Indian-Origin Man Leaves Google After 16 Years, Finds Microsoft ‘Refreshing'
Amar Subramanya got the opportunity to talk to Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella and Microsoft AI CEO Mustafa Suleyman.
In a major push to strengthen its Artificial Intelligence capabilities, Microsoft has hired 24 researchers, developers, and product specialists from Google DeepMind over the past six months. Among the notable recruits is Amar Subramanya, former technical head of Google's Gemini chatbot, who has joined Microsoft as Corporate Vice President of AI. His new role was confirmed through a recent LinkedIn post.
In his LinkedIn post, Amar Subramanya expressed excitement about his new role and praised Microsoft's work culture, describing it as 'refreshingly low ego yet bursting with ambition." As Corporate Vice President of AI, his responsibilities will include enhancing Microsoft's AI offerings, such as Copilot and Bing.
'Super excited to share that I've started a new position as Corporate VP, AI at Microsoft AI," Amar Subramanya wrote in his LinkedIn post. 'After only one week in my new work, I'm already feeling extremely energised. The culture here is surprisingly humble yet bursting with aspiration."
Furthermore, he compared the company's work culture to that of a new start-up and described it as 'fast-paced, collaborative, and intensely focused on developing really creative, cutting-edge foundation models that enable enjoyable AI-powered products like Microsoft Copilot."
Not just this, Amar also got the opportunity to talk to Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella and Microsoft AI CEO Mustafa Suleyman.
As soon as the post was shared, several LinkedIn users congratulated Amar on his new journey with Microsoft. However, his comment about Microsoft's work culture being 'refreshingly low ego" raised a few eyebrows. Many even congratulated him.
A LinkedIn user commented, 'Congratulations Amar! They are lucky to have you!"
Another one wrote, 'Awesome!!!! Congratulations, Amar." A person shared, 'Congrats! They're very fortunate to have you on the team."
Other Recruits
Apart from Amar, according to a report by Financial Times, other notable hires include Sonal Gupta (engineering lead), Adam Sadovsky (formerly senior director at DeepMind), and Tim Frank (product manager), who have all taken on leadership roles as Microsoft expands its AI division.
Microsoft Layoffs
This hiring comes at a time when Microsoft has laid off over 15,000 employees over the past two years. Despite the workforce reduction, the company continues to double down on artificial intelligence, with significant investments in tools like Copilot and automation. Internally, Microsoft has been urging employees to upskill in AI, with leadership emphasising that integrating AI into daily work is no longer optional but essential.
Location :
Delhi, India, India
First Published:
July 24, 2025, 16:03 IST
News viral Indian-Origin Man Leaves Google After 16 Years, Finds Microsoft 'Refreshing'
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scroll.in
7 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
India's embrace of dangerous facial recognition technology is great for AI, terrible for privacy
In February, India, along with France, co-hosted the AI Action Summit held in Paris. At the end, it was announced that the next edition will be held in India. In its naming, priorities, and focus, the summit witnessed a clear shift from 'safety' to 'innovation' as the principal theme in artificial intelligence discourse. This move aligns with India's lax regulatory stance on AI governance, even in high-risk areas like healthcare and surveillance-driven technologies such as facial recognition technology. In the upcoming summit, this shift will enable the Indian government to steer discussions toward innovation, investment and accessibility while avoiding scrutiny over its weak legal protections, which create an environment conducive to unregulated technological experimentation. Shortly after the introduction of Chinese start-up DeepSeek's R1 model – which upended assumptions about large language models and how much it might cost to develop them – the Indian Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology announced plans to develop indigenous foundation models using Indian language data within a year and invited proposals from companies and researchers under its IndiaAI Mission. While local development in these areas is still in the early phase, the domain of AI that has already seen widespread adoption and deployment in India is facial recognition technology. As India contemplates a sustained push toward AI development and will likely seek to leverage its hosting of the next AI Summit for investments, it is instructive to look at how it has deployed and governed facial recognition technology solutions. Understanding Facial Recognition Technology Facial recognition