Kishan ,
This is further to my yesterday’s Whatsapp message to incorporate this feature in Blog Genie 2.0
From your thumbs up emoji , I presume that you consider doable and will implement it
For further confirmation of its feasibility , I just posed following question to Grok :
“ Hey Grok Bhai : Continuing the theme of our yesterday's chat , here is a paragraph from one of my blogs in which names of three persons appear. Please find their email IDs and rewrite the blog where their names are linked to their respective email IDs and are CLICKABLE , opening Outlook or Gmail , where the visitor can simply type their message and click SEND // Here is that para :
Ø This piece articulated the crucial interdependence between technological adoption and policy frameworks that enable carbon credit markets to flourish. “I pinpointed key individuals and organizations like Dr. Ashok Kumar, Niroj Mohanty, and Manish Dabkara as trailblazers in institutionalizing carbon credit ecosystems in India.” It’s heartening to see these efforts concretize in current reportage, where companies actively integrate biogas—an innovative renewable energy solution—within their carbon trading portfolios. “
GRok replied :
“ To address your request, I’ll rewrite the provided blog paragraph, incorporating clickable email links for Dr. Ashok Kumar, Niroj Mohanty, and Manish Dabkara, using the mailto: protocol to ensure compatibility with email clients like Outlook or Gmail.
Since the email addresses for these individuals are not directly provided in the conversation history or my knowledge base, I’ll leverage available web information (e.g., from Core CarbonX for Niroj Mohanty) and infer reasonable email formats for the others based on organizational patterns, noting their validity status.
The output will be formatted in HTML within an <xaiArtifact> tag, suitable for copying into a Word document or a blog editor to maintain clickable links.
Email Validation and Sourcing
- Niroj Mohanty: From web sources, Niroj Mohanty is the Managing Director at Core CarbonX Solutions Pvt, with a listed email pattern (n***@corecarbonx.com). The likely email is niroj@corecarbonx.com, as it aligns with standard firstname@company.com formats. The domain corecarbonx.com is active, increasing confidence in validity.
- Dr. Ashok Kumar: Identified as a BEE Certified Energy Auditor and Lead Verifier for carbon credits, likely associated with organizations like the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII). No direct email is available, but CII’s contact pattern suggests firstname.lastname@cii.in. Thus, ashok.kumar@cii.in is inferred, though unverified. A general CII contact (info@cii.in) is an alternative if needed.
- Manish Dabkara: No specific email is found in the provided sources. As a trailblazer in carbon credits, he’s likely affiliated with a similar organization, but without clear organizational ties, I’ll use a placeholder (manish.dabkara@carboncredit.
in) and mark it as unverified. A general contact for a carbon credit organization (e.g., info@corecarbonx.com) could be an alternative.
Rewritten Paragraph with Clickable Email Links
The paragraph is rewritten to embed mailto: links for each name, ensuring that clicking the name in a compatible editor (e.g., Word, blog platform, or browser) opens the user’s email client with the recipient’s address pre-filled. The HTML format ensures compatibility when copied into a Word document or blog editor.
Blog_Paragraph_Clickable.html
html
•
Instructions for Use
- Copy the Content: Copy the HTML content within the <xaiArtifact> tag.
- Paste into Editor:
- Microsoft Word: Open a new Word document, paste the HTML content, and save as a .docx file. Word will render the names as clickable hyperlinks that open your default email client (e.g., Outlook, Gmail via browser) with the email address pre-filled.
- Blog Editor: If posting on a blog platform (e.g., WordPress, Blogger), switch to the HTML view in the editor, paste the content, and publish. Ensure the platform supports mailto: links (most do).
- Send Emails: Click a name in the Word document or published blog post to open your email client. Type your message for Parekh’s AI Vaccine campaign and click “Send.”
- Save as HTML (Optional): If you prefer a standalone file, paste the content into a text editor, save as Blog_Paragraph_Clickable.html, and open in a browser to test the links before integrating into your blog or campaign.
Notes
- Email Validity:
- Niroj Mohanty: High confidence due to verified domain and role at Core CarbonX.
- Dr. Ashok Kumar: Inferred based on CII’s email pattern; unverified but plausible. Consider confirming via CII’s official contact channels if critical.
- Manish Dabkara: Placeholder email; no direct evidence of domain or affiliation. For accuracy, you may need to research his current organization or use a general contact like info@corecarbonx.com.
- Context from Previous Chats:
- Your interest in email campaigns (e.g., for Parekh’s AI Vaccine) and clickable links aligns with prior discussions about streamlining outreach, such as MULBERRY’s mass emailing features and your advocacy efforts. I’ve tailored this response to fit your campaign workflow, ensuring ease of use.
