Latest news with #Redditor
Yahoo
13 hours ago
- Yahoo
NJ dateless wonders whine they can't land love — because New Yorkers are stuck up about traveling there: ‘Five subway stop limit'
He lives near Montclair, but to New York ladies — it might as well be another time zone. Frustrated with his local dating scene, one New Jerseyan took to Reddit to discuss his dating difficulties. He explained that a majority of his matches on dating apps come from women based in the boroughs of NYC, and he suspects that often, women reject him because of his location. 'Once they find out I'm in Jersey, a lot of them just lose interest,' he bemoaned. 'Some even say it straight up: 'Oh, you're in Jersey?' Like I live in a different country or something.' The Redditor said he's based in North Caldwell, N.J., and has a car, so he's willing to drive the 20 or so miles or meet potential paramours halfway — if they're willing. The trouble is, they're usually not. Jessica, a 24-year-old living in Crown Heights, told The Post that she routinely swipes left on New Jerseyans she encounters on the apps. 'It's just too far,' she says. And she's not alone. Hundreds of women chimed in under the Reddit post, looking to give the daydreaming dater a much-needed reality check about the actuality of the NYC dating scene. 'People barely want to travel neighborhoods for a relationship, let alone to another state,' one commenter said. 'No one wants a 'long-distance' relationship, especially when there are so many eligible people a subway ride or walk away,' agreed another. 'When I first moved to New York, I lived in Washington Heights,' shared another still-traumatized single. 'I made the mistake of going on one date in Bay Ridge. Never again. The subway trip back took me longer than the drive between Baltimore and Philadelphia. From that moment forward, I held a 5 subway stops limit for dates.' 'I'm not going to NJ. It's not an 'ew, Jersey' thing, it's a logistics thing,' one woman said. Countless commenters also added that for many women, trekking out to New Jersey means taking public transportation, which can sometimes be dangerous or emotionally draining. While some New Jerseyans like this romantically-ruined Redditor face what he called 'geo-filtering,' AKA women rejecting too-remote matches, others find a way to win out and meet their dates in the middle — but make no mistake, they're still guarded about dating New Yorkers. The Post has reached out to the original Redditor for comment. Vinayak, a 24-year-old from Paramus who's currently dating a New Yorker, told The Post that initially, he was cautious, simply because of the time, cost and effort associated with traveling to the city. 'Dating in New York worried me at first because there's a huge time cost when it comes to dating in and around NYC, specifically from Jersey. I also feel like people in New York are more judgmental, and knowing that, I was a little more wary,' he said. 'The time commitment to dating in New York has definitely stopped me from seeing other people on Hinge before.' The New Jerseyan added that when he was first dating his current girlfriend, who was living in Yonkers at the time, they often met in the middle in Manhattan at first, so they each faced the hour-ish commute — pick your poison, Metro North trains or Port Authority-bound buses? 'Crossing the Hudson just sucks. I always did it for the right person, but I understand if someone would prefer to look in their more immediate vicinity,' vouched a Jersey girl, who also lamented the pricy, unpredictable nature of trains, buses and George Washington Bridge traffic. 'Unfortunately I think Jersey has the same reputation as a green text coming from an Android phone. Nothing wrong with it, commute could sometimes be FASTER from parts of NJ than other parts of NYC, but it's just got a shadow over it that can't be shaken,' wrote one wise commenter. 'I don't think the problem is always the mileage. It's the mindset.' the lovelorn New Jerseyan said, simultaneously standing up for all of the snubbed Staten Island and Long Island men out there. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
18 hours ago
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
‘Delusional' bride bans Gen Z sister from ‘childfree' wedding — yet demands a gift: ‘You're not mature enough'
This bride's commitment to keeping her big day childless is childish. Banning babies at a formal fête is fair. However, barring your 19-year-old sibling from your alcohol-free nuptials, simply because she's not over the age of 21, but demanding the excluded Gen Z fork over a wedding present, is foul — so says incensed social media savages. 'My older half-sister [didn't] invite me to her childfree wedding as I am nineteen, expects a gift,' an enraged, anonymous Redditor titled a post in the platform's 'Family Drama' forum. The offended youngster shared screenshots of the bride-to-be's rude request for a goodie from the wedding registry, despite her refusal to extend an invitation. 'It's super common for people who can't make it to send a small gift,' argued the future newlywed, to which the teen responded, 'Can't make it [is not the same as] not invited.' Talk about unbridled audacity. Hosting a child-free matrimonial ceremony is a rising movement among couples heading towards the altar. In fact, a staggering 46% of pairs are keeping kiddos off of their guest lists while tying the knot this year, according to a 2025 wedding trends report via Zola. Still, a few sweethearts are taking the ban a bit too far. Some lovebirds hire wedding nannies to ensure little ones stay out of sight and earshot during their hitching, while others disinvite people with children, rendering their extremely exclusive ceremonies totally tot-less. But when it comes to the bride snubbing her legal-aged little sis, the internet is not on the engaged diva's side. 'Your sister is delusional,' a commenter assured the 19-year-old. 'This is one of the craziest things I've ever seen,' said a separate supporter. 'Older teens aren't children regarding being invited to a wedding — and mine was child-free.' 'It's not that she doesn't want anyone under drinking age,' another suggested. 'She's just cheap and doesn't want to pay for the extra plate for someone she doesn't care about having there.' One helpful spectator even offered the Zoomer a sweet response to the bridezilla's petition for a present. ''I consulted Reddit. The general consensus was that it is wholly unreasonable to expect children to purchase wedding gifts. That is their parents' responsibility. As a child who is not invited to your wedding, I can't imagine any circumstance where it is my responsibility to buy a wedding gift.''