technology is a probabilistic tool developed to automatically identify or verify individuals by analysing their facial features. It enables the comparison of digital facial images, captured via live video cameras (such as CCTV) or photographs, to ascertain whether the images belong to the same person. Facial recognition technology uses algorithms to analyse facial features, such as eye distance and chin shape, creating a unique mathematical 'face template' for identification. This template, similar to a fingerprint, allows facial recognition technology to identify individuals from photos, videos, or real-time feeds using visible or infrared light. Facial recognition technology has two main applications: identifying unknown individuals by comparing their face template to a database (often used by law enforcement) and verifying the identity of a known person, such as unlocking a phone. Modern facial recognition technology utilises deep learning, a machine learning technique. During training, artificial neurons learn to recognise facial features from labeled inputs. New facial scans are processed as pixel matrices, with neurons assigning weights based on features, producing labels with confidence levels. Liveness checks, like blinking, ensure the subject is real. Still, facial recognition technology faces accuracy challenges – balancing false positives (wrong matches) and false negatives (missed matches). Minimising one often increases the other. Factors like lighting, background and expressions also affect accuracy. Over the past seven years, facial recognition technology has seen widespread adoption in India, especially by the government and its agencies. This growth has coincided with debates surrounding Aadhaar (the national biometric ID system), frequent failures of other verification methods, a rise in street surveillance, and government efforts to modernise law enforcement and national security operations. In this review, I have surveyed the range of facial recognition technology deployment across sectors in India, both in public and private service delivery. This adoption tells the story of an exponential rise in the use of FRT in India, with barely any regulatory hurdles despite clear privacy and discrimination harms. Locating India's regulatory approach While efforts toward regulating AI are still in their infancy, with a handful of global regulations and considerable international debate about the appropriate approach, regulatory discussions about facial recognition technology predate them by a few years and are a little more evolved. Facial recognition technology systems can produce inaccurate, discriminatory, and biased outcomes due to flawed design and training data. A Georgetown Law study on the use of facial recognition technology in the US showed disproportionate impacts on African Americans and tests revealed frequent false positives, particularly affecting people of color. In 2019, the UK's Science and Technology Committee recommended halting facial recognition technology deployment until bias and effectiveness issues are resolved. The UK government countered the report by stating that the existing legal framework already offered sufficient safeguards regarding the application of facial recognition technology. Civil society organisations have been demanding bans or moratoriums on the use and purchase of facial recognition technology for years, most notably after a New York Times investigation in 2019 revealed that more than 600 law enforcement agencies in the US rely on the technology provided by a secretive company known as Clearview AI. An impact assessment commissioned by the European Commission in 2021 observed that facial recognition technology 'bear[s] new and unprecedentedly stark risks for fundamental rights, most significantly the right to privacy and non-discrimination.' The European Union and UK offer regulatory models for facial recognition technology in law enforcement. The EU's Law Enforcement Directive restricts biometric data processing to strictly necessary cases. While initial drafts of the EU's AI Act banned remote biometrics – such as the use of facial recognition technology – the final version has exceptions for law enforcement. In the UK, the Data Protection Act mirrors Europe's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), and a landmark court ruling deemed police facial recognition technology use unlawful, citing violations of human rights and data protection, and the technology's mass, covert nature. The EU's AI Act, while not explicitly banning discriminatory facial recognition technology, mandates data governance and bias checks for high-risk AI systems, potentially forcing developers to implement stronger safeguards. The GDPR generally bans processing biometric data for unique identification, but exceptions exist for data made public by the subject or when processing is for substantial public