Ayumi⁷ is seeing BTS

@seokjindesi Congratulations!!!!

I GOT IT I GOT IT I GOT THE FUCKING TICKETS I AM SEEING BTS ON MY HONEYMOON OH MY GOD THIS IS GOING TO BE THE HIGHLIGHT OF MY WEDDING, HONEYMOON AND MY MARRIED LIFE. IAM SHAKING

Agdhsjsahdjdkvdjsj I am finally seeing my seven with my sisters for the first time in 12 long years. KL was so tough I still can’t believe, lets fucking gooo! 😭😭💜💜 #BTS_ARİRANG

@priyanka_795 Congratulations!! I’m also going to KL!

Ohhhh... To get that ticket for seeing TANNIES in the Festa-cum-Birthday month is crazyyyyyy 😭😭😭

@brattaex Okay phew, I was so worried, thank you for the clarification!

@UtDAyumiK Yes it's normal! It didn't ask for others name while booking more than one tix

IM FUCKING SEEING BTS THAT TOO VIP 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭

@minieslildimple Thanks a lot for clarifying

@UtDAyumiK Yeah it’s fine. You just have to be present with other ppl at the venue checking

I CANT STOP SHAKING STILL. Your girl got VIP soundcheck for KL. I’m seeing them again in december. Post birthday gift for myself. SOMEONE PINCH MEEE

@kookiegirlxo @BTS_twt Yess for KL! 💜💜 Thank you for all the guides!!

@UtDAyumiK @BTS_twt Thank you!!!! Did you get em?

GOOD MORNING TO ME I LOVE MY DAD AND HIS WHATEVER STAR HE WAS BORN UNDER and also THANK YOU CITIBANK FOR THE SMOOTH PROCESSING lmao 😭🙏🏽 see you 4x in ma city @BTS_twt

@taekooksbag Hi, How do i join the waiting room? TM and LN is not displaying shit

1 MORE HOUR FOR SINGAPORE TICKETS IM NERVOUS

today someone at work asked me, "kasih satu alasan knp pengen bgt nonton BTS." after i answered, they looked at me and said, "in this economy? mending ditabung aja uangnya, dollar naik dll" && honestly, i get it. tapi mereka nggak tahu seberapa besar gue sayang sama mereka. you see a concert ticket, i see years of memories. you see a few hours in a stadium, i see a dream i've been carrying for almost half of my life. because BTS was there through different versions of me. pas gue lagi bahagia. pas gue lagi capek. pas hidup ngerasa berat. bahkan pas gue ngerasa kehilangan arah. jadi pas orang bilang, "mending tabung aja uangnya," gue paham bgt maksudnya. but this isn't just a concert for me. ini kesempatan buat akhirnya ada di tempat yang sama dengan orang-orang yang tanpa mereka sadari, udah jadi bagian besar dari hidup gue. & maybe that sounds dramatic. but if you've ever loved something with your whole heart, you'd understand..

