sReinwald

I'm from a region bordering the palatinate region and I'll absolutely back you up on being able to understand them pretty well. There's an amish guy who sometimes pops up on my TikTok feed, and it's always fascinating to me how the language, while it has obviously drifted away over hundreds of years, is still fairly intelligible for me. The comparison to older people from your local village is pretty apt.

Funny sidenote: The highest rate of foreign migrants into the palatinate region --- where the amish came from --- is now from US citizens

For anyone wondering whether this reflects some strange Amish return migration: almost certainly not. It’s overwhelmingly the result of the enormous US military presence around Ramstein, Landstuhl, and Kaiserslautern. It's also not exactly a recent development.

at a breakneck pace for no apparent reason, lately.

This isn't surprising to me at all.

The World Cup is on, and it draws attention away from politics. This has been a pretty common observable pattern for as long as I can remember.

You clearly haven't played WoW in a decade, judging from this comment.

Even if you buy the expansion just to get the "feel" on how it was, it's impossible.

You don't buy previous expansions after a new one launches - they roll into the base subscription. After Shadowlands released, buying BfA separately wasn't even an option.

MMOs like GW2 and even SWTOR do it way better

“Keep every expansion fully relevant forever” sounds nice until you think through what that actually means for an MMO like WoW. You would either fragment the player base across twenty years of content or turn gearing and balance into a complete circus.

Imagine your best-in-slot trinkets from the current raid and Siege of Orgrimmar, your tier set from Dragon Soul, the weapon from Hellfire Citadel. Try organizing a group when other classes need gear from Icecrown Citadel, The Everbloom, Argus and Ahn'Qiraj.

The point of "current expansion content is relevant" is that it funnels the player base into a fairly narrow area of the theme park. That is important, because if you spread out the population over 20 years worth of content, you risk making the world feel incredibly empty, which is a death sentence for a theme park MMORPG.

Blizzard’s actual approach is much more sane: older content comes back in controlled ways. Timewalking reopens older expansion content with scaling and relevant rewards, and Mythic+ seasons already rotate older dungeons into the current endgame pool. Midnight's Season One, for example, features dungeons from Wrath of the Lich King, Warlords of Draenor, Legion, and Dragonflight.

Yeah, totally valid for things like D&D - I split that out too, for the same reason.

Work and homelab overlap constantly for me though. I make heavy use of periodic notes, so even something like recipes would get linked in weekly logs for meal planning or tracking. The connections don't have to be deep to be useful - sometimes it might just be 'I made this thing on this day' and that's enough context to be worth having in one place.

I keep one vault for almost everything because the cross-domain links are where the interesting stuff happens. I studied sociology, political science, and media & communication before moving into IT, and I'm still actively interested in all of it and especially how these topics intersect. Where does a note on Baudrillard's concept of hyperreality go? The social science vault? The IT vault? Both? With a single vault I don't have to answer that question - the note exists, and I can use it to make connections to AI, social media, or cultural trends.

Multiple vaults break this. You end up duplicating notes, or linking across vault boundaries (which adds friction), or just forgetting where you put something. That's trading one of Obsidian's strongest features for... tidier folders.

The one case where I do split things out is genuinely isolated project knowledge - like a D&D campaign I used to GM. 99% of those notes have zero connection to anything else. Separation makes sense there precisely because there's nothing to link.

One more thing: a lot of people solve the "big vault gets messy" problem with elaborate folder structures, but Obsidian's search (especially with Omnisearch) makes most of that unnecessary. I don't really organize my notes into careful hierarchies. I write them, link them, and search for them. The mess is fine. I am one with the mess.

Third-party MCP servers create at least two different security problems. One is prompt/context injection through the tool output. The other is the much more conventional risk of executing untrusted code with transient dependencies on your machine (which is how the recent litellm compromise was discovered).

Containerization only helps with the second one, not the first, but that still matters. If you’re going to run random third-party MCP servers, isolating them from your host and any sensitive local data is still an obvious improvement over no isolation.

"It's not a complaint about water. It's a complaint about the wetness."

If capitalism requires constant vigilant government intervention to prevent monopolistic practices, anti-competitive markets, and asymmetric bargaining power, then it seems to me that this is absolutely a complaint about capitalism. If anything, your comment just makes the indictment more damning.

Any single LLM-edited comment reads fine in isolation. The uncanny valley kicks in when you read thirty of them in a row and they all use the same "it's not X, it's Y" construction. The problem isn't that LLM prose sounds inhuman but that it sounds like one human writing everything. Homogeneity at scale becomes an uncanny valley.

