gls2ro

I am not sure this is true with regards to SaaS and IT.

For example I know at least one country (but I suspect many more are just I did not checked) where the IT creates a big enough chunk of GDP and hires a lot of people. Much more than it disrupted initially.

But more than this IT allowed so far for much more people to get a very good job and have a very decent life. Up until the promises of AI the IT industry was an industry that was hiring a lot of people and producing a lot of money in their economies. Not only by sales tax or sales but also by circulating money via paying their employees and thus along with IT a lot of other businesses where created.

I also think property based testing is great.

But they are very different IMO at what they focus on and so they occupy different places when talking about does a piece of software does what it should do and withing the state/parameters specified:

- Property based testing focuses on finding counter examples - Formal verification focuses to prove that a property always holds

More than this I think in all these discussions we are missing the most important piece: validation.

While verification means to prove or test or verify that the software does what is should do, validation means to prove or test or verify that the software is solving user needs.

It does not matter that they were stochastic events because the reason we have regulation and procedures and protocols for these systems is to reduce randomness and mistakes as close to zero.

While individually each event can maybe just be random mistake having two could be the beginning of some new information about the system(s) we have to consider.

So we should all say and act like this is not acceptable and we need more focus on making these stochastic events not happen now that they are not just a mere probability over an event space filled with randomness. They just happened.

I fail to understand this line of thinking.

Even letting aside any survival mechanism we have there are two rational posibilities:

1. We are alone in the universe => super huge loss of complexity and consciousness

2. We are not alone but at Universe scale intelligent life seems rather scarce => still huge loss in diversity

None of these two partners benefit from mass migration because both of them actually need more workers.

Also a trade partnership is not a zero sum game. Can also be that everybody will benefit by more trade, more cooperation and more exchanges for young people.

If this alliance will be signed and has the support of people from both sides then Buy Canadian and Buy European will mean Buy European or Canadian.

We might need a new name for this in 10 years if it works.

Like Buy EuroCan or But Caneu (maybe better names)

That is not a simple solution in practice, only on social media.

It will make prices go high, which will spiral in a lot of things and will increase the cost of living in the present even more for the vulnerable part of the population of a country.

of course it can be the proper solution for the future but saying it is simple is a huge huge understatement of the political and economical will needed to make it happen.

If they use https://www.simpleanalytics.com/data-collection then that is the list they collect.

So it does not seem to collect IP. Of course it is sent to their servers but they publicly state they don't collect it.

Their _main_ selling point is that they are hosted in EU and also their analytics seems to be hosted in EU.

I did not read with very much attention their website but I think they are not saying they are gluten free and eating a whole wheat bread. But even so it is possible that a cook that produces gluten free bread to sell can eat a whole wheat bread. I see no problem with that.

I also don't think we need metaphors for this. It is clear for me that their USP is hosting in EU and the fact that on their marketing website uses https://www.simpleanalytics.com/data-collection does not contradict their product which is Hosting websites in EU.

What would contradict is hosting their marketing website on US.

Second point is: Yes, their status page should be hosted in other places and I could even understand if they want to host their status page in US or ASIA. I actually think that would be the right way to host their own status page.

I think you are picking on the product by sharing a (real) critique of the marketing website.

The product says "100% European static website hosting" it does not make any promise about the actual marketing website they have that will be privacy protected.

So yes, you are right they used in their marketing website maybe some trackers and even so based on the link you shared here they seem to use https://www.simpleanalytics.com/ which sounds okish than any other trackers and it might even be also EU hosted: "We're a three-person team based in the Netherlands, building privacy-first analytics for the web"

I was replying to someone saying to make this the default.

While this is good for _technical english_ it is not a good default as a good default should work for most of the people in most of the cases.

IMHO the case for explaining logical flows and how someting works is just one case even when using Claude Code in programming so a default will not make sense.

IMO that would be a mistake because Simplified Technical English cannot properly represent business domains specifically when talking about using specific concepts from those domains. It can explain those concepts but I think it will fail short or naming them.