This is an unbelievable piece of work by Sarthak and something that requires amplification. Let me explain what he found, in simple terms. Sarthak is a Class 12 student from the 2025-26 batch, one of the 17 lakh students whose answer sheets went through CBSE's new On-Screen Marking system. He spent days reading through CBSE's evaluation tenders, scraped all 576 tenders CBSE has issued, and tracked how the rules changed across three versions of the same tender. The core finding is that the company that won the contract to scan and grade 17 lakh students' answer sheets is Coempt Eduteck. Coempt used to be called Globarena Technologies. Globarena was the company behind the 2019 Telangana intermediate exam disaster, where software failures led to 3.8 lakh students getting wrong or missing marks, and 23 students died by suicide. A government committee found systemic failure and negligence. Six months later, Globarena rebranded to Coempt Eduteck. So a company with that track record won a contract to handle 17 lakh CBSE students. Sarthak's investigation is about how the rules were rewritten to let that happen. The tender was issued three times. > First tender, February 2025. It existed, then disappeared from the public GeM portal. Sarthak scraped all 576 CBSE tenders and this one was missing from the archive entirely. > Second tender, May 2025. Four companies applied including TCS and Coempt. All four failed the technical evaluation. Cancelled. > Third tender, August 2025. Coempt won. Between the second and third tender, a series of rule changes happened, and every single one made it easier for Coempt to qualify. Here is what changed, one by one. 01. The old rules disqualified any company with a history of abandoning work, failing to complete contracts, or financial weakness. The new rules deleted this clause entirely. Coempt's Telangana history stopped being a barrier. 02. The old rules disqualified any company that was "blacklisted earlier." The new rules changed this to "currently blacklisted." Because Globarena rebranded after Telangana, removing the word "earlier" effectively erased their past. 03. The rules required Rs 50 crore average turnover over three years. Coempt's exact average came to Rs 50.86 crore. They cleared the bar by less than 1%. Earlier, a smaller company had asked CBSE to lower the bar to Rs 30 crore for fairer competition. CBSE refused. So the bar was kept high enough to block small players, but sat exactly low enough for Coempt to scrape through. 04. Software maturity is measured on the CMMI scale, 1 to 5. The old rules required Level 5. The new rules dropped it to Level 3. Coempt is a Level 3 company. 05. The cooling-off period for engaging retired CBSE officials was cut from two years to one. This makes it easier to use recently retired insiders to influence the process. 06. The old rules required experience with large projects of at least 5 lakh students each. The new rules removed the student count and counted cumulative answer-book volume across small projects instead. Coempt has many small fragmented university contracts. This helped Coempt and hurt TCS. 07. The old rules required bidders to own their own data centre and disaster recovery centre on Indian soil. The new rules allowed third-party MeitY-empanelled cloud hosting. Coempt runs on AWS and Azure. This helped Coempt and hurt TCS, which owns its own data centres. It also means student data is no longer on sovereign, Indian infrastructure. 08. The old rules required the bidder to own or control the complete source code of its software. The new rules deleted this. Coempt's platform runs on Microsoft's proprietary IIS, which they don't own. 09. A last-minute corrigendum, issued right before bid submission, removed CBSE's own power to blacklist the firm if its software failed catastrophically. So even a Telangana-scale failure couldn't get Coempt banned from future government tenders. 10. The penalty structure shifted from punishing mistakes to punishing delays. The old rules fined the vendor for wrong scanning, merged pages, and unscanned books. The new rules dropped those and instead levied Rs 50,000 per day for delays. This incentivises rushed scanning over accurate scanning. 11. The old rules had a hard accuracy threshold, error rate not to exceed 0.5%. The new rules removed this number entirely. 12. The old rules specified proper book and robotics scanners. The new rules just say "sufficient scanners." The definition was vague enough that, as Sarthak notes, the scanning could be done with a phone on a stand. 13. On the security side, the contract required a VAPT (vulnerability and penetration test) certified by CERT-In before go-live, and a restricted beta phase before launch. The system clearly wasn't restricted, because the other researcher, Nisarga, was able to access it and find vulnerabilities four days before go-live. So the mandatory security audit appears to have been bypassed. These are more than a dozen rule changes, all between the failed tender and the winning tender, all pushing in the same direction, all benefiting the one company with the worst track record in the field. The security holes Nisarga found last week now have an explanation. The system was built by a vendor that was specifically allowed to skip the security certification, the source code ownership, the data sovereignty, and the quality thresholds the original rules demanded. Following things need to happen immediately; 1. An immediate CAG audit of the tender process. 2. A parliamentary debate on the topic. 3. An independent investigation into > Why the first tender vanished? > Why the disqualification clauses were deleted? > Why the turnover bar was held exactly where it was? > Why the security level was dropped? > Why the blacklisting power was removed at the last moment? Sarthak, this is genuinely exceptional investigative work. Far better than most journalists with full resources ever manage. Take a bow. :)

We on

Urban legends lang nakakaalam nito

🐥 the first part of the us tour is over, let's applaud our directors, staff, dancers 🐥 we're able to stand here because of you, i hope you never forget that 🐥 i will keep doing my best to give you great music and performances. thank you, i love you