This happens because most people just paste a draft and say "make this better" with zero style direction. The model defaults to its own median register, and that register gets very recognizable after you've seen it a hundred times.

But this is a usage problem, not a fundamental one. I actually ran an experiment on this — fed Claude Code a massive export of my own Reddit comments, thousands of them across different subreddits, and had it build a style guide based on how I actually write and argue. The output was genuinely good. It sounded like me, not like Claude. The typical Claude-isms were just about gone.

I wouldn't expect most people to do that. But even a small prompt adjustment makes a real difference. Compare "improve this email" to something like:

    Your job is to proofread and edit the following email draft. 
    Don't make it longer, more formal, or more "polished" than it needs to be. 
    Fix anything that's actually wrong (grammar that changes meaning, tone misreads). 
    Leave stylistic roughness alone if it fits the voice. 
    If the draft is already fine, say so.

But if we're being honest, most people don't care about preserving their voice. They need to email their professor or write a letter to their bank, and they don't want to be misunderstood or feel stupid.

Overall this was a worthwhile assist. I believe (totally understandable) anti-AI animus is coloring a lot of these replies.

That, and hindsight bias. People know the second version came from an LLM, so it's automatically "flat." But if that edited comment had just been posted, nobody would've blinked. It reads fine.

IMO, there's a distinction worth drawing here: "AI edited" and "AI generated" are not the same thing. If you write something to express your own thinking, then use an LLM to tighten the phrasing or catch grammar issues, that's just editing. You're still the one with the ideas and the intent. The LLM is a tool, not an author.

The real failure mode is obvious enough: people who dump raw model prose into threads without critical review. The only one who "delved into things" was the model - not the human pressing send. That does flatten everything. But that’s a different case from a non-native speaker using a tool to express their own point more clearly.

The "preserve your voice" argument also smuggles in a premise I don't necessarily share - that everyone should care about preserving their voice. I'm neurodivergent. Being misunderstood when I know I've been clear is one of the most frustrating experiences there is. For some of us, being understood sometimes matters more than sounding like ourselves.

Interestingly, when I apply the "simply repeat the prompt" technique [1], Sonnet 4.6 on the website got it right every time, both with and without extended thinking.

Not repeating the prompt got a mix of walk and drive answers.

I love how prompt engineering is basically techno-alchemy

1: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2512.14982

You are essentially amortizing a single dose over 6 months by micro-dosing and receiving a clearly sub-therapeutic dose. While that may work for your specific usage, it doesn't change the unit economics for someone who needs the standard therapeutic dose, which in my case at 10 mg is roughly €400 every 4 weeks.

It’s a bit like arguing that a Porsche GT3 RS is an 'affordable' car because the monthly payment is low, provided you finance it over 30 years. The sticker price hasn't changed, you've just engaged in extreme creative accounting to make it fit a monthly budget.

I suspect a big reason for why Mounjaro is still fairly expensive here in Germany (I pay nearly €400 for a 10mg Qwickpen - a 12.5mg Qwickpen is nearly €500) is due to health insurance not being allowed to cover them for anything but diabetes treatment.

If health insurance companies would be able to cover these drugs, there'd have to be negotiations between Eli Lilly and the insurance companies, and insurance companies have a bigger lever than individual patients who pay out of pocket. Self-payers are just price-takers. We pay whatever Eli Lilly wants us to pay.

It would probably be interesting, but if you are not overweight, the appetite suppression will likely make this not a very healthy or very fun experiment. I started at 5mg in October, and even on that smaller dose I had to force myself to eat even just ~800kcal a day - especially in the early weeks. When you have a lot of weight to lose, that's a pretty welcome effect. When you are already at a healthy weight, not so much. That caloric intake would put most adults into a pretty deep caloric deficit.

I'd suspect if the effects on non-weight indications check out in studies, we might see drugs that could specifically target those effects without also slowing down your digestive tract. Addictions like nicotine and alcoholism and their consequences cost health insurance companies (and us as a society) billions of Euros/Dollars each year, so there'd be a strong incentive to pursue this.

One thing I have noticed on Mounjaro is a (at least subjectively) significant decrease in impulse spending / buying random crap off Amazon. I have ADHD and that has been a real problem for quite a while - even with ADHD medication (Elvanse/Vyvanse in my case).

The part of Mounjaro that regulates the craving side of the weight loss equation (like reducing 'food noise' and the desire for sugary and fatty foods) seems to also affect other behaviors due to Mounjaro's effect on the brain's reward circuitry. I believe there are also early preliminary studies that indicate it can help with addictions like alcoholism.

Those drugs really are quite something. Shame they're so damn expensive. Insurance here in Germany is unfortunately legally prohibited from covering GLP-1 class drugs for weight loss unless you have a diabetes diagnosis.

