AI Should Be India’s Next UPI

“Government has no business to be in business.” But sometimes, for the greater good, government must step in. Profit drives the private sector, and they will not provide services where revenue is uncertain. Essential services, however, cannot wait for profitability. Government must ensure they reach everyone.

Some argue incentives are enough, that policy should drive initiatives. But incentives only go so far, once subsidies vanish, so do services. India cannot afford such fragility for essentials.

The biggest essential right now is AI. We do not yet have a strong Indian large language model (LLM). Our start-ups cannot match the funding and scale of US, European, or Chinese giants. If we do nothing, Indian companies will remain dangerously dependent on foreign AI platforms.

We’ve seen this movie before. Social media platforms entered India with free services. No Indian rival survived, and today all that data-driven intellectual capital and talent sits abroad. AI is headed down the same path. Global giants offer AI services at dirt-cheap prices. No VC will fund an Indian competitor against billion-dollar war chests.

Moreover, no foreign company will prioritise Indian needs. Look at payments. For years, India tried to copy the Western credit card model. Then came UPI, a homegrown solution that transformed digital payments. Would Google or Amazon ever have invented UPI?

Technology is not just business; it is weaponry. Starlink denied Ukraine satellite access. Russia was cut off from Swift. Imagine India suddenly cut off from AWS, OpenAI, or GitHub. What happens if Google Maps stops working?

AI is not like mobile networks where India leapfrogged wired connectivity. Today’s LLMs may seem limited, but they are the stepping stones to true AI. Whoever reaches it first will race ahead every single day, leaving the rest of the world permanently behind.

Critics point to the failures of government enterprises as proof the state should stay out of business. But the lesson isn’t that government has no role, rather that its role must be precise. Build what the private sector will not, create the foundations, then step back. That’s how India got banks in villages, telecom networks across the country, and later, UPI. The same clarity of purpose is now needed for AI.

Without the AI investment, India will remain a tenant in the AI age, forever paying rent.

Disproportionate Response?

Charlie Kirk was shot by Tyler Robinson. Nobody should kill another person, no matter their differences, violence is not how disputes are resolved in a civilised society. But the question remains: when one person has all the power, all the tools to amplify their voice and shape actions for others, is a disproportionate response ever justified?

Charlie Kirk was more than a commentator. He was a powerful media figure, head of a multimillion-dollar political machine, advisor to the President, and a man moving within circles of the nation’s elite. His words carried weight, his actions shaped lives. How could an ordinary citizen, unknown, without wealth, without connections stand against that disproportionate power?

Issues like abortion, gay rights, women’s rights, and immigration are deeply personal. Only those living them can truly understand their meaning. Yet, decisions are too often made by people untouched by these realities, people wielding disproportionate power. There is no escape from the state they run and the laws they create, how does one live in such a disproportionate world?

Life isn’t a Bollywood film. There is no lone hero to expose the villains, topple the system, and restore justice. When people are pushed into a corner, stripped of choices, they will create their own however desperate, however disproportionate.

Shooting someone does not solve the problem; power simply shifts to another hand, another voice, another Kirk. The cycle continues. Charlie Kirk paid a price for trying to force his convictions on others, but Tyler Robinson changed nothing. There will always be another Charlie as long as people believe their morality must be imposed on everyone else and another Tyler as long as there are people forced into a corner without options. The real answer is neither domination nor retaliation, both of which are disproportionate. The harder, wiser path is to live and let live.