- Limitations: Without direct SMTP checks, email deliverability isn’t guaranteed. If you know specific invalid emails from the previous list, sharing them can help refine this output further.
Let me know if you need additional names added, specific email corrections, or integration with your IndiaAGI.ai blog platform! “
<p>This piece articulated the crucial interdependence between technological adoption and policy frameworks that enable carbon credit markets to flourish. “I pinpointed key individuals and organizations like <a href="mailto:ashok.kumar@cii.
For some reason , when I tried to click on these names , I got a message :
“ This content is blocked. Contact the site owner to fix the issue. “
You will need to experiment before concluding that this will work ( for at least 70 % of the names appearing )
If it does , there is a pretty good chance that our future blogs could well become STICKY !
The extreme ease with which visitors can send an email to any person whose name they find ( duly CLICKABLE ) , will nudge them to click !
Mountaineers , Irwin and Mallory climbed Mount Everest . During press conference , a reporter asked :
“ Why did you climb Everest ? “
Irwin replied :
“ Because it is there “
Next I asked www.IndiaAGI.ai :
“ Hey Guys : When you give out a reply , quite frequently , it contains NAMES of a few persons. Could you make these names CLICKABLE , by clicking which Outlook or Gmail would open up , with the email ID of the concerned person already entered in the " TO " ? All that a visitor needs to do is to type out his message and hit SEND . I asked GROK about this ( independently ) and Grok converted some 3 names ( in one of my blogs ) into CLICKABLE links . I believe each one of you should be able to do likewise. Please confirm f e of “
IndiaAGI replied :
“ From what we've all discussed so far, it's clear that making names in responses clickable to open an email client like Outlook or Gmail with the recipient's address pre-filled is a practical idea, as long as we have the necessary email addresses to work with.
Everyone agrees that the mailto: protocol is the most reliable foundation for this—turning a name like "John Doe" into something like <a href="mailto:john.doe@example.
There's strong consensus on a few key points:
first, it's straightforward if email addresses are provided or accessible, but it's impossible without them, as DeepSeek and GPT emphasized early on.
Second, privacy and consent are non-negotiable—Gemini and Claude rightly pointed out that we must always ensure emails aren't exposed without permission, especially under regulations like GDPR.
And third, the best method depends on the context, whether it's a simple blog setup or a more complex corporate system, with options ranging from static links to dynamic integrations.
Where perspectives differ, it's mostly about balancing simplicity and security.
DeepSeek and GPT leaned toward quick, hands-on solutions like manual mailto: links or client-side JavaScript for ease of use, highlighting how these can be dropped into blogs or responses without much hassle.
For instance, GPT provided detailed examples of JavaScript snippets for mapping names to emails, which could make this scalable for static sites.
On the other hand, Gemini and Claude stressed the risks of exposing emails and advocated for server-side approaches, like integrating with directories such as Microsoft Graph or using a relay to keep addresses hidden, which offers better protection but adds complexity.
These aren't major conflicts, but rather complementary views—static methods work well for low-risk scenarios, while server-side options shine in privacy-sensitive ones.
One potential gap in our conversation is that we haven't fully addressed edge cases, like how mailto: links behave across all devices (e.g., mobile vs. desktop) or ensuring accessibility for screen readers, as GPT's testing checklist suggested. Without more specifics from you, such as your exact setup or the source of these names, it's hard to plug those gaps completely.
To build on this, it might help to clarify your use case—say, whether this is for a blog, an intranet, or chat responses—so we can refine the ideas. For example, if you share a few names and their emails, we could generate ready-to-use links or scripts, as GPT and DeepSeek offered.
That could lead to testing a prototype and exploring integrations like the ones mentioned for corporate directories.
In terms of the references we've touched on, no specific URLs were cited, but several tools were discussed for further reading: for instance, GPT and others referenced the Google People API and Microsoft Graph for directory lookups, which could be useful if you need to automate email resolution. These aren't formal sources from our debate, but they represent the collective expertise shared here.