So I think making that default as it is will create bugs. I ran an experiment here https://allaboutcoding.ghinda.com/explain-to-me-in-simple-te... (of course it is fit to my usage) see section "What about understanding and facts" and ASD-STE100 fails, in my experiment, to return facts as I have defined them in those cases compared with no instruction or just saying "use Simple Technical English".

Cookie banner is not required. It is not even mentioned in GDPR law => EU did not require anyone to implement any cookie banner. You can implement the consent in multiple other ways probably and GDPR does not mandate any specific technical or UX flows. It talks about what consent means for example.

The same goes for landing rockets on the moon. You pay from your taxes.

Can you maybe expand this? Are Romanians from North Sea going to fish near Iceland? or did they do that near UK?

And let me ask you an even better question: Is Romania the country you see that has so many derogations from EU laws and can do what they like?

You cannot compare 10 million people with 450 million people when talking about direct democracy. It cannot be done I think. But if you know a way propose it here.

Just saying lets vote directly on everything will put everything on hold until all goes down.

Author of the article here.

Yes, sorry for this. I think I rushed to post that and did not expected to be read by so many people.

I used Codex TUI on MacOS using `gpt-5.6-sol xhigh` vs Claude Code TUI on MacOS using `opus-5 xhigh`. Of course it was a mixed work with subagents being Sonnet 5 in case of Claude Code and Terra 5.6 and Luna 5.6 in case of Codex.

Author of the article here.

Yes, sorry for this. I think I rushed to post that and did not expected to be read by so many people.

I used Codex TUI on MacOS using `gpt-5.6-sol xhigh` vs Claude Code TUI on MacOS using `opus-5 xhigh`. Of course it was a mixed work with subagents being Sonnet 5 in case of Claude Code and Terra 5.6 and Luna 5.6 in case of Codex.

Author of the article here.

Yes, sorry for this. I think I rushed to post that and did not expected to be read by so many people.

I used Codex TUI on MacOS using `gpt-5.6-sol xhigh` vs Claude Code TUI on MacOS using `opus-5 xhigh`. Of course it was a mixed work with subagents being Sonnet 5 in case of Claude Code and Terra 5.6 and Luna 5.6 in case of Codex.

I think you need to provide independent sources for the "SynthID has practically zero false positives". Except a paper written by Google authors about SynthID for images I have not found any study about zero false positives.

I like an article focused on us, the special tech people.

But the truth is everyone is sad or subjectively unhappy no matter if that is a real or imaginary reflection of wealth or money or access to food, cloths, coffee, restaurants ...

You can see it in SF movies: a lot of the successful ones in the last years maybe 10, maybe 20 years are not optimistic about the future. The same is in all areas of life: we seem to need always something to reach for, or something to fix, to work on, to improve so we can be (maybe have) eudaimonia (for a lack of a better word) or just a normal life.

Rails is flexible too. Everything that you mentioned here can also have the sample flexibility in Rails: You can use Arel and skip AR, you can use Plex instead of HTML and so on.

The Rails Way is a response to people changing too much Rails and making it super custom.

In the last 4 years alone I touched codebases ranging from Rails Way to Rails and everything dry.rb, to Rails and Grape and Sorbet, to Rails and service objects everywhere and a lot more combinations.

This is not about learning only.

It is about context window too so no matter how much money you put to train your model it can still have degraded performance in following instructions but it will be better to execute the instructions they can follow.

It is also about the harness and how that can help drive the model and pick and choose what to include or not in the context.

These LLMs do not understand the project. For them any next word is good as long as it was picked by the token predictor. It does not have any way to understand but only to do. probability distribution over their vocabulary and if that vocabulary is tainted and lost parts of the original context what is a good candidate there will not match the intention of the initial project.

I dont understand the comparison of Go even with Sqlite and Rails or Django?

one is a programming language with a db server and the others are full stack web frameworks.

How fast can you create (without LLMs) an authentication system plus a form and saving the answers in DB (only for authenticated users) with sane default good secure protections in Go and Sqlite?

