overrides that actually hold, a named person behind the machine's word. Not because AI frightens me. Because unaccountable upbringing does.

What am I writing about right now?

Essays, read in the open and half-formed on purpose. Come push on them. Browse all essays ↗

The measurement work lives as a proposed open standard, v0.1, at Sanctity: the Meaningful Override Rate.

• Is "human-in-the-loop" mostly theater? What would it take to actually measure whether a human is in command, override rate, not vibes?
• Every model has a constituency it never consulted. What would it mean to give the governed a vote?
• The EU AI Act is really a product spec. What does it do to how you build, from the inside, not the op-ed?

Recent

Where does my perspective on AI come from?

Not from an engineering degree, and not from IIT. Those came later. It started at nine, in a school computer lab in 1990s India, years before any of this had a name.

The living grid behind these words and the glider in my logo are the same idea I have been circling since then: a few simple rules, chosen by a few people, quietly growing the world the rest of us live in. The longer story →

The second source is geography. From that lab I went on to live in ten countries and travel to all seven continents, which is exactly why I distrust any single room deciding the values a model carries for everyone else.