우리는 살아오면서 겪은 모든 상처와 힘든 경험, 그리고 성장 속에서 얼마나 많은 교훈을 마음 깊이 간직하고 있는지 종종 과소평가하는 것 같아요. 나 자신도 때때로 내가 얼마나 많은 일을 견뎌냈는지 잊곤 합니다. 정말 자주 잊어요. 사람들과 비교하거나, 지금쯤 내 삶이 ‘어디쯤 있어야 하는지’에 대한 사회의 기대, 내가 이미 이루었어야 할 목표들, 떠났어야 했던 모험들, 놓지 말았어야 했던 사람들에 사로잡히곤 합니다. 하지만 사실 나는 내가 얼마나 멀리 걸어왔는지를 잊고 있었어요. 나는 완벽하지 않아도 괜찮다는 걸 잊고 있었어요. 나에게도 불안함과 약점이 있고, 상처와 흉터도 있어요. 내 마음 한구석에는 아직도 아물지 않은 조각들이 남아 있지만, 나는 그것들을 없애지 않을 거예요. 왜냐하면 그것들 또한 나를 나답게 만들기 때문입니다. 내가 후회할 행동들을 했고, 누군가의 마음을 아프게 했으며, 실수를 하고, 다시는 주워 담을 수 없는 말들을 했을지라도—그 실수들이 나를 정의하게 두지 않을 거예요. 그 경험들이 나를 무너지게 하지 않을 거예요. 그 사람들에 대한 기억이 다시 돌아가고 싶지 않은 시간만 떠올리게 두지 않을 거예요. 왜냐하면 이제 그 사람들, 그 장소들, 그리고 그 사건들은 내가 몇 시간이고, 며칠이고, 심지어 몇 달 동안 견뎌내며 배워온 교훈의 상징이 되었기 때문입니다. 그리고 그 기억들은 내가 인생에서 가장 힘든 싸움들을 마주하고도 결국 이겨낼 수 있었던 강인함의 증거입니다. 끝내 나는 이겨냈어요. 그리고 결국 하루의 끝에서 가장 중요한 건 바로 그것입니다. 정말 그것만이 중요합니다.

🐨: Since each of us had been doing so many different genres and so many different things for over ten years, the goals or direction each of us envisioned were different. And it wasn't just us—the fanbases' thoughts were different, the thoughts of the members here were different, and the thoughts of the representatives from the relevant departments were all different too. 🐨: There was just no narrowing it down. Personally, the hardest part for me was that there wasn't a clear "captain" this time. A leader or a boss who could firmly pull things forward and declare, "This is right" or "That is wrong." But given the situation, it was really difficult for that to happen. 🐨: So, it was very tough. To be honest, we ended up making this album without having a set path beforehand. Because of that, when the album came out, I completely expected that opinions would be divided…starting with the title track itself. 🐨: But as a player participating in this, I honestly think it's a miracle that this album even came out at all. The very fact that it was released feels like a miracle to me. Whether people feel it's lacking, whether there's mixed reception, or if people don't like it…the fact that we came back together here, released a studio album as promised, and are carrying out performances and a tour again... 🐨: Of course, this and that might be disappointing; everything has its shortcomings. I feel those shortcomings too. But really, for us to make it through without a single member dropping out, without anyone getting sick, or without anyone creating an issue... safely. 🐨: And now, thanks to all of you, our scale has grown so much. If we don't plan the scheduling for making an album and managing it at least a year to a year and a half in advance, we can't even move forward. That's because so many people move together with us. It's not a situation where we can just say, "Hey, let's do it this way and make it happen." It just didn't work like that. 🐨: So it was a project that was incredibly, incredibly difficult to make. If there's a sense of disappointment or something along those lines that you all are feeling, it's probably due to the lack of a strong central focal point, or a "captain." I think that's what it is. 🐨: But it couldn't be helped, and we had to release this so that when we gather together again someday to create something, we can move past this—even if it feels somewhat disorganized and mixed with so many different elements.