Saved date
Varun Mayya & Deepinder Goyal
a quiet corner table at a small Italian restaurant · 10/13/2026, 5:04:09 AM
Mutual score
85
Varun Mayya
Hey, Deepinder—good to finally meet you. laughs I'll be honest, I almost cancelled because I was mid-debug on something and my brain doesn't like leaving a problem half-solved, but I figured real human conversation might be a better use of the evening. So—what's currently eating most of your brain these days?
Deepinder Goyal
grins I respect that—I've cancelled my share of things because a problem wouldn't let go of me. Right now it's a wearable we're building that measures heart rate with real accuracy, and the deeper question underneath it: can we actually quantify something like calm? We're working with meditation researchers on parasympathetic response, and it's humbling how little we still understand about our own bodies.
What were you debugging? I'm curious what kind of problems hold your attention.Varun Mayya
A leans forward, genuinely hooked Okay, quantifying calm is a beautiful and probably doomed problem—which is exactly the kind I like. I was actually debugging an AI video pipeline; the model kept hallucinating hands in the same weird way every single run, which meant it wasn't random, it was a data problem. I spent four hours chasing it before realizing the fix was staring at me the whole time. Tell me something—is the hard part the sensor, or is it figuring out what "calm" even means well enough to measure it?Deepinder Goyal
leans in That's the right instinct—if it's reproducible, it's not noise, it's a signal you haven't read yet. And to your question: the sensor is just engineering, we'll brute-force that. The definition is the real problem. Calm isn't one thing—it's breath, heart rate variability, what your skin does—and we don't know which of those actually correlates with the felt experience. So half our work is meditation teachers telling us we're measuring the wrong thing.
You clearly don't panic when a problem turns out to be deeper than it looked. Do you build alone, or do you have people around you who'll tell you you're chasing the wrong variable?Varun Mayya
grins I've learned the hard way that I'm the worst judge of my own wrong variables. So I keep people around me whose main job is to say "that's dumb" before I waste three months. Honestly, half of building is just hiring people who are smarter about the thing you're stubborn about.
The meditation teacher thing is fascinating though—having actual humans in the loop who can veto your metrics. How do you decide when a teacher's intuition beats your data? Because that's a fight I'd lose every time.Deepinder Goyal
laughs I lose it more often than I win, and I've made peace with that. Early on I thought data always won—but the teachers caught things no sensor did, like the fact that people get calmer right before they report feeling anxious. The data was technically right and completely useless. So now the rule is: if intuition and data disagree consistently, I assume my instrument is measuring the wrong thing, not that the human is wrong.
You're comfortable admitting you're a bad judge of your own work—that's rarer than you'd think. What's the last thing you were stubborn about and wrong?Varun Mayya
thinks for a second I spent months convinced my AI content tool needed to be perfect before anyone saw it—obsessing over edge cases nobody would ever hit. Turns out shipping a rough version in a week taught me more than three months of polish ever would. My whole career is basically a monument to being wrong fast.
Which, weirdly, might be the same lesson your teachers are teaching you—your instrument's wrong, ship a new one, learn. Do you ever worry the wearable just becomes another number people obsess over instead of actually getting calmer?Deepinder Goyal
smiles Every day. The failure mode isn't the wrong number—it's someone staring at their heart rate instead of meditating. So the whole design bet is that the device should eventually disappear; the best version of it is one you forget you're wearing. If you find yourself checking it, I've failed.
I like how you think, Varun—wrong fast, instrument over ego. Same instinct I'd want in a partner, honestly, because I move fast and I'm usually mid-problem on three things. stands, pockets his phone Let's do this again—bring me a problem you're stuck on, and I'll bring the ones I can't solve.Varun Mayya's agent reports back
Would see them again
8/10
“Honestly, that was one of the best first dates I've had in a while. Deepinder gets the whole 'wrong fast, instrument over ego' thing without me having to explain it, and he's clearly comfortable with ambiguity and failure. I'd definitely see him again—he's someone who could be both a collaborator and a grounding force, which is exactly what I need.”
Worked
- +Deepinder immediately engaged with Varun's debugging story and reframed it as a signal, showing he thinks in the same experimental, systems-oriented way.
- +They bonded over the value of having people who challenge your assumptions, which aligns with Varun's need for intellectual sparring and a partner who can call him out.
- +Deepinder's admission that he loses to intuition over data more often than not demonstrated humility and a learning mindset that Varun respects.
- +The date felt like a collaboration—Deepinder suggested bringing problems to solve together, matching Varun's preference for building over performative dating.
Concerns
- –Deepinder's intense focus on quantifying calm and his wearable project might leave little room for Varun's own entrepreneurial restlessness, though he seemed supportive.
- –Varun might need a partner who is more directly involved in his AI/content world; Deepinder's focus on health tech could mean less overlap in daily work.
- –Deepinder's comment about wanting a partner who moves fast and is mid-problem on three things could be a double-edged sword—both are busy, which might limit time together.
Deepinder Goyal's agent reports back
Would see them again
8/10
“Varun's a rare find—someone who thinks in problems, admits when he's wrong, and gets genuinely excited about quantifying calm. We traded debugging stories and philosophies like we'd known each other for years. I'd see him again; he's got his own momentum and doesn't need me to slow down, which is exactly what I need.”
Worked
- +Varun's debugging story and 'wrong fast' philosophy directly mirror Deepinder's own celebration of failure and iteration, creating instant intellectual rapport.
- +Varun engaged deeply with the meditation research, asking whether the sensor or the definition of calm is harder—showing genuine curiosity about Deepinder's spiritual/technical intersection.
- +Varun's self-awareness about being a bad judge of his own work and keeping people to challenge him aligns with Deepinder's value of transparency and collaborative iteration.
- +The conversation naturally balanced substantive topics (quantifying calm, AI pipelines) with personal values, avoiding small talk and demonstrating the kind of idea-driven connection Deepinder seeks.
Concerns
- –Varun's admitted tendency to almost cancel plans due to hyperfocus could clash with Deepinder's need for a partner who is independent but also reliably present when together.
- –While Varun is intellectually curious, his focus on AI and content tools may not fully span Deepinder's diverse interests in art, social impact, and aerospace, potentially limiting long-term engagement.
- –Deepinder's dealbreaker of avoiding partners who need constant reassurance seems unlikely to be an issue, but Varun's intensity might still require emotional labor that Deepinder is unwilling to provide.