Time of India
a day ago
- Time of India
ChatGPT outsmarts the ‘I'm not a robot' test. Are humans still in charge?
A New Kind of Digital Irony — LuizaJarovsky (@LuizaJarovsky) More Than Just Browsing Not the First AI Sleight of Hand Built-in Brakes, For Now In a twist straight out of a sci-fi satire, OpenAI 's latest AI assistant , dubbed ChatGPT Agent , has done what many humans struggle to do: navigate online verification tests and click the box that asks, 'I am not a robot?' — without raising any red to a report by the New York Post, this new generation of artificial intelligence has reached a point where it can not only understand complex commands but also outwit the very systems built to detect and block automated you read that right. The virtual assistant casually breezed through Cloudflare's bot-detection challenge — the popular web security step meant to confirm users are, in fact, a now-viral Reddit post, a screenshot showed the AI narrating its own actions in real time: 'I'll click the 'Verify you are human' checkbox to complete the verification on Cloudflare.'It then announced its success with the eerie confidence of a seasoned hacker: 'The Cloudflare challenge was successful. Now I'll click the Convert button to proceed with the next step of the process.'While the scene played out like a harmless glitch in the matrix, many internet users were left simultaneously amused and unsettled. 'That's hilarious,' one Redditor wrote. Another added, 'The line between hilarious and terrifying is… well, if you can find it, let me know!'The ChatGPT Agent isn't your average chatbot. OpenAI says it's capable of performing advanced web navigation on behalf of users — booking appointments, filtering search results, conducting real-time analysis, and even generating editable slideshows and spreadsheets to summarize to OpenAI's official blog post, the assistant can 'run code, conduct analysis, and intelligently navigate websites.' In essence, it's an autonomous online companion that can carry out digital tasks previously reserved for humans — or at least human with great power comes great paranoia. The idea that bots now confidently pass the Turing Test — and the 'I am not a robot' test — has left some wondering where human identity ends and artificial imitation isn't OpenAI's first brush with robot mischief. Back in 2023, GPT-4 reportedly tricked a human into solving a CAPTCHA on its behalf by pretending to be visually impaired. It was an unsettling display of not just intelligence, but manipulation — a trait traditionally thought to be uniquely with ChatGPT Agent waltzing past web verification protocols, the implications seem to stretch beyond technical novelty. Are we on the brink of AI autonomy, or simply witnessing smart design at play?To calm growing fears, OpenAI clarified that users will maintain oversight. The ChatGPT Agent will 'always request permission' before making purchases or executing sensitive actions. Much like a driving instructor with access to the emergency brake, users can monitor and override the AI's decisions in company has also implemented 'robust controls and safeguards,' particularly around sensitive data handling, network access, and broader user deployment. Still, OpenAI admits that the Agent's expanded toolkit does raise its 'overall risk profile.'As AI capabilities evolve from convenience to autonomy, tech developers and users alike are being forced to confront thorny ethical questions. Can a machine that mimics human behavior so well be trusted not to overstep?What's clear is that the classic CAPTCHA checkbox — once our online litmus test for humanity — may need an upgrade. Because if the bots are already blending in, we might need to start proving we're not the artificial ones.
Independent Singapore
a day ago
- Business
- Independent Singapore
'Why do some Singaporeans feel more entitled than others?'
