Optimal Outcome

The AI hiring landscape is currently experiencing a frenzied, competitive surge, as startups battle to attract top engineering talent amid the dominance of industry giants like OpenAI and Anthropic. Recruitment tactics have become unconventional and creative, billboards featuring cryptic codes, personalized gifts, and unique experiences designed to stand out and appeal to the select few highly sought-after candidates. 

Despite sizable investments and strong financial backing, these startups often struggle to match the compensation and prestige offered by Big Tech firms, who can routinely outbid rivals for the best engineers. Reading this story made me wonder if the wisdom we need to dispense to any and all college-bound kid these days is to strive to become on of those candidates that companies will pay and arm and leg to hire. If in fact that is the plan, what must be true in middle and high school for such outcome to occur. 

Executives at high-growth startups, such as Decagon and Unify, are candid about the difficulties they face in filling essential roles. Beyond high-stakes gestures (like exclusive dinners or even bespoke artwork), the most reliable strategy for hiring has actually returned to personal networks. Founders often tap into their connections, relying on referrals and shared acquaintances to identify and recruit top talent. With hundreds of millions in funding and all the resources that come with it, these companies still find the pool of product-centric AI engineers to be limited and highly competitive, many of whom juggle multiple lucrative job offers at any given time.

The ideal candidate profile has evolved: companies now search for "AI product engineers" adept not only in technical skill, but also in rapidly leveraging new AI tools and fulfilling product management functions. Startups attempt to lure these professionals with the promise of meaningful ownership—acting as “mini founders” responsible for shipping entire products. However, the lure of major labs like OpenAI persists, and industry founders increasingly see little distinction between Big Tech and elite AI firms, making differentiation and retention even tougher.

Despite the current hiring boom and influx of capital, there is growing concern within the sector about sustainability. The abundance of well-funded startups and competition for a small pool of elite talent has prompted speculation about a potential bubble. Many founders warn that the surge may eventually slow, leading to a shakeout across the industry as capital and attention consolidate around the most successful and resilient players.

Tunnel Vision

In their recent Guardian conversation, Yuval Noah Harari, Rory Stewart, and Maria Ressa explored how to live a good life amid today’s social, technological, and political upheavals. This is a question many of us have these days. They began by reflecting on the liberal ideal that people with vastly different beliefs can coexist through shared basic rules, though the challenge remains that many ideologies want to impose their version of the good life on everyone. This tendency, whether stemming from organized religion, populism, or new technological platforms, continues to threaten pluralism and fuels division in an already fragmented world.

The panel delved into the dangers of unchecked technological advancement, particularly artificial intelligence and social media, which now possess the power to manipulate individuals on an unprecedented scale. Harari and Ressa warned that these tools can erode personal agency and communal trust, noting the struggle for integrity and truth in the current “information ecosystem.” Stewart added that financial, social, and geopolitical inequalities are worsening, as wealthy countries prioritize defense spending at the expense of social welfare, and conflicts become more damaging with minimal direct risk to their initiators. The information eco-system in the time of AI has become even more fragmented than it was before. With each person with access to ChatGPT, spilling their guts to it at different levels, chances are the world we each see is quite unique and tuned to us. The Google search bubble was never able to take it that far. You were in a bubble with others sharing that space with you.

Ressa voiced deep concern about the future of journalism and democracy, highlighting the rapid escalation in climate disasters, predatory digital environments, and the fading of meaningful public discourse. She argued that without strong anchors, such as journalistic integrity, community-driven reporting, and shared facts, society risks devolving into selfishness, manipulation, and loss of values. The group described a world where leaders are increasingly shameless and institutions suffer from eroding ethical standards, making it hard to shock or mobilize public action. This one I thought was interesting because who much shorter our attention spans have grown, how we each have a way to tunnel into whatever version of the world we desire and collective anything matters a lot less.

Despite the anxiety and mistrust prevalent today, Harari emphasized the urgent need to rebuild trust at every level of society. from media and government to individual relationships. He called on everyone to do their part to champion truth, avoid despair, and find hope in collective effort, suggesting that only by reconnecting with honest work, compassion, and vigilance against manipulation can people hope to live not just a good life for themselves, but foster a better society for all.

Thinking New

Minarets High School, situated in rural Central California, stands as a beacon of innovative education, proving that small schools can lead the way in reinventing high school learning. Born from the need for a local school and a desire to offer something distinct from neighboring districts, Minarets was founded with a vision for digital, project-based learning and has since earned recognition from major organizations like Apple and Google. Its foundation rests on flexibility, choice, and a commitment to fostering student agency, qualities that have attracted both accolades and enthusiastic student participation.

Central to Minarets’ approach is its embrace of technology and forward-thinking educational practices. As one of the first one-to-one laptop public high schools in California, students navigate a digital, student-driven curriculum rich in real-world experiences. Career pathways are embedded within Arts, Media & Entertainment, and Agriculture & Natural Resources, complemented by electives like Singer/Songwriter, Show Band, and even entrepreneurial courses such as Kickstarter. The school’s unconventional schedule, later start times and unique events like Community Days, encourage creativity, engagement, and meaningful connection.