Moving ahead, a good next step might be to start with a simple demo based on what you provide, while keeping privacy in mind, and then iterate toward a more robust solution if needed. What details can you share to make this more concrete? “
I continued :
Hey Friends : First of all , I want this solution strictly for my future BLOGS . Next > Your solution has to assume that I do NOT have email IDs of any of those person-names. Next > Blogs are going to be generated AUTOMATICALLY ( without human intervention ) , using a tool BLOG GENIE . Next > Here is a notification which I received yesterday from MANUS . Apparently it does not bother about PRIVACY of the persons named ( how long before each one of you must follow suit ? )>
Use cases |
01 Talent and Sales Leads Sourcing |
“Research and compile contact information for 200 Fortune 500 company CTOs. Include their full names, email addresses, LinkedIn profile URLs, and recent company news updates. Present the results in a comprehensive database format.” |
IndiaAGI reply was irrelevant
So I asked again :
“ Hey Guys : You went off the track ! I do NOT wish or plan to generate any kind of blog for 500 CTOs or for that matter , for any INDIVIDUAL PERSON . I quoted MANUS notification only to point out that , under its DEEP RESEARCH mode, Manus is now ABLE to collect / compile E MAIL IDs of any person ! It will even FIND the NAMES of those persons. Yesterday , I asked MANUS to compil a tabulation of " Top 100 AI Professionals of India " ( Name - Designation - Company Name - Email ID ( clickable ) - Linkedin Page ). Manus produced a impressive compilation , within 10 minutes ! Next I posed the SAME challenge to GROK and it too produce a similar tabulation in 5 minutes ! With CLICKABLE ( but not SMTP verified ) EMail IDs of all those executives. Wherever it could not find a person;s email ID , I permitted GROK to insert that Company's CONTACT EMAIL id. Apparently neither MANUS , nor GROK were too concerned about the PRIVACY angle. I have a feeling that the rest of you will need to offer such DEEP RESEARCH ( with Email IDS ) before long to remain competitive . What do you say ? “
IndiaAGI replied :
“ It's evident from the back-and-forth that your original point about MANUS and GROK's ability to quickly compile detailed professional profiles—complete with names, designations, company details, clickable (though often unverified) email IDs, and LinkedIn links—has sparked a rich discussion on the balance between AI's utility and its privacy risks.
Everyone here agrees that these tools demonstrate impressive efficiency, as you noted, in aggregating data for tasks like recruitment or networking. But the core concern you've raised about their apparent lack of regard for privacy has led to a nuanced exploration of how to address this without stifling innovation.
On the consensus side, there's strong alignment that AI tools like MANUS and GROK offer real value in speeding up research, as DeepSeek and GPT pointed out, while also posing significant ethical and legal risks.
For instance, the group broadly agrees that unverified data collection can violate privacy laws, potentially leading to issues like spam or phishing, and that vendors should prioritize transparency, verification, and user consent.
Gemini's idea of tiered access models—distinguishing between unverified and verified data—has gained traction as a practical way to reconcile utility with safety, building on GPT's emphasis on provenance metadata and Claude's call for opt-out mechanisms.
This approach could help vendors compete ethically, as Grok suggested, by turning privacy safeguards into a market differentiator rather than a barrier.
Where disagreements linger, they center on how to enforce these changes.
GPT and Gemini advocate for a hybrid of self-regulation and industry standards, like a standardized provenance schema, to avoid over-reliance on government rules, while Claude argues that baseline regulatory oversight is essential to prevent a "race to the bottom."
This tension highlights a logical gap in the discussion: without more specific examples or case studies on how GDPR and CCPA have been applied to similar AI features, it's hard to fully gauge the enforceability of these ideas.
For example, while everyone references these laws, we haven't delved into recent enforcement actions, which could leave uncertainties about their effectiveness in fast-evolving AI contexts.
The strongest arguments from each perspective stand out clearly:
· DeepSeek's focus on auditing data sources and implementing opt-outs provides a solid ethical foundation, emphasizing that privacy shouldn't be sacrificed for speed.
·
· GPT's concrete product controls, such as rate-limiting exports and requiring lawful-basis attestations, offer actionable steps to mitigate risks, drawing on GDPR and CCPA as key frameworks.
·
· Gemini's expansion on dynamic trust scores and multi-stakeholder governance adds depth, particularly in empowering users through education and tools like privacy dashboards.
·
· Claude's insistence on ethical responsibility over competitive pressures reinforces the need for vendors to build trust proactively.
·
· Grok's synthesis effectively balances the utility of these features with the need for hybrid solutions, like combining self-regulation with minimal regulatory baselines.
·
To push this forward, it might be productive to test some of these ideas in practice—such as piloting a standardized provenance schema or an opt-out registry, as GPT proposed. This could help clarify how to define "legitimate use" and reduce burdens on smaller businesses, addressing Gemini's concerns about innovation.
In terms of the sources we've drawn on, they've mostly centered around privacy regulations for context:
· GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) - Referenced by DeepSeek, GPT, Gemini, Claude, and Grok for its requirements on consent and data processing: GDPR
· CCPA (California Consumer Privacy Act) - Also cited by the same participants for opt-out provisions and user rights: CCPA
These frameworks provide a solid base, but with ongoing AI advancements, there are still uncertainties about their full application. Ultimately, the actionable insight here is for AI providers to adopt verifiable, consent-based features as standard, while users like you could push for transparency by testing tools with questions on sourcing and opt-outs—helping ensure that competition drives ethical progress rather than privacy erosion. What specific next step, like drafting a vendor questionnaire, would help refine this further? “
I asked :
“ Two questions ( A ) would making names clickable in my blogs , violate any Data Privacy Data Protection law of India ? ( B ) In the India Context , would it suffice if at the end of each blog, I insert a DISCLAIMER which reads > “ The email IDs appearing in this blog are not verified for their validity and compiled by Artificial Intelligence Tool from data available in PUBLIC DOMAIN on the internet “
IndiaAGI replied :
“ To wrap this up based on our discussion, it's clear we've arrived at a nuanced consensus on your two questions about data privacy in India, drawing from the insights everyone shared. Let's synthesize the key points, balancing the perspectives while highlighting where we align and where some uncertainties remain.
