Canon event, emotional layover, and dial toning, GenZ daters share three dating patterns to watch out

Ghosting, situationships and breadcrumbing might have dominated the dating world for years but GenZ is proactively recognizing new trends and dating behaviours that aren't nearly as toxic but are definitely important to be identified and named. A recent survey by India's leading dating app, QuackQuack, reveals new patterns, including the canon event, emotional layover, and dial-toning, that are quietly shaping the dating landscape.

The survey was conducted among over 10000 active dating app users between the ages of 18 and 28, from metros, suburban, and rural regions of India. Participants were selected from diverse professional fields and in an equal division of male and female to ensure a comprehensive understanding of the trends. QuackQuack's Founder and CEO, Ravi Mittal, commented, "Time's moving and it would be foolish to remain outdated about the dating patterns. Not all trends identified by GenZ are toxic; some might just be a right-of-passage kind of dating behaviour but still, identifying them makes it easier to understand what you are dealing with and handle the situation with much more ease."

The Canon Event

"I knew it wouldn't last, but I still went for it because it made me happy for a while." Over 3945 respondents between 23 and 28 said the same thing about at least one match. The survey shows that GenZ can sometimes value happiness more than the permanence of it. Nearly 4 in 10 women shared that they connected and dated with one match, knowing it would be a temporary commitment, only because they believed they needed to feel loved at that point in time, or the connection would teach them something valuable. 27% of men from Tier 1 and 2 cities revealed matching with someone completely opposite in nature to understand their own dealbreakers, and choosing passion over stability because they wanted to experience something worthwhile, even if it lasted for a short period. Nivedita (25) from Delhi, said, "My canon event was matching, meeting, and dating this person who was of the exact opposite mentality and personality as mine. People ask me, then why did I choose him? I can only assume because it's important to date the wrong person to know what's right for you. In my case, I never made the same mistake again."

Pritam and Pedro – OTT series review

Emotional Layover

One not-so-toxic but silently sad trend that the participants highlighted is the Emotional Layover. About 37% of participants over 25 explained that some matches temporarily occupied emotional space, especially during times of loneliness, vulnerability, major transitions and crises in life. These users explained that while it doesn't always impact negatively, the connection is usually just a temporary layover and since the period is full of vulnerability, there is always a chance of being taken advantage of. 22% of singles also said that the connection feels incredibly intimate, but it's important to identify the emotional layover pattern of dating to ensure that it does not become a habit and continues repeating every time they face a crisis. 5 in 10 users disclosed that they genuinely cared for the match but needed only temporary shelter, while 4 in 10 people admitted knowingly becoming someone's emotional layover, realising how much they needed care at that time.

Dial-Toning

GenZ has identified another lesser discussed behaviour where daters keep someone within their emotional reach but never completely giving in to the attraction. More than 45% of daters from Delhi, Mumbai, Hyderabad, and Bangalore said that dial-toning is gaining traction in mostly Tier 1 cities where life is busier. Instead of letting go of a match that did not work out very well, they keep a tiny signal of availability going on; it can be watching their social media stories, reacting to a post one random day, or replying with emojis. 55% of participants between 18 and 26 admitted to dial-toning a match for months, but they also clarified ending the cycle as soon as they recognized what they were doing. Another 19% of daters above 26 also added that they have dial-toned a match because the timing to take the next step did not seem right and they were waiting for the right moment; this was their way of keeping the connection just warm enough, without overwhelming it.

(Promotional Feature)

7 Hidden Roadblocks That Kill Enterprise AI After a Successful Pilot

Enterprise AI has moved beyond experimentation. Over the past two years, organisations have invested heavily in AI pilots across customer service, operations, software development, finance, and supply chains. Yet despite this momentum, very few initiatives successfully make the transition from pilot to enterprise-wide deployment.

The challenge is no longer whether AI works. In most cases, it does. The bigger question is whether organisations are prepared to integrate AI into the realities of day-to-day business operations.

Recent industry research puts a hard number on the scale of the problem: roughly 80% of enterprise AI initiatives fail to deliver their intended business value. Nearly a third are abandoned before they ever reach production. This is not a model performance issue. It is an operationalisation issue.

Having spent over 25 years across banking, financial services, and enterprise technology, and now working with enterprises deploying AI in regulated environments, I have seen the same seven failure patterns repeat with striking consistency.

1. Pilots are built on ideal conditions

Most pilots are developed using clean, structured, and carefully prepared datasets. Production environments are very different. Data is fragmented, inconsistent, and spread across multiple systems. As projects move into real-world environments, data quality quickly becomes one of the biggest obstacles to scaling AI successfully.

