Predictive AI has slowly replaced existing laborious tasks. Do you think a technology of such magnitude poses privacy risks of peering into the lives of individuals too much?

Predictive AI definitely shifts the privacy conversation. It’s no longer just about protecting static data like your phone number or credit card. It’s about protecting what machines can infer about you. Machine learning models can analyze routine location logs or browsing habits, and accurately predict sensitive traits, from health conditions to financial habits, without you ever explicitly sharing them. Models require continuous, high-volume data streams to stay accurate, to replace existing laborious tasks, which naturally incentivizes intrusive surveillance. To keep this technology in check, we have to embed privacy right into the architecture. Ultimately, the goal isn’t to stop prediction altogether, but to ensure that algorithmic utility doesn’t cost us our personal autonomy.

Do you think modern LLMs are too focused on processing language at scale? Moreover, in the process, they are losing the ability to distinguish what information is at the crux of the question; especially when interpreting local dialects and linguistic nuances?

I firmly believe modern Large Language Models (LLMs) sometimes prioritize processing language over picking up what truly matters. In my own personal opinion, I would emphasize that language is not merely about words: context, culture, and intention and every language’s own humour and expression play a pivotal role in shaping it. Although their responses may be grammatically correct, they can miss the speaker’s actual meaning. Therefore, the challenge is not simply processing more data but understanding it meaningfully. LLMs must develop greater contextual awareness and respect linguistic diversity to communicate effectively across different communities. This has been brilliantly taken up by some local LLMs developed to tackle problems at their root.

Robotics takes concepts from many disciplines, turning theoretical knowledge into something practical. How do you think experience with robotics changes the way students understand what they learn? What role should schools play in making this kind of learning more accessible?

Experience with robotics helps students remember abstract concepts from maths, physics and coding very quickly as they can see them working in real time through the motion, balance, sensor responses etc. of robots. Robotics helps develop resilience within students. When a robot fails, students don’t get disheartened about it too much, instead quickly trying to find the bugs in the bot trying to fix them. It also helps bring different fields together, helping students have a headstart in fields like mechanical engineering, software engineering etc. and knowing how to connect them together. Using low-cost or open-source tools can help foster robotics in schools. Instead of treating it as expensive co-curricular club work, schools can add it as part of their core curriculum through STEM classes, so all students get exposure.

Schools have long been built around established methods of teaching, learning and assessment. When a new technology challenges these traditions, how do you decide what should evolve and what is worth preserving?

Ans) Change is the essence of life. It is the only constant. The only difference could be in the order in which change occurs. At best, certain events may be periodic or repetitive, like the revolution of the Earth around the Sun. Yet, even when a cycle repeats, it is never exactly the same, because change is inevitable. Similarly, in education, we cannot expect the world to remain unchanged while everything around us progresses. The basic tendency of human nature is to resist change, largely because we are comfortable with what we already know and practice. However, for anyone who wishes to be progressive, welcoming change is essential. The real question is not whether we should change, but whether we are willing to recognise the need for change and prepare ourselves for what lies ahead.
When we consider emerging technologies such as Artificial Intelligence, this need becomes even more urgent. We must be ready for the foreseeable future, because if we are not AI-trained, we risk becoming obsolete in a world that is rapidly moving towards technological advancement. Elon Musk recently suggested that the world could undergo a significant transformation within the next five years, highlighting just how quickly technology may reshape our lives and the way we work. Therefore, educational institutions must evolve with the changing times rather than remain confined to traditional approaches. This does not mean that we discard everything that has served education well over the years. The fundamental values of education must continue to guide us. Our responsibility is to embrace innovation, equip both teachers and students with the skills required for the future and ensure that we are not merely reacting to change when it arrives but preparing for it well in advance.

As technology becomes increasingly capable of answering questions, analysing information and even creating original work, what do you believe will remain distinctly human?

I believe that intuition is one of the most distinctly human aspects of learning, and it cannot simply be replaced by a machine. The term intuition is often misunderstood, as people tend to perceive it as an ability that can be replicated through information and analysis alone. However, intuition is deeply connected to human experience, observation, emotions and human connection. For instance, I may have an intuition about DPS RK Puram because I have a certain familiarity with the institution, its people and its environment, but can I claim to have the same intuition about Cambodia, a place with which I may have little or no direct experience? This illustrates that intuition is shaped by the extent and nature of our engagement with the world. Without human connection, there will always be a limitation to how intuition develops. Even when a machine can analyse patterns and make predictions about a particular situation, human intuition brings a different dimension to the process. Intelligence and intuition build upon each other; intelligence helps us understand information, while intuition enables us to interpret situations in ways that go beyond what is immediately evident.

