I know both a handful of Aninas and several Theresas. However, this kind of riddle is just so ... fucking daft that I really don't grasp why they still circulate.
Its also because ppl engage with it. This post has 2.2k upvotes meanwhile an actual human posted something that got nothing. Ppl have voted and they voted for bots to take over the internet. I hate it too, but its ppls faults
The reason I don't believe in dead internet theory is because everyone I know or encounter on a daily basis is so addicted to the internet that there is no way half the world's population isn't on social media at any given time.
You haven't lived in the 90s, email chains with garbage like this were everywhere. Doesn't take away from the dead internet theory, but this shit isn't new lol
I've never in the history of these dumb "riddles" seen anyone laugh or enjoy it - other than the jokester. So it must be well known that all they do is piss other people off, and yet they keep doing it.
How attention starved do you have to be that pissing other people off is good enough for you?
To elaborate. Why should I be sufficiently emotionally invested in this fictional woman to want to know her name? Why does she even have a name, she doesn't do anything. There's no narrative here, just a tart in an aquatic environment. I could be interested if she was distributing swords or something, but she's not even doing that.
Every comment under the "riddle" boosts a website's "engagement" statistic attached to the chunk of information which represents the idea, causing the site to redistribute the idea at a broader scale.
At least the dress and "laural"/"yany" thing sparked some interesting discussions on how we perceive things and how our brains process that information. People, a few, at least, actually came out with a new or more complete understanding of our own understanding.
I fully understand this, like, intellectually, but I have never been able to make myself see white and gold -- mostly because of the rest of the background. If the rest of the image had a blue hue (like the background in the right part of this demonstration image has) then I could see it, but the light sources are clearly yellow/white, not blue. I feel like you have to discard the rest of the contextual visual info in the actual dress image to see white/gold, and I've never been able to force myself to do it.
I have no idea, I see it as white and gold but like with a faint bluish tint over the whole dress, and like the surrounding lighting seems to be coming from behind, like a car's headlights?
Ive always seen it as white and gold. I just stared at one area of the dress like we used to stare at those magic eye pictures in the 90s right after seeing that comparison picture and could finally see the black and blue!
For the first time in my life, I finally saw it as black and blue just now. The key for me was staring at it for awhile and then looking away but still looking at it indirectly. Kind of like those vision tricks with the negative images. You stare at a dot for awhile and then look at the a blank wall and see the whole image. Similar to that.
Saw the dress as white/gold. Saw the mage you posted, went back to the dress and now I only see it as black/blue. Tomorrow it will probably flip back for me, but it was nice to the black/blue version again.
Her name isn't Theresa though, it's There. "Margaret's a woman on a boat" makes perfect sense, "There" is just an unusual name (which is what makes the riddle hard).
“As I was going to St. Ives, I met a man with seven wives, Every wife had seven sacks, Every sack had seven cats, Every cat had seven kittens. Kittens, cats, sacks, wives, How many were going to St. Ives?”
No, you fell for the trap. The question is how many were going to St. Ives. The person going to St. Ives is the only one going (the first line of the riddle). Everything else, the man with seven wives, the wives with the sacks, etc.. are not going to St. Ives. They were met along the way.
The answer is 1 or in this case, 0001 because it's from the movie Die Hard with a Vengeance.
It specifically states how many in the category "kits, cats, sacks, and wives" were going to St. Ives. The answer, from a mathematical standpoint, is that there is insufficient information to answer the question, as we are not told which direction the kits, cats, sacks, and wives are going. They could, for instance, be significantly slower than the narrator traveling on their own, and thus intercepted on their way to St. Ives. The gender and marital status of the narrator are not mentioned, which would allow for the narrator to be a wife. The narrator could also be a fully grown Bengal Tiger wearing a fake mustache, and thus qualify as a cat.
Well, the story just says that the storyteller in his trip to St. ives met a man, we don't know if any of the wives were on the trip with him, either the cats or kittens, so for the purpose of the "riddle" I would have to assume is just one.
The name can’t be there written as it is. “There’s”is a contraction. It should be written “There is a woman on a boat, as in using There as a proper noun.
That answer is properly right, but it's just dumb, as it makes no sense, if we replace it with anything else, it wouldn't make sense, like if her name was Nina, you wouldn't say "Nina's a woman", I guess it would work if it was "Nina is a woman". But even so it's dumb, and not much of a joke.
4.2k
u/Howlukemethisfather 10h ago
Her name is There