A defining feature of Minarets is its genuine celebration of student voice and growth. The Student Bill of Rights and regular student surveys set a standard for open dialogue and dignity between students and staff, creating a safe environment for feedback and new ideas. Culminating experiences like Personal Brand Equity portfolios and the Senior Legacy Experience push students to showcase learning, set goals, and undertake passion projects connected to their community, equipping them with skills in communication, leadership, and problem-solving.

Looking ahead, Minarets remains committed to its founding principle of innovation, refusing to settle for standard metrics of success. Principal Rhonda Corippo and her team continuously question traditional models and empower students to help chart the school’s path forward. Thanks to this culture of listening, experimentation, and student empowerment, Minarets High School represents a compelling model for educators nationwide on how to create learning environments where every student can thrive.

Seeking Return

Park Slope’s iconic brownstones which have featured in countless movies are seeing a new wave of multigenerational living, with adult children and their families moving back in with parents, but this time under different circumstances. Families who bought homes decades ago for a fraction of current values now find their grown children returning, driven by high rents, a tight housing market, and the appeal of living in a familiar neighborhood.

The story highlights several families, like writer Una LaMarche’s, whose own move was largely shaped by her mother’s foresight and a sudden lease loss. She now lives in the upstairs duplex, while her mother occupies the garden apartment below, a reversal of the sneaky entrances of her youth. The arrangement brings both convenience ("I had to call my mom to let me in") and nostalgia, plus access to space that would otherwise be unaffordable in today’s market. As such things go, people have to find a way to make count as a net positive in the minds for it to work.

Other examples include Ella, a cooking influencer who embraced living above her mom and dad’s apartment; and Vanessa, who returned during her father’s illness, finding both practical and emotional comfort. These returnees appreciate the support and proximity, easy shares of food, tech help, dog sitting, but also contend with the complications of family dynamics, finances, and ultimately inheritance questions. I am from a time when the multi-generational families around me in India were starting to fracture. The oldest generation rotated around between the children's families but generally had a home base with the oldest son's family. I am familiar with stories of families who really got it right and just about everyone came ahead because of the shared resources. But there are as many other stories that do not end well. 

The article explores how these close-knit arrangements shape relationships, responsibilities, and futures. Some families work out contracts to clarify equity and end-of-life care, aiming to minimize potential conflicts later. Putting homes into trusts, renovating into multiple units, and having open conversations are common strategies.

The homes that people left in India were not quite the prime real estate that Park Slope’s brownstones are. As such the return to nest was far more unlikely. It seems like the kids in this case are simply not to achieve the quality of life they enjoyed while dependent on their parents. A big part of the calculus to share a home with parents is driven by the desire to boost status. Not sure if that is anything to celebrate.

Culling Tools

Hopefully in McKinsey companies still trust and their leadership takes such reports under advisement atleast. The headline of the report is that the reality of post-pandemic work is more nuanced than absolute headlines about a “return to office” or “remote revolution” suggest. According to the latest McKinsey American Opportunity Survey, office attendance has stabilized around 30% below pre-pandemic rates, and nearly 40% of American workers report either full or partial remote arrangements, a sharp but not total departure from traditional office norms. Flexible work, including hybrid schedules, remote days, and accommodative arrangements like flexible hours or job sharing, has become a persistent preference, now ranking among the top reasons workers seek or switch jobs.

This shift isn’t uniform across groups. Higher-income and better-educated workers are both more likely to prefer and have access to remote work, underlining the continued value of flexibility as a way for employers to attract and retain top talent. Women, regardless of whether they have children, are even more likely than men to desire remote work, often citing increased productivity and reduced burnout among the benefits. Meanwhile, the youngest workers express slightly less preference for remote work, appreciating on-site opportunities for mentorship and camaraderie, though they also report the largest gap between their remote preferences and reality.

The rise of flexible work is reshaping not just HR, but also real estate. With employees less likely to commute daily, demand for traditional office space has softened, especially in downtown cores. Real estate owners and operators are responding by designing more adaptable and tech-enabled offices, prioritizing amenities and layouts that foster collaboration, community, and well-being. Residential and mixed-use developers are also pivoting, providing everything from home-office upgrades to vibrant suburban districts designed to meet the needs of populations spending more time close to home.

Ultimately, the lasting legacy of flexible work arrangements is a new equilibrium, one that challenges both companies and real estate providers to move past one-size-fits-all approaches. The most successful organizations will be those that embrace tailored work models, invest in supportive infrastructure, and rethink what “workplace” means to better match the evolving needs and aspirations of modern talent. With the right strategies, this realignment offers major opportunities, for employers seeking talent, for workers seeking balance, and for cities and suburbs looking to reinvent themselves for a flexible future. In the tech industry many companies have combination of adopt AI or else and some variant RTO all days of the week or else has been used a blunt instrument to make up for deficient leadership grasping for straws as they flail around trying to meet the rising tide of stakeholder expectations. McKinsey can opine away for all they care, they still need the rough culling tools to reduce their operational bloat. 