At the same time, I believe we must understand that intuition is not always infallible. Fear and overconfidence, for instance, can both produce strong intuitions, but neither necessarily leads us to the right conclusion. This is why human learning must involve not only developing intuition but also cultivating the wisdom to question it, reflect upon it and balance it with intelligence and reason.

Over the years, the role of technology at DPS R.K. Puram has evolved. What changes in the way students learn or teachers teach are you most proud to have witnessed or helped bring about?

One of the developments I am most proud to have witnessed at DPS R.K. Puram is the establishment of the AI Innovation and Incubation Centre, which emerged from an intuitive understanding that education must constantly evolve to remain relevant. Sometimes, the trigger for innovation comes from a feeling that the existing environment is too limiting or that there is little room for new ideas to flourish. I personally experienced this when I first entered DPS RK Puram.  The room felt limiting in a way that had nothing to do with size but because it was cut-off from all human activities. That is not an environment in which I feel comfortable, because I believe education must inspire people to think beyond the conventional and explore what is possible. 

The same outlook can be seen in the International Baccalaureate (IB) Board, which demonstrates a willingness to revise its syllabus every five years and adapt to changing educational needs. Such an approach reflects the importance of continuously questioning the established practices and making room for innovation. For me, the real achievement lies not simply in introducing technology into education, but in creating an environment where new ideas can emerge, experimentation is encouraged and students and teachers are empowered to look beyond what already exists.

Looking back at your own school days and lives of students today, what is the biggest difference technology has brought in the learning experience?

Reflecting on my years in education, the biggest shift technology has brought is moving from information scarcity to complete abundance. Back when I was a student, our knowledge was defined by books, parents, teachers and peers. Today’s students navigate a borderless digital landscape, walking into our classrooms with a high level of tech-savvy awareness and global perspective. This creates an interesting gap. While students move at the speed of the digital age, formal schooling, having evolved less, remains tied to traditional frameworks and constraints of syllabi, time, and textbooks. Of course, this brings both great advantages and real challenges. Because of this, our role as educators has fundamentally changed. We are no longer just transmitters of facts because at the end of the day, education is no longer about imparting what we know, but equipping students to navigate what they discover.

How do you think we should tackle the fact that most youth in India are technologically unadvanced based on the fact that 90% of them have smartphones, yet 70-80% lack basic computer literacy?

We must urgently transition our youth from being passive consumers of technology to active creators and problem solvers.
Having spent the last 35 years in the classroom teaching Computer Science I have watched this crisis unfold firsthand. We are living in a dangerous paradox; our students have incredibly fast thumbs for scrolling social media, but they do not know how to format a professional document, analyze data in a spreadsheet, or understand the file structures behind the apps they use.
A smartphone is an entertainment and consumption gateway; a computer is a production tool. To bridge this gap between “device ownership” and “digital literacy,” we must completely overhaul our approach to technology in education.
Demystify the “Black Box” of the Smartphone. Expose the backend. Kids look at a phone as purely an everyday use device. We need to teach them how a smartphone works—file systems, cloud storage, permissions, and basic operating system. Show them how data flows from a mobile UI to a backend server. We need to Overhaul the Curriculum and kill outdated syllabus items.
We should focus on functional literacy. From Class 6 onwards, students should master cloud collaboration, advanced data handling, and critical digital hygiene (cybersecurity, phishing detection, and prompt engineering).
We should integrate AI thoughtfully. Instead of banning AI, teach them how to use large language models as coding partners and research assistants, emphasizing critical thinking over copy-pasting.
Since 90% of them have phones, we must meet them where they are. We should introduce coding and web development through robust mobile coding applications – so lack of a laptop isn’t an immediate barrier to learning.
The computer lab needs to be open, accessible, and integrated into non-CS subjects like History (for digital research) and Math (for data visualization)etc There should be Peer mentoring. Let Class 11 and 12 Computer Science students run “Digital Literacy Bootcamps” for younger classes or non-CS peers to democratize basic tech skills.