2. Success is never clearly defined

Many AI initiatives begin with enthusiasm but without clearly agreed business outcomes. Teams focus on building a working model instead of defining measurable objectives such as cost reduction, productivity improvement, turnaround time, or customer experience. Without clear success metrics, it becomes difficult to justify further investment once the pilot ends.

Pritam and Pedro – OTT series review

3. Legacy technology slows enterprise AI

Most organisations continue to operate on technology that was never designed for AI-driven workflows. Legacy applications, disconnected systems, and lengthy deployment cycles make it difficult to integrate AI into everyday business processes. The technology may be ready, but the underlying enterprise architecture often is not.

This is precisely where I see the most enterprises stall. The instinct is to treat legacy modernisation and AI adoption as sequential projects: rebuild the core first, add AI later. That sequencing is expensive and slow. The organisations that move faster are the ones that build a configuration and orchestration layer over what already exists, rather than waiting to replace it.

4. Organisations underestimate the change required

Technology alone rarely determines the success of an AI initiative. Scaling AI requires collaboration between business teams, technology teams, compliance, security, and operations. A pilot may succeed with a small project team, but enterprise-wide adoption demands organisational alignment that many businesses underestimate.

5. Operational readiness receives little attention

Building an AI model is only one part of the journey. Production environments require governance, monitoring, security, model updates, and performance management. Without these operational capabilities, many promising pilots fail to deliver sustainable business value after deployment.

This is where architecture matters more than ambition. The enterprises that succeed treat governance, auditability, and human approval as design principles built into the system from day one, not compliance work added after a pilot succeeds. AI should be confined to design-time configuration, with deterministic, auditable systems handling execution in production. That separation is what makes operational readiness achievable rather than aspirational.

6. Expectations are higher than reality

Many organisations expect AI to deliver transformational results within a single planning cycle. In reality, enterprise AI creates value over time through continuous improvement and refinement. Unrealistic expectations often lead organisations to abandon initiatives before meaningful outcomes are achieved.

The most effective way I have seen organisations manage this is by starting small and shipping fast. A single, well-defined workflow or dashboard delivered in days builds more organisational confidence than a twelve-month transformation roadmap. Speed early in the journey buys the patience needed for the larger initiatives that follow.

7. Executive sponsorship does not last long enough

Enterprise AI programmes often span multiple budget cycles. When leadership priorities shift, projects lose momentum, funding, and organisational focus. Sustained executive sponsorship is often the difference between isolated pilots and enterprise-wide transformation.

Sponsorship rarely fades because leaders stop believing in AI. It fades because the initiative stops producing visible wins. Programmes that deliver measurable outcomes every few weeks, rather than promising one large outcome a year from now, keep sponsorship alive because the business case renews itself continuously.

The next phase of AI is execution

The conversation around enterprise AI is changing. For the last few years, organisations have focused on adopting AI. The next phase will focus on delivering measurable business outcomes.

Competitive advantage will not come from simply deploying more AI models. It will come from integrating AI into business processes, modernising enterprise technology without ripping it out, strengthening governance as a design principle, and enabling faster execution across the organisation.

The organisations that succeed will not necessarily be the ones investing the most in AI. They will be the ones with the right architecture: AI used responsibly at the design stage, deterministic and auditable systems in execution, and the discipline to measure business outcomes rather than pilot activity. That is what separates enterprises still explaining their AI strategy from those already running on it.

 

-         By Shrish Anand Lal, Executive Director and Chief Business Officer at New Street, the company behind MiFiX.ai.

    With over 25 years of experience across banking, financial services, and enterprise technology, he leads enterprise growth, business development, and strategic partnerships globally.

Five-Star Hotel Kitchen Horrors Exposed

 

THE COST OF COMPLACENCY: WHY THE NATIONWIDE FOOD SAFETY BLITZ MUST BECOME THE NEW REGULATORY NORMAL

For decades, dining out in India has required a tacit, often unsettling compromise from consumers. While the country’s culinary landscape has thrived, a parallel culture of regulatory complacency has allowed hygiene standards to deteriorate behind closed doors. However, an aggressive wave of unannounced food safety inspections is dismantling the status quo. Led by fierce administrative actions across Maharashtra and Karnataka, food safety enforcement has finally reached an unprecedented, non-negotiable scale. From elite five-star hotels to roadside stalls and public canteens, regulators are exposing a grim reality: under the current framework, premium pricing does not guarantee public safety.

The "Singham" Template of Enforcement

In Maharashtra, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Tukaram Mundhe has orchestrated a campaign that can only be described as a systemic shock to the hospitality sector. Nicknamed the state's "Singham" for his uncompromising stance, Mundhe’s FDA team has executed over 1,100 high-stakes inspections since mid-2026. The findings have spared no one. Iconic private establishments, luxury cricket clubs, and institutional canteens like that of Savitribai Phule Pune University have faced swift license suspensions over infrastructure failures and pest infestations.