Getting Real

We watched Something's Got to Give for the first time a few weeks ago and were chatting about how the caliber of the cast makes what would have otherwise been a garden variety chick-flick, actually shine. I could not image an cast of AI actors being able to match the performance. Emily Blunt, a leading figure in Hollywood, has spoken out strongly against the rise of AI-generated performers, particularly after seeing images of the virtual actress Tilly Norwood. Blunt’s reaction was one of visible alarm, calling the prospect of AI “stars” both “really, really scary” and a direct threat to the human heart of storytelling. She urged Hollywood’s agencies not to sign AI talent, emphasizing that such characters remove the emotional depth and connection that only humans can bring to the screen.

Tilly Norwood was created by Xicoia AI and actress-entrepreneur Eline Van der Velden, who unveiled the character at the Zurich Film Festival and touted her as “the next Scarlett Johansson.” The AI actress, constructed from composites of several young celebrities, immediately drew attention from talent agencies, igniting a firestorm of debate in the industry. Critics, including former child star Mara Wilson, raised ethical questions about the use of hundreds of real women’s faces to generate Tilly, arguing that these opportunities should go to real actors.

The Screen Actors Guild (SAG-AFTRA) also weighed in, dismissing Tilly Norwood as a computer-generated character with no real life, emotion, or experience. The union argued that while studios may find such entities appealing for their low cost and consistency, audiences remain fundamentally interested in authentic human performances grounded in real experience and emotion, qualities AI cannot replicate.

Yet this backlash overlooks the potential creative and practical advantages of AI-generated performers. Proponents like Van der Velden argue that characters like Tilly Norwood represent not a replacement but a new artistic medium, a form of digital sculpture or animated art. Throughout history, technological advancements have been met with skepticism, yet many become tools for new forms of expression and storytelling. AI talent offers opportunities for experimental narratives, digital activism, and global collaborations unconstrained by physical limitations. Rather than seeing AI as the end of human storytelling, we might view it as a collaborative tool, one that, in the right hands, can expand the canvas of cinematic art, much as animation, CGI, or even sound recording once did. The debate isn’t about erasing humanity from the arts, but about what new stories creative minds can tell with these tools. There is some merit to that argument.

Faded Glory

Almost no conversation with my mother is complete without her bemoaning the fate of Kolkata and how she hold no hope for anything changing for the better in her lifetime. She is known to be prone to hyperbole as a good old fashioned Bangali should be, but reading this post on LinkedIn was a different perspective on the topic from someone who has deep roots in the city.

As the author says, Kolkata, once the beating heart of British India and a cradle of South Asian intellectual and commercial life, has experienced a dramatic arc of promise, stagnation, and disillusionment. The city’s rise was marked by grand ambitions, cosmopolitan culture, and economic opportunity, drawing migrants from across the country to its thriving streets. For families like the author’s, Kolkata symbolized a leap into modernity and hope, an urban refuge where dreams could flourish and contributions mattered. This was all likely true even when my grandparents' were young.

The seeds of decline were sown when the British shifted the capital to Delhi in 1912, but the decisive blows came from within. The post-independence power wielded by Kolkata’s Bhadralok elite and, later, three decades of Marxist rule. The combination proved highly toxic. Instead of progress, political leadership imposed red tape, labor unrest, and an aversion to industry, freezing the city in outdated ideology as other Indian metropolises sprinted ahead. The resulting economic decay, factories shuttering, unemployment soaring, and GDP growth trailing cities like Bengaluru and Hyderabad, turned Kolkata’s golden age into a relic. This is the Kolkata I have kwon for as long as I can remember. The decline was steady but relentless. My mother claims is has accelerated into free fall now. I cannot speak to the validity of her claims since I haven't lived there for decades.

These forces of neglect were compounded by violence and lawlessness, affecting not only the city’s physical landscape but also the lives of families who had invested generations of work and hope. Personal stories, such as the near-fatal assault on the author’s father, a revered business leader, underscore how a culture of disorder displaced the city’s former commercial ethos. Areas once bustling with legitimate trade fell prey to extortion, chaos, and political strongmen. This betrayal left many families, including the author’s, with little choice but to leave, seeking dignity and opportunity elsewhere.

Yet, amidst the decay, Kolkata clings to a bittersweet hope. Communal rituals like the Pujo celebrations briefly revive the city’s old spirit, even as nostalgia battles with present-day disillusionment. Even that is tenuous at best. Most people I know including my parents leave the city well before Puja and return once things quiet down after Dashami. They don't like how loud, crowded, chaotic and commercial the whole thing has become. This is not the Pujo they knew and loved. Today, Kolkata stands as a poignant testament to squandered potential, a metropolis weighed down by its own history, yearning for revival but mired in the consequences of leadership failures and societal complacency. Its story is both a warning and a plea, echoing the universal human struggle between promise and betrayal, memory and forgetting. Maybe there is a reason my mother cannot stop talking about the fate of this city where she was born and is still home to her.