Imagine a 17th-century commander facing an enemy, armed with technology that today’s scientists can’t reproduce. Sounds crazy, right? Believe me, it isn’t. 

When we think of nanotech, we picture images of sophisticated microscopic equipment and high-end tech laboratories.

But what we often don’t know is that more than 400 years ago, nanotech was used. Not by scientists to conduct experiments, but by blacksmiths in caves to forge swords. 

These are the Damascus swords. 

Damascus swords used military technology so advanced that the swords could slice through armour, bend 90 degrees without snapping and literally sharpen themselves during combat. 

Modern swords are usually hard so that they stay sharp or flexible to prevent shattering. Damascus swords were both. Blacksmiths used ultra-hard micro wires of wootz steel to make the brittle core, keeping the sword rigid. Surrounding the wires were tubes of pure carbon – carbon nanotubes. Carbon nanotubes are cylinders made of hexagonally arranged carbon atoms, enhancing their elasticity and tensile strength. When the sword hit a shield, the nanotubes would absorb the kinetic energy, trapping the crack and saving the weapon.

Most swords become dull due to friction. Damascus swords used differential erosion technology to last 20% longer. Simply put, differential erosion tech allowed blacksmiths to etch intricate micro-patterns. This also influenced the sword design, as it moved towards more sabre geometries, with alternating bands of soft metal and nano-reinforced hard metal.

All of these techniques lead to one question: did ancient blacksmiths really invent nanotechnology? As per the modern definition of nanotechnology, no. Nanotechnology is the science of building, controlling and manipulating matter typically between 1 and 100 nanometers. But they did something remarkably more advanced – they learned how to manipulate matter on microscopic scales. It wasn’t magic. It was just a bunch of people refusing to stop experimenting with materials science, centuries before we even had a name for it.

And yet, there is still something unsettling about the story of these swords. The blades can be studied today, but the process behind their invention remains lost, passed down through blacksmith after blacksmith. And thus, that 17th-century commander wasn’t holding any advanced technology – he was holding a piece of the past that we’re still trying to understand.

– Akshara Aggrawal

Across the vast, invisible web of global networks, every click leaves a digital footprint. The internet may seem like an endless ocean of information, vast and anonymous, but to a skilled investigator, it is a map of interconnected clues, where even the smallest trace can reveal something about the person behind the screen.

At the heart of this digital map lies the IP address, a numerical label that helps devices communicate over the internet. Think of it as a digital return address. While it cannot usually reveal your exact location on its own, it can offer clues about your internet service provider and approximate geographic area. Other technologies fill in the gaps. GPS uses satellites to estimate your phone’s position, Wi-Fi networks help determine where you are based on nearby routers and mobile networks can estimate your location using cell towers. Combine these technologies and the digital world begins to connect with physical reality.

For agencies like the FBI, these digital footprints can become crucial investigative clues. Cybercriminals often use VPNs, proxy servers, or privacy networks like Tor to hide their identities and make their online activity harder to trace. But anonymity is not always absolute. Investigators can analyse server logs, compare connection timestamps and obtain records from internet service providers to connect online activity with real-world identities. Sometimes, all it takes is one overlooked detail.

One prominent example is that of Hector Monsegur. In 2011, Hector Monsegur, better known as “Sabu,” was a prominent member of LulzSec, a hacking group responsible for several high-profile cyberattacks. Despite using tools to conceal his identity, Monsegur was eventually identified by the FBI through digital evidence. His case demonstrated how a lapse in anonymity, combined with technical investigation, can help expose someone operating behind a screen. But the story took an unexpected turn: Monsegur agreed to cooperate with the FBI. For months, he continued chatting with fellow hackers while secretly helping investigators gather evidence, contributing to the eventual arrests of several members of the hacking community.

Of course, this technology isn’t just about catching hackers. The same location systems help emergency responders find people in distress, rescue teams locate lost hikers, navigation apps avoid traffic jams and delivery drivers bring your pizza to the right doorstep. The technology remains much the same, only the mission changes.

The internet may stretch across continents, passing information through countless devices and servers, but it is still connected to the physical world. An IP address alone rarely tells the whole story, yet when combined with other digital traces, it can help investigators piece together a person’s movements and identity. In this vast ocean of data, every connection leaves a wake.

– Govind Narayan and Yashraj

Martin Luther King Jr. once said, “We are not makers of history. We are made by history.” 