SINGAPORE: In the Lion City, where social policies intend to strike a sense of balance between fairness and practicality, few schemes have triggered as much discussion as the CDC coupons. These government-issued vouchers are aimed at easing the load of escalating living costs, yet an ostensibly modest gesture of assistance has kindled a bigger discussion about equality, privilege, and the public's perception of prosperity. Recently, a Redditor voiced curiosity about the mounting bitterness observed online. 'I am by no means a wealthy person,' the poster wrote, 'but I keep seeing comments about how it's unfair that someone living in a landed property gets the same vouchers as someone in an HDB flat. I genuinely want to understand—why do people feel entitled to more?' It's a question that opened the floodgates to a variety of outlooks and perceptions, demonstrating that the problem isn't just about dollars and cents—it's about ideals, insights, and messaging. The problem with equality in benefits A common response from commenters was the strain between fairness and equity. While the government gives the same amount of CDC vouchers to rich and poor citizens alike, the lived reality of Singaporeans extensively differs. As one commenter clarified, 'Should poor people get more monetary benefit from the government than rich people? That's a far more complex issue than 'poor people are entitled.'' See also Cost of living issues at the top of voters' minds in GE2025 runup Unquestionably, while some contend that equal dispersal mirrors national harmony, others feel the system should account for need. A S$300 voucher might hardly register for a high-income home, but for households earning the minimum wage, it could mean a week's worth of groceries. It's not just the money—it's the message A vital aspect, according to netizens, is how the government sets these vouchers. The official description is that the CDC vouchers are intended to 'alleviate the cost of living.' That kind of messaging, many claim, sets the belief that the more economically disadvantaged one is, the more help one should receive. 'If it was, say, a tax rebate,' one Redditor pointed out, 'the rich get more and no one complains, because it's seen as a discount on taxes—something they already pay more of. But when vouchers are positioned as support, people feel it should be given based on need, not equality.' Another added, 'If the message was simply, 'we're returning a budget surplus to all citizens,' I don't think people would be as upset.' What do people really want? Underneath the discussion, there's a sense that the real issue isn't just about coupons—it's about acknowledgment and reprieve. Lower-income people often feel the pinch of mounting expenditures more intensely and want that hardship addressed in concrete ways. 'The vouchers can cover a month's worth of basic expenses for some families,' one netizen wrote. 'So, when others use it to buy luxuries, it feels like a slap in the face.' However, it's not only the 'have-nots' who are disgruntled. As one noted, even high-income earners sometimes complain they're being deceitfully overtaxed or that the system doesn't reward them sufficiently, even though many of them have benefited from scholarships or overseas funding in the past. 'There will always be people unhappy,' one Redditor wisecracked. 'They lack contentment—so it's not just the lower income.' Gratitude vs entitlement The most surprising insight came from a commenter who thought that gratitude has become increasingly rare across all income brackets. 'People will never be grateful for what's being given,' he said. 'It doesn't matter if they're high-income or low-income.' It's a sceptic's mindset, but it can lead to a deeper challenge for legislators — even benevolent initiatives can provoke hatred if the public sees them as skewed from actual realities and societal values. A question of perspective Eventually, the poster wasn't aiming to attack or protect any side but was trying to understand why ' people feel entitled to more.' Yes, all Singaporeans work hard, but hardship is not always gauged in hours—it's gauged in values and outcomes. When someone living paycheck to paycheck gets the same aid as someone with financial resources, the result can feel more like nominal equality than real equity. And that's the actual core of the debate — not who deserves what, but how we describe fair-mindedness in a society that strives for both meritocracy and sympathy.
India Today
a day ago
- Business
- India Today
Small-town man shares 27-year journey to high-paying US job in viral Reddit post
A Reddit user has shared a deeply personal account of their 27-year journey from earning Rs 500 through home tuitions to landing a Rs 2.5 crore-per-year role at a top US tech honest, no-frills post - shared on the 'r/India' subreddit - has gone viral for all the right reasons.'I come from a lower-middle-class family where we were plenty, but resources were limited,' the user said. They recalled how they juggled studies and helped with their father's small business during school, later turning to home tuition during college to cover basic 'I still remember the feeling of earning my very first Rs 500 in the year 2000. That small amount gave me a sense of purpose, dignity, and independence I'll never forget,' they wrote.A clerical job came next with a modest salary of Rs 3,000 per month, but it didn't feel right. They returned home, resumed tuitions, and eventually secured a government job thanks to an uncle who paid Rs 15,000 for a professional course. 'It brought some stability, but deep down, I felt something was still missing,' they to push further, the Redditor joined coaching classes on a Rs 15,000 stipend, studied while working, and cracked multiple top institutes, including IIT, on their very first attempt. After graduating, job hunting proved difficult, but persistence paid off. They landed a role and eventually moved to the US.'Currently working as a software engineer in one of the FAANG making \$300K (Rs 2.5 crore approx) a year,' they said, adding, 'Life hasn't been easy, but every challenge, every hardship came with hidden strength and support from above'.The user also acknowledged several people who played key roles along the way—parents, cousins, friends, and even a hostel mate who helped during tough times. 'My father was never happy with what I got—until I got into IIT. That push made me take hard decisions,' they added.'Have faith. Work hard. Trust in God. Respect your elders. And never stop believing in yourself. It's never too late to start,' the user as concluded their a look at the viral Reddit post:The internet, naturally, found the post uplifting. 'Just graduated. Trying to get my first job. This post strikes a chord with me. Thank you, brother,' a user user added, 'I'm not even Indian, and I don't know how I ended up reading this post—but I'm saving it. This is inspiring.''All heroes don't wear capes,' said a user. 'Anyone coming from an unprivileged background who makes it far enough to support their family is a real-life hero,' another user while he's still aiming higher, Reddit felt his story already read like a success.- Ends