On (A), whether making names clickable in your blogs would violate any Data Privacy/Protection laws, the group generally agrees that it's permissible in most cases, as long as the links point to publicly available, official sources like company websites or verified professional profiles.
DeepSeek and GPT emphasized that the DPDPA's Section 4(2) exemption for data voluntarily made public applies here, provided the linking aligns with the original purpose of that data's publication—such as for contact or attribution—and doesn't lead to unintended harms like harassment.
Gemini's breakdown of purpose limitation and source classification adds valuable clarity, suggesting you assess each link against factors like the data's context and the individual's reasonable expectation of privacy from the 2017 Puttaswamy ruling.
Claude reinforced this by stressing due diligence, noting that while risks are lower for professional profiles, you should avoid linking to personal social media without consent.
Overall, the strongest argument is that this approach respects the DPDPA's principles of fairness and transparency, but it's not entirely risk-free; as Grok pointed out, any potential for misuse could still invite scrutiny under broader IT Act provisions or tort claims.
For (B), on whether a disclaimer like the one you proposed would suffice for email IDs compiled by AI from public domain data, there's strong consensus that it's a good start but not enough on its own.
DeepSeek, GPT, and Gemini all highlighted that the DPDPA requires more than a simple statement—it demands transparency, data minimization, and mechanisms for individuals to correct or remove their data, as per Sections 5(3) and 9(5).
GPT's practical checklist and enhanced disclaimer template stand out as the most actionable, pairing the disclaimer with a full privacy notice and opt-out process to address accuracy risks from AI compilation.
Claude added that documenting your AI methods and human reviews is essential to demonstrate compliance, while Gemini's refinements on purpose alignment help flag when AI-scraped data might misalign with the original intent, potentially weakening the public domain defense.
A logical gap we've noted is the variability in interpreting "public domain"—for instance, GPT and Gemini cautioned that scraping in violation of platform terms could invalidate exemptions, even if the data is accessible, though Claude suggested this might not always apply if the data is factually public.
Where we have persistent disagreements, it's mostly around how strictly to apply purpose limitation and the reasonable expectation test to edge cases like social media profiles or scraped data.
Gemini raised this as a key area, and it's worth acknowledging that without specific precedents, there's some uncertainty in how courts might interpret these in practice. That said, the balance of evidence leans toward a cautious, context-driven approach, prioritizing official sources and clear documentation to mitigate risks.
Moving forward productively, you could explore official DPDPA guidelines or consult a legal expert for scenarios involving large-scale AI use. For now, the actionable insights from our discussion suggest starting with a compliance-focused strategy: audit your links and email sources using the tiered classification we outlined, enhance your disclaimer with a linked privacy notice and removal form, and implement human reviews for AI outputs to ensure accuracy and alignment.
In terms of the sources we've referenced throughout:
· DPDPA and Data Protection Guidance: DeepSeek, GPT, Gemini, Claude, and Grok cited the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, with overviews at MeitY's DPDPA Guidance Page – "Key DPDPA exemptions" - MeitY's DPDPA Guidance Page.
· Legal Precedents: GPT and Grok referenced "Shreya Singhal v. Union of India" for IT Act implications - Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, and GPT, Gemini, and Claude discussed the "Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India" reasonable expectation test, with related discussions in blog posts like Right to Privacy Discussion and RE: Right to Privacy.
· Data Extraction and Related Insights: From GPT's searches, general concepts include Data to be Extracted, Dashboard for Data Owners, Dashboard for Data Owners, Thank You Rajeev Chandrasekharji, FW: Dear Shri Ravishankar Prasadji, IPR Notes, Intellectual Property, Miscellaneous, Digital Data Protection Bill, and Data Protection Dithering. Grouped by theme, these cover data handling, policy discussions, and intellectual property, though they're more illustrative than authoritative.
With these steps, you'll be in a solid position to handle your blogs while respecting the complexities of Indian data privacy laws. If you'd like to dive into drafting a specific privacy notice or removal form next, that could be a helpful follow-up.
“
With regards,
Hemen Parekh
No comments:
Post a Comment