interest. In Europe, non-law enforcement facial recognition technology often falls under these exceptions. As per EU laws, facial recognition technology use may be permitted under strict circumstances in which a legislator can provide a specific legal basis regulating the deployment of facial recognition technology that is compatible with fundamental rights. US Vice President JD Vance's rebuke against ' excessive regulation ' of AI at the Paris Summit in February telegraphed a lack of intent for the current US federal government to regulate AI. However, there are numerous state-level regulations in operation in the US. Canada's Artificial Intelligence and Data Act (AIDA) follows the EU model of risk regulation. Countries like South Korea have taken a more light-touch approach, with Seoul's AI Basic Act including a smaller subset of protections and ethical considerations than those outlined in the EU law. Japan and Singapore have explored self-regulatory codes rather than command and control regulation. The Indian Supreme Court's Puttaswamy judgment, which upheld a right to privacy, outlines a four-part test for proportionality to test whether state actions violate fundamental rights: a legitimate goal, suitable means, necessity (meaning there are no less restrictive alternatives), and balanced impact on rights. Facial recognition technology applications, like those that use the technology to mark attendance and carry out authentication, often have less intrusive alternatives, suggesting they fail the necessity test. Street surveillance using facial recognition technology inherently involves indiscriminate mass surveillance, not targeted monitoring. India's newly legislated Digital Data Protection Act, whose rules are currently being framed, permits the government to process personal data without consent in certain cases. Section 17(2) grants a broad exemption from its provisions for personal data processing, exempting state entities designated by the Indian government for reasons as broad as sovereignty, security, foreign relations, public order, or preventing incitement to certain offenses. In India, the primary policy document on facial recognition technology is a Niti Aayog paper, ' Responsible AI for All,' which anticipates that India's data protection law will handle facial recognition technology privacy concerns. However, it lacks detailed recommendations for ethical facial recognition technology use. It suggests the government should not exempt law enforcement from data protection oversight. It remains to be seen whether this recommendation will be followed, but this alone would be insufficient protection. Data minimisation, a key data protection principle that recommends the collection only of such information as is strictly necessary, restricts facial recognition technology by preventing the merging of captured images with other databases to form comprehensive citizen profiles. Yet, tenders for Automated Facial Recognition Systems (AFRS), to be used by law enforcement agencies, explicitly called for database integration, contradicting data minimisation principles. India's lenient approach toward facial recognition technology regulation, even as there is widespread adoption of the technology by both public and private bodies, suggests a pattern of regulatory restraint when it comes to emerging digital technologies. Rest of World recently reported on an open-arms approach that India has taken to AI, with a focus on 'courting large AI companies to make massive investments.' As a prime example, both Meta and OpenAI are seeking partnerships with Reliance Industries in India to offer their AI products to Indian consumers, which would be hosted at a new three-gigawatt data center in Jamnagar, Gujarat. These investments in India need to be seen in the context of a number of geopolitical and geoeconomic factors: data localisation regulations under India's new data protection law, the negotiating power that the Indian government and the companies close to it possess by leveraging the size of its emerging data market, how these factors facilitate the emergence of domestic BigTech players like Reliance, and most importantly, the Indian government's overall approach toward AI development and regulation. It was earlier reported that the much-awaited Digital India Act would have elements of AI regulation. However, the fate of both the legislation or any other form of regulation is, for the moment, uncertain. As recently as December 2024, Ashwini Vaishnav, the Indian minister of electronics and information technology, stated in the Indian Parliament that a lot more consensus was needed before a law on AI can be formulated. This suggests that the Indian government currently has no concrete plans to begin work toward any form of AI regulation, and despite the widespread use of AI and well documented risks, will stay out of the first wave of global AI regulations.
