Optics Over Innovation: How Delhi’s AI Summit Failed Builders
The recent AI summit in New Delhi was meant to signal India’s arrival as a serious global player in artificial intelligence. Instead, it exposed a deeper and more uncomfortable truth: we still confuse spectacle with substance.
If the accounts from founders, developers, and delegates are even half accurate, the event became a case study in how not to organise a technology conference. And more importantly, why political theatre and innovation rarely mix well.
Politics at Tech Conferences: A Misplaced Priority
Technology conferences are meant to serve builders, founders, engineers, researchers, investors. They are working spaces, not rally grounds. Yet in India, we increasingly insert political leadership at the centre of such events.
When the Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, visited the summit venue, the main hall was reportedly cleared for hours. Attendees including international delegates were made to wait outside. Exhibitors were locked out of their own stalls. Entry queues stretched to three hours. VIPs walked past sweating founders who had flown in to showcase real products.
Security is important. But when security arrangements paralyse the very event they are meant to protect, something has gone wrong. A tech summit should not feel like a political rally with side exhibits.
This is precisely why political leaders should not dominate technology conferences. There is little technical value they can add to detailed discussions on models, infrastructure, data pipelines, or AI deployment. Their presence shifts focus from ideas to optics. And once optics take over, execution suffers.
The Irony of “Digital India”
• The irony was almost painful.
• At a flagship AI summit in the capital of the world’s fastest-growing major digital economy, there were reports of:
• Cash-only payment counters in the age of UPI.
• No stable WiFi at an AI event.
• Registration systems crashing repeatedly.
• Founders who registered weeks in advance being denied entry.
• Demos failing due to lack of internet.
• Attendees unable to carry laptops or cameras.
• Even car and bike keys reportedly being restricted.
An AI summit without reliable connectivity is like a medical conference without electricity. It signals either a staggering oversight or a fundamental misunderstanding of what such gatherings require. If 27 countries witnessed these lapses firsthand, the damage goes beyond inconvenience. It becomes reputational.
Builders vs Bureaucracy
Equally worrying was the reported composition of the speaker lineup heavy on consultants and bureaucrats, light on product builders who have actually shipped global-scale technology.
India does not lack talent. In fact, across global campuses and research labs, Indians dominate. As many young entrepreneurs observe, the youngest and most ambitious crowds at cutting-edge programs abroad are often Indian. Our founders are building world-class SaaS tools, AI startups, fintech systems, and deep-tech research.
But when a global summit sidelines these builders in favour of administrative voices, it sends a message about priorities.
The same disconnect was visible when Sam Altman visited India earlier. Rather than engaging deeply with the structural challenges of building foundational AI models compute access, research funding, talent retention much of the public discourse became defensive and ego-driven.
We cannot take structural critiques personally and expect structural change to follow.
Security Theatre Over Substance
What happened in Delhi was not merely bad logistics. It was a symptom of a larger pattern: security theatre and photo-ops over execution and detail.
The West is not “winning” in technology because it is inherently smarter. It wins because conferences work. Because demo booths have internet. Because builders are respected. Because logistics are treated as mission-critical, not afterthoughts.
In ecosystems like Silicon Valley, political leaders attend tech events without paralysing them. The event does not stop. The main hall is not cleared for hours. Founders are not locked out of their own stalls.
Details matter. Respect matters. Functionality matters.
The Cost of Embarrassment
For many founders who attended, the dominant emotion was embarrassment. Imagine being an international delegate and leaving with stories not about cutting-edge Indian AI products, but about queues, WiFi failures, and chaotic access control.
That embarrassment translates into lost confidence. Lost investor conversations. Lost partnerships. Lost narrative control.
India has the market. It has the engineering base. It has the ambition. What it repeatedly struggles with is disciplined execution.
A Hard Question for India’s Tech Ambition
If we truly want to be an AI powerhouse, we must stop mistaking symbolism for strategy.
Technology conferences should be:
• Builder-first.
• Internet-first.
• Product-first.
• Detail-obsessed.
• Not VIP-first.
Until we decouple innovation from political choreography, we risk repeating the same pattern: high rhetoric, weak delivery. The Delhi summit was not just a logistical failure. It was a mirror. It showed what we value and what we still neglect.
India’s founders do not need grand stages and flashing cameras. They need stable infrastructure, serious conversations, and institutional respect. We can do better. The talent is undeniable. The potential is enormous. What remains to be proven is whether we are ready to prioritise execution over optics and builders over photo-ops.