The Barber, the Cat, and the Turn of Phrase
When I wake up unusually early, I use the time to read the newsletters I subscribe to in my email. Even if I have not opened emails from places I like for weeks, I like receiving email.
This morning, I read a fascinating piece on Word Smarts about "turns of phrase." It got me thinking about how the sequence of words changes based on where we live. As someone who has lived and studied outside the US, I often notice these differences when I write or speak. My idiom knowledge is closer to British English, but there are thousands of Indian idioms that color my thinking.
One Telugu saying came to mind while reading about these English turns of phrase: Panileni mangali pilli tala gorigadanta.
❖
The Meaning
Translated literally, it means: "A barber without work shaved the cat's hair."
It is a specific turn of phrase used to describe someone doing useless work just to look busy. But my elders had a way of flipping it. To them, it was a reminder to use your time well. Even if work is slow, find something productive to do rather than inventing tasks.
We often say "no use crying over spilt milk" in the US. It is practical. But sometimes I miss the vivid imagery of the idioms back home.
Recommended Reading: If you enjoy language as much as I do, check out the Word Smarts article on turns of phrase here: Word Smarts: Turns of Phrase.
What turns of phrase do you remember from your childhood?
Who Decided Your Favorite Color? (And Why You Can't Escape It)
What role does color play in your life? It is a strange negotiation. Somehow, either you decide, or someone else decides for you, what your “favorite color” is.
It starts innocently. You pick a blue shirt. It looks good. You buy another. A few years pass, and suddenly, you are “The Blue Shirt Guy.” Then, the trap snaps shut: The moment you try to change—maybe you experiment with a bold new shade—your spouse or friends hate it. You have been branded.
The Illusion of Choice
I have observed that we have less agency here than we think. Clothing companies seem to act as a cartel, releasing the exact same “new” colors every year.
One year, I was inexplicably fascinated by fluorescent green. It was everywhere, so it was in my closet. But my safe zone remains firm: Blue, Pink, and Red for shirts. But pants? I tried. I really did. But I just couldn't pull off red or pink pants.
Pantone’s “Blank Canvas”
If you feel stuck in your color palette, there is good news. The industry has decided to hit the reset button.
In a recent article by Rachel Kurzius in The Washington Post, it was announced that Pantone’s 2026 Color of the Year is… nothing. Well, technically, it is “Cloud Dancer.”
For the first time, a white shade has received the designation. According to Leatrice Eiseman, executive director of the Pantone Color Institute, it is meant to be a “whisper of calm in a noisy world”.
A Chance to Reset?
Rachel Kurzius notes that this isn't just a lack of color; it signifies a “blank canvas, opening up new avenues and ways of thinking”.
Maybe that is the permission we need. If the world’s color authority says the trend is a “blank canvas,” perhaps we can finally retire the blue shirts and fluorescent green phases. Or maybe, just maybe, 2026 is the year I finally pull off the red pants.
❖
Thought for the day: Are you wearing that color because you love it, or because everyone expects you to?
Sources
- Kurzius, Rachel. “Pantone makes a surprising choice for its 2026 color of the year.” The Washington Post, 11 Dec. 2025.
The Doorman Fallacy: Why Automating “Tasks” Can Kill Your Value
If you define a job narrowly enough, you can automate anything. But you might lose the only thing that actually creates value.
There is a brilliant concept from behavioral economist Rory Sutherland called “The Doorman Fallacy.” It explains perfectly why so many companies are getting AI adoption wrong. They are looking for efficiency, but they are accidentally destroying their brand's signaling power.
What is the Fallacy?
Sutherland explains it like this: If a consultant looks at a hotel doorman, they might define his role as “opening the door.”
If that is the definition, the solution is obvious: Install an automatic sliding door. It is cheaper, faster, and never takes a break. But then, the hotel starts losing money. Why? Because the doorman wasn't just opening the door. He was providing security, recognition, and status.
The AI Lesson: Don't Be the Automatic Door
Right now, C-Suites are looking at their workforce like that consultant. They are asking, “Can AI write this code?” or “Can AI write this email?”
The answer is yes. But if you replace your people with AI, you are just installing automatic doors. You lose the judgment, the context, and the relationship.
The “Ready Thought” Strategy
We shouldn't protect the “task” of opening the door. That should be easy. The goal is to train your people to be AI-Savvy so they can stop doing the robotic work and start doing the human work.
The winning formula: Use AI to handle the logistics (the door opening), so the human can focus on the hospitality (the welcome). Use AI to generate the data, but keep the human to interpret the nuance.
Train Them to Remain Human
This profession—the “Doorman,” the "Advisor,” the “Marketer”—has survived for ages not because of the mechanical tasks we do, but because of the trust we engender.
❖
My advice? Teach your teams to master the tools (AI), but grade them on their humanity. If they use AI to become faster robots, they are redundant. If they use AI to become more attentive humans, they are irreplaceable.
Sources
- Heywood, Brady. “What is the Doorman Fallacy?” YouTube, 19 Aug. 2025, Watch the Video.
 
The New Axiom: When Expertise Meets Unconventional Value
Shashi | 2025-12-06 | ReadyThoughts.com
Inspired by the reporting of Ben Cohen in The Wall Street Journal.
The Greatest Liability in Expertise is Certainty
The collaboration between Ken Ono and Carina Hong at Axiom Math is not a sentimental story; it is a profound lesson in prioritizing **Exponential Business Value** over secure, linear careers.
The True Cost of Certainty
Ken Ono, a renowned mathematician, once expressed skepticism about AI’s capacity for original discovery. Yet, at age 57, he left his tenured position at UVA to join Axiom Math, a startup founded by his former student, Carina Hong.
The common knowledge take is that AI automates tasks. The thought leader take is this: **The highest Business Value creation today is not automating existing production but accelerating the speed of intellectual discovery itself**.
Professor Ono’s pivot is a public acknowledgment that the exponential value offered by Axiom Math—to build an AI capable of generating new mathematical truths—warrants dismantling decades of personal conviction. He is demonstrating that if an innovation challenges the source of creation, the highest-value move is to guide that change, not defend the status quo.
Carina Hong: Rejecting the Conventional Summit
Carina Hong, 24, abandoned an already high-value, dual J.D./Ph.D. path at Stanford. She recognized that **Business Value scales with the scope of the problem solved, not the number of degrees earned**.
Her company is attempting to generate fundamental new mathematical knowledge—a task that underpins all engineering, science, and advanced AI. This potential for non-linear return far exceeds the incremental value of any conventional professional career.
Thought Leader Take: The Axiom of Value
This partnership is proof that **if your organizational structure or personal conviction cannot adapt when a fundamental source of creation shifts, your expertise becomes a historical artifact, not a competitive asset.** The real value is realized at the intersection of foundational expertise (Ono) and a willingness to completely rethink the underlying infrastructure of knowledge creation (Hong).
Key Facts on Axiom Math
- Founder: Carina Hong (Letong Hong)
- Founding Mathematician: Ken Ono
- Goal: Building an AI to discover and prove mathematical theorems.
- Business Value: Accelerating fundamental mathematical knowledge, a basis for all science and technology.
This paradigm shift proves that true intellectual value demands participation in the future, regardless of one's past stature.
More Recent Articles
|