Economic Times
7 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Godrej Properties plans its largest-ever bond issue: Report
Godrej Properties, the real estate unit of India's Godrej Industries, is set to tap the corporate bond market later this month with its largest issue to date, three sources aware of the matter said. ADVERTISEMENT The real estate developer is likely to raise around 20 billion rupees ($230 million) through the sale of shorter duration bonds, with a maturity of three to five years, the sources said last week. "The company could look to tap the market after the central bank's monetary policy decision this week, in the hope that yields ease further," one of the sources said. All the sources requested anonymity as the talks are private. Godrej Properties did not reply to a Reuters email seeking comment. The bonds are rated 'AA+', and this will be the company's first bond issuance in nearly a year. Last September, it had raised around 650 million rupees through the sale of five-year bonds at an annual coupon of 8.50%. ADVERTISEMENT Godrej Properties has borrowed 25 billion rupees through bonds since September 2023. The upcoming sale would take its outstanding issuances to 45 billion rupees. The Mumbai-based firm last month acquired around 50 acres of land for premium plotted residential units in the Indian state of Chhattisgarh. ADVERTISEMENT ($1 = 87.2300 Indian rupees) (You can now subscribe to our ETMarkets WhatsApp channel)
Time of India
7 minutes ago
- Time of India
Retail investors dump 68% of Nifty stocks chasing smallcap crorepati dreams. Is this a trap?
Indian retail investors are selling their holdings in Nifty50 companies. They are seeking higher returns in small and mid-cap stocks. This trend is driven by impatience and the desire for quick profits. Experts warn against this strategy. They cite risks like volatility and poor governance. Institutional investors are buying the bluechip stocks that retail investors are selling. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads What's the psychology behind the sell-off? Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads The smallcap gamble The experts highlight a minefield of specific, often overlooked, dangers: Crippling Volatility and Liquidity Traps: "Smallcaps are inherently more volatile than largecaps, with lower liquidity and higher sensitivity to market or economic shocks," explains Karthick Jonagadla. This means portfolios can "magnify portfolio swings and potential losses." Sheth adds a critical point about exit strategy: "Smallcaps can be hard to exit in downturns. If there's a market correction or panic, these stocks fall harder and faster—and may not recover as easily." Questionable Quality and Governance: The mad dash for returns often means due diligence is ignored. "Many small and midcap companies may lack the transparency, consistent performance, and robust governance standards that bluechip stocks maintain," Jonagadla warns. "Retail investors chasing rallies often ignore these critical qualitative factors." The Peril of Herding and Stretched Valuations: When everyone rushes into the same few stocks, it creates a bubble. "As more retail investors crowd into the same set of smallcaps, these stocks can become highly overvalued, exacerbating the risk of a sharp correction when sentiment reverses," says Jonagadla. Sheth confirms that many of these stocks are now trading at "stretched valuations, without matching earnings support," exposing investors to severe valuation compression risk. In a high-stakes gamble for explosive returns, a vast army of retail investors has systematically shedded its holdings in India's most formidable bluechip companies. Driven by a potent cocktail of impatience, profit-booking, and the intoxicating allure of finding the next multibagger , they are abandoning the perceived safety of Nifty50 stock to chase the "crorepati" dream in the volatile, high-octane world of small and mid-cap numbers from the June 2025 quarter show that retail investors have pared stakes in 34 of 50 companies constituting the Nifty index, which means 3 out of every 4th bluechip stock saw small investors taking a bearish move is made all the more dramatic by the fact that many of these discarded giants have been stellar performers. Investors have been selling shares in companies like Bajaj Finance, which has rocketed 28.5% year-to-date, and defence stalwart BEL, up an impressive 29%. This paradox suggests a conscious, aggressive strategy: cash in the steady gains from the giants and redeploy the winnings onto the riskier, but potentially more rewarding, terrain of the broader is driving millions of investors to collectively turn their backs on stability? Market experts point to a confluence of powerful behavioral Sheth , Head of Market Perspectives & Research at SAMCO Securities , identifies a core sentiment of frustration. "Looking at the investment behaviour of the retail investors