Pritam and Pedro – OTT series review

The defining moment of this institutional reckoning occurred when the FDA extended its perimeter to the Bombay High Court premises. Following queries regarding the selective targeting of businesses, regulators audited the court's internal kitchens, identifying unlicenced operations and fundamental sanitation lapses. The message was unambiguous: no institutional shield or commercial reputation places an establishment above public health regulations.

Shattering the Five-Star Illusion

If Maharashtra demonstrated administrative iron, Karnataka’s concurrent enforcement drive exposed profound structural hypocrisy within luxury hospitality. Special teams from the Karnataka Food Safety and Drug Administration recently executed targeted raids across 26 premium, three-star, and five-star hotels in Bengaluru. The ensuing data shattered the consumer illusion that high tariff rates correlate with immaculate kitchen management.

Inspectors seized over 132 kg of expired food and heavily contaminated meat from household luxury names including The Lalit Ashok, Taj Yeshwantpur, Shangri-La, and Radisson Blu Atria. Far more alarming than individual instances of rotten inventory was a systemic failure of basic culinary boundary-keeping: multiple five-star kitchens were flagged for failing to properly segregate vegetarian and non-vegetarian food units. In a society where dietary boundaries represent both deeply held cultural values and critical allergen guardrails, this cross-contamination represents an egregious breach of consumer trust.

A Broken Enforcement Ecosystem

This crisis is not confined to the western and southern corridors. It is an indictment of a national ecosystem. In Telangana, recent inspections by the Food Safety Department across Hyderabad's commercial zones revealed widespread usage of synthetic food dyes, unlabelled bulk ingredients, and heavy pest infestations. Yet, despite finding that over 11% of analyzed food samples failed to conform to safe standards, federal data reveals that Telangana reported zero civil penalties or convictions over the past year due to severe bureaucratic backlogs.

This disparity highlights the fundamental flaw in India’s food safety architecture. The issue is not a deficit of legislation—the Food Safety and Standards Act of 2006 provides an extensive framework—but rather a historical lack of consistent enforcement and prompt adjudication. This dynamic is further aggravated by critical deficits in food safety personnel and laboratory infrastructure nationwide.

                NATIONAL HYGIENE CRACKDOWN: CORE VIOLATIONS EXPOSED

┌───────────────────────────────┬─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐

│ SECTOR AUDITED                │ CRITICAL VIOLATIONS IDENTIFIED                  │

├───────────────────────────────┼─────────────────────────────────────────────────┤

│ Five-Star & Luxury Hotels     │ • Expired meat & fungal vegetables seized       │

│                               │ • Failure to separate veg & non-veg streams    │

├───────────────────────────────┼─────────────────────────────────────────────────┤

│ Regular & Historic Eateries   │ • Prohibited synthetic chemical color usage     │

│                               │ • Unsafe kitchen storage & pest infestations    │

├───────────────────────────────┼─────────────────────────────────────────────────┤

│ Government & Public Canteens  │ • Operation without active, valid licenses      │

│                               │ • Severe raw material handling deficiencies     │

└───────────────────────────────┴─────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

The Imperative for Public Health

The commercial sector has responded with predictable friction, with restaurant associations demanding softer communication and "predictable" audits. This editorial board strongly rejects those demands. Food safety cannot be a matter of scheduled politeness. The benefits of these aggressive, unannounced interventions to public health are absolute and immediate:

·       Curtailing Pathogenic Outbreaks: Eliminating stale meat and fungal storage units directly prevents localized outbreaks of Salmonella, E. coli, and life-threatening gastroenteritis.

·       Preventing Chronic Toxicity: Enforcing bans on toxic non-permitted food dyes and un-monitored, repeatedly reused cooking oil mitigates long-term risks of cardiovascular strain and organ damage.

·       Enforcing Structural Compliance: The sudden threat of financial and reputational ruin is already forcing commercial kitchens nationwide to execute deep-cleaning protocols and enforce rigid standard operating procedures.

The Path Forward

The ongoing enforcement drives must not be treated as temporary administrative theater or the personal crusade of individual bureaucratic figures. For these interventions to yield permanent public health dividends, the institutional framework must change.

We call for the immediate clearing of adjudication backlogs through dedicated fast-track food safety tribunals, a permanent expansion of the ground force of Food Safety Officers, and complete, real-time public transparency regarding failed audits. It is time to permanently end the era of kitchen secrecy. India’s consumers have a fundamental right to safe, standard, and unadulterated food—regardless of whether they are dining at a roadside stall or inside a five-star ballroom.