And assuming you are amazing at Go (and probably you are) then ask the same question above for any average Go developer vs any average Django or Rails developer.

Even if maintainance is just a Claude/ChatGPT session away we know that the cost of that session could be 1-2 hours of attention going to a supporting tool. And what if suddently is down? now your software team is having an incident about an in house tool instead if an incident about your paying customers.

Moreso while a custom build software just for you is a great fit for your own processes you are loosing innovation and what you could benefit from using a software where someone is trying to innovate and bring out better things that you might not know even to ask for in a prompt as that is not your own domain of expertise or better said you are too expert in your own process that you cannot see what else is out there. And to overcome this you have to try to put in resources for this tool.

That is not true that EU can legislate anything.

Here is a clear list of areas: https://commission.europa.eu/about/role/law/areas-eu-action_...

Also EU does not have a government. There are 3 powers lets say:

- EU Council which represents the countries governments

- The EU Commission representing EU interests

- The EU Parliament representing citizens

We go back to what I said: when introducing a new level of abstraction we got a new governing power. But lets never forget that except the EU Parliament all the others are formed by people proposed by countries governments.

Thus as EU citizen one:

- influences EU direct by voting the EU parliament

- influences EU indirect by voting who rules their countries which will then send people to EU Council and Commission

As you notice the countries governments have more power (2 out of 3) than the EU parliament even if they are different kind of powers.

Still in the end each citizen that goes to vote is deciding the direction of EU in three ways (one direct citizen to EU and two indirect citizen to country to EU). Want more federalization then vote parties that go that way. Want more nationalism then vote that way. But nobody (or few people) really think then consequences of what they vote in their own countries and how that affects everybody in EU.

I dont disagree. But I am also limited in seeing practical solutions to make EU better in this sense for people to feel represented at all levels directly. Please note the practical thing here cause idealist solutions I have plenty. It is just that countries are too nationalistic.

Why I find it hard: EU is another abstraction on top of what we already have: local, regional, national. EU is not just an alliance but a real governing body with legislative and executive branches.

Having an average (as in normal) citizen of a country have to think about their local interests, regional (as in around their local cities), national and global interests is too prone to manipulation. As we saw with Brexit and other campaigns. Too many of us are too focused on self interest and locality to be able to dedicate enough time to global matters.

IMHO of course

> Ministers are appointed, not elected.

I dont understand this line of reasoning about EU:

Ministers are appointed by people we vote. In most democracies the entire government is appointed and maybe indirect voted as a whole (by parliament and maybe directly by citizens).

What I am trying to say is people who proposed this are representatives of those countries (even if indirect their citizens votes vor the party that appointed them).

So representation is not the problem. The problem is citizens (at large) voting only on personal interest and not thinking or not understanding the second order effects. If you don't like what Council did here make sure next round of elections the party that proposed those ministers will not get elected in your country an should not have the power to form a government.

We seem to expect country officials to be even better when playing at EU level and think about yet a greater good than they are doing in their own countries.

I would assume the actual reality of what can be done that is also respecting individual country needs and the EU ad a whole is at least an extra level of complexity than the reduction of those agreements.

Add to that the risk that every diminishing level of comfort for a population in EU seems to bring new percentages for extremist parties.

The second order and third order effects of any decision are too big and almost everyone posting EU should do <insert here a single simple thing> is most probably wrong in ways they dont even know about. That does not mean we should not debate but we should slow down a bit the extreme choices and try to be a bit more understanding of various details.

It feels to me that you are really trying hard to brainstorm root causes for their failures.

Could be a hardware issue, could be a datacenter issue. Could be anything. So it could also be a software issue right?

This is not ideology. This is talking about root causes and I replied to someone that started saying this is not because of them promoting and using LLMs to the maximum. Could be it is not because of that. But it could be because of LLMs.

Keeping a company accountable when they try to sell a service that will replace engineers is not ideology. Ideology will be to not use any company that uses LLMs. But pointing out the disconnect between the public discourse and the status.claude.com is a simple idea.

Can you tell me that all those red lines there are infra?