in the recent past, it seems that they are fed up with the ongoing consolidation in the largecap stocks," he observes, adding that this phase of sideways movement has been "unduly prolonged." For investors seeing small-caps deliver triple-digit returns elsewhere, the steady, single-digit churn of a largecap leader can feel like impatience is fertile ground for the fear of missing out, or FOMO. Karthick Jonagadla , Founder of Quantace Research, says retail investors may be exiting bluechip Nifty stocks in favor of smallcap and midcap names, hoping to capture outsized gains in those segments.'The outperformance of these lesser-valued segments in previous cycles can generate a fear of missing out (FOMO), often leading retail participation to surge in already rallying stocks,' he concurs, noting, "Retail tends to follow trends, and the recent outperformance of broader markets may have created a FOMO effect. Stocks that already ran up are being assumed to continue that momentum."For many, the decision is also tactical. Anand K Rathi, Co-Founder of MIRA Money, sees this as a "classic case of profit booking." He elaborates that it's a "common behavioral pattern where investors—retail or HNIs—tend to exit well-performing bluechip stocks to preserve gains and rotate capital into areas they believe have higher near-term upside or appear undervalued."However, Rathi issues a stern warning against this seemingly savvy move. "Investors frequently lose out on long-term wealth building while using this strategy," he cautions. "They enter risky equities without considering fundamentals and sell winners too soon, only to see their earlier holdings grow even more. Such reactionary investing, motivated more by short-term stories than by long-term convictions, may backfire."The exodus of retail investors has created a fascinating divergence when contrasted with the behavior of institutional "smart money." While retail sold, mutual funds increased their holdings in 33 Nifty companies, and foreign institutional investors (FIIs) were net buyers in schism is starkly visible at the individual stock level. In IndusInd Bank, retail investors shed a significant 1.10% of their holdings. In the same period, FIIs saw a buying opportunity, aggressively increasing their stake by a massive 4.16%. A similar story played out in BEL, where a 0.72% retail exit was met with a 1.01% FII institutional conviction suggests a fundamentally different thesis. While retail chases short-term momentum, institutions appear to be capitalizing on the availability of high-quality assets, perhaps seeing long-term value where retail sees limited near-term upside. Jonagadla notes that some retail investors may be selling because they believe "further upside is now limited" in Nifty stocks that have already run Apurva Sheth offers another layer of nuance. The decline in direct share ownership might not be a complete abandonment of blue-chips. "Some of the reduced direct ownership in largecaps may also be explained by a shift to SIPs and mutual fund investing," he suggests. "Retail may prefer managed portfolios, especially in volatile markets, leading to declining individual holdings even in top-quality names."While the chase for multibaggers is exhilarating, market veterans are nearly unanimous in their warnings about the dangers of this strategy. They describe it as "classic late-cycle optimism" and a gamble that exchanges stability for fragility."This is a serious risk during bullish times," states Anand K Rathi. "It may seem profitable to sell largecaps with solid fundamentals and reallocate a significant portion to smallcaps but doing so exposes investors to high volatility and concentration risk."Apurva Sheth echoes this sentiment, emphasizing the danger for the average investor. "It's a significant risk, especially for inexperienced or emotionally driven investors," he says. "By exiting diversified bluechips (like RIL, HDFC Bank), retail is exchanging stability for fragility."Perhaps the most significant risk is the abandonment of a proven wealth-creation strategy. "Historical returns demonstrate that a core allocation to quality bluechip stocks underpins long-term wealth creation," reminds Jonagadla. "Sudden portfolio shifts based on short-term momentum can compromise overall diversification, making portfolios riskier than what retail investors may realize."Anand K Rathi stresses that this behavior can be self-destructive. "From the perspective of portfolio construction, these tactics have the potential to sabotage long-term objectives," he says. The very act of selling a steady compounder to buy a speculative asset can be the costliest mistake an investor Anand K Rathi aptly concludes, investors should build their portfolios with a clear principle in mind: "Balance, not blind rotation is the key.": Recommendations, suggestions, views and opinions given by the experts are their own. These do not represent the views of The Economic Times)