Over the centuries, graphic design has evolved. From Babylonian inscriptions pressed into wet clay and Egyptian hieroglyphs carved into temple walls to Figma files, it is like watching a beautiful design come together, one layer at a time. Our ancestors etched designs and graphics onto cave walls thousands of years ago to fulfil the true role of design: communication. When paper was first invented in China, designs became more readily available, and woodblock printing eventually followed. Slowly, typography and art started to come together, laying the foundation for the designs we see today. Gutenberg’s printing press, around 1450, was a revolutionary advancement for the rapid spread of designs and text, reaching the masses, which is the most important objective of graphic design. Technology kept advancing, from lithography in the 1790s to the steam-powered printing press in the early 1800s and then to offset printing, which made mass production faster, cheaper and sharper.

But more than the development of new technologies, the development of new thoughts, thinking outside the frame, matters in graphic design. Designers started developing new styles to convey their thoughts in changing times. Of the many art styles that have emerged over the years, a few are worthy of note. The interpretive form of expression we all appreciate in design today owes much to the Art Nouveau movement of the late 19th century, with its flowing lines and nature-inspired lettering. Various movements followed, ultimately leading to the Bauhaus movement, founded by Walter Gropius in Germany in 1919, which embraced minimalism, geometric shapes, and simple, new typefaces. This movement has helped form the basis of modern graphic design. Around the same time came the De Stijl movement of primary colours and squares and the Art Deco movement of bold symmetry and distinct sets of three. But while graphic design existed for centuries, the term itself was first coined in 1922 by William A. Dwiggins in his article “New Kind of Printing Calls for New Design”. Design today is used for advertising, and corporate branding was revolutionised by Paul Rand, who helped some of America’s biggest corporations, including IBM, UPS and ABC, shape their brand identities with logos. His marks were so well drawn that they still look fresh decades later.

Graphic design as we know it today uses a multitude of advanced platforms. It took off with Photoshop in 1990, which was used to build professional designs by the masses, and suddenly “undo” became a designer’s best friend. Microsoft Paint, which shipped with the first version of Windows in 1985, was also a simple tool the design populace could use, even if the results were not always masterpieces. The journey of graphic design ever since has been wonderful. After Framer came out in 2014 and Figma in 2016, graphic design became a discipline many practice today, from changing thoughts and ideas to UI/UX. It surrounds us and changes the way we experience the world. And the graphic designers of the past, our ancestors who once designed without knowing it, laid the foundation for the pixels of today.

– Nikunj Kohli

Socrates rightly said, “The secret of change is to focus all of your energy not on fighting the old, but on building the new.”

As the commander of the entire Greek army, you have to send a message to your allies an island away. You can either reroute your messenger and waste 3 crucial days, or you can send it through a risky route in enemy territory.

This is where Sparta’s scytale came in: a strip of leather wrapped around a wooden rod, with a message written across it. Once unwound, the letters appeared scrambled. The recipient needed a compatible rod to reconstruct the original message. This resembles a transposition cipher, which rearranges characters without replacing them.

Centuries later, Polybius formulated a systematic system of encoding for long-distance transmissions. His signalling system transformed letters into coordinates using a grid. In a modern English adaptation, A becomes 11, C becomes 13, and D becomes 14. Consequently, EXUN becomes 15 53 45 33. This representation could help transmit letters using visual signals across distances. 

The Polybius square was revolutionary because it was the first widespread fractionation system and also an example of brilliant encoding. Encoding, as a term, refers to representing information in a different form according to an agreed convention. Modern character standards such as Unicode follow the broader principle of representing text numerically, although they developed independently through much later technological advances.

Another fascinating technology that contributed to the evolution of communication is the Caesar cipher, attributed to Julius Caesar. This technique involved shifting each letter of a message by a fixed number of positions in the alphabet. For example, with a shift of three, A becomes D, B becomes E, and C becomes F. Although simple by modern standards, the Caesar cipher demonstrated how ordinary messages could be transformed into coded information to protect their meaning from unauthorized readers. 

In conclusion, the journey from the scytale to the Polybius square and the Caesar cipher highlights how the need for secure communication has shaped technological progress throughout history. These early techniques were not merely methods of hiding messages; they were foundations for the broader principles of information security, data representation and encryption that remain relevant today. 

52 15 33 34 44 24