Like I said, the first examples are fairly trivial, and you absolutely don't need an LLM for those. A good agent architecture lets the LLM orchestrate but the actual API calls are deterministic (through tool use / MCPs).

My point was specifically about the news filtering part, which was something I had tried in the past but never managed to solve to my satisfaction.

The agent's job in the end for a morning briefing would be:

  - grab weather, calendar, Todoist data using APIs or MCP  
  - grab news from select sources via RSS or similar, then filter relevant news based on my interests and things it has learned about me  
  - synthesize the information above

But can't you do the same just using appropriate MCP servers with any of the LLM providers?

Yeah, absolutely. And that was going to be my approach for a personal AI assistant side project. No need to reinvent the wheel writing a Todoist integration when MCPs exist.

The difference is where it runs. ChatGPT Tasks and MCP through the Claude/OpenAI web interfaces run on their infrastructure, which means no access to your local network — your Home Assistant instance, your NAS, your printer. A self-hosted agent on a mac mini or your old laptop can talk to all of that.

But I think the big value-add here might be "disposable automation". You could set up a Home Assistant automation to check the weather and notify you when rain is coming because you're drying clothes on the clothesline outside. That's 5 minutes of config for something you might need once. Telling your AI assistant "hey, I've got laundry on the line. Let me know if rain's coming and remind me to grab the clothes before it gets dark" takes 10 seconds and you never think about it again. The agent has access to weather forecasts, maybe even your smart home weather station in Home Assistant, and it can create a sub-agent, which polls those once every x minutes and pings your phone when it needs to.

You could, but Claude Code's memory system works well for specialized tasks like coding - not so much for a general-purpose assistant. It stores everything in flat markdown files, which means you're pulling in the full file regardless of relevance. That costs tokens and dilutes the context the model actually needs.

An embedding-based memory system (letta, mem0, or a self-built PostgreSQL + pgvector setup) lets you retrieve selectively and only grab what's relevant to the current query. Much better fit for anything beyond a narrow use case. Your assistant doesn't need to know your location and address when you're asking it to look up whether sharks are indeed older than trees, but it probably should know where you live when you ask it about the weather, or good Thai restaurants near you.

Disclaimer: Haven't used any of these (was going to try OpenClaw but found too many issues). I think the biggest value-add is agency. Chat interfaces like Claude/ChatGPT are reactive, but agents can be proactive. They don't need to wait for you to initiate a conversation.

What I've always wanted: a morning briefing that pulls in my calendar (CalDAV), open Todoist items, weather, and relevant news. The first three are trivial API work. The news part is where it gets interesting and more difficult - RSS feeds and news APIs are firehoses. But an LLM that knows your interests could actually filter effectively. E.g., I want tech news but don't care about Android (iPhone user) or MacOS (Linux user). That kind of nuanced filtering is hard to express as traditional rules but trivial for an LLM.

Not saying the frontier models aren't smarter than the ones I can run on my two 4090s (they absolutely are) but I feel like you're exaggerating the security implications a bit.

We've seen some absolutely glaring security issues with vibe-coded apps / websites that did use Claude (most recently Moltbook).

No matter whether you're vibe coding with frontier models or local ones, you simply cannot rely on the model knowing what it is doing. Frankly, if you rely on the model's alignment training for writing secure authentication flows, you are doing it wrong. Claude Opus or Qwen3 Coder Next isn't responsible if you ship insecure code - you are.

IMO the value and differentiating factor is basically just the ability to organize them cleanly with accompanying scripts and references, which are only loaded on demand. But a skill just by itself (without scripts or references) is essentially just a slash command with metadata.

Another value add is that theoretically agents should trigger skills automatically based on context and their current task. In practice, at least in my experience, that is not happening reliably.

I don't see how that makes it uniquely viable in France. Germany has something very much like this too. And we've had it for nearly 13 years.

Since 31 August 2013 companies which operate public petrol stations or have the power to set their prices are required to report price changes for the most commonly used types of fuel, i.e. Super E5, Super E10 and Diesel “in real time” to the Market Transparency Unit for Fuels. This then passes on the incoming price data to consumer information service providers, which in turn pass it on to the consumer.

As a consumer, there is no direct API by the MTS-K that you can use, but there are some services like Tankerkoenig which pass this data on to you. I have used their API in Home Assistant before I switched to an EV.

https://www.bundeskartellamt.de/EN/Tasks/markettransparencyu...

It's been a few days, but when I tried it, it just completely bricked itself because it tried to install a plugin (matrix) even though that was already installed. That wasn't some esoteric config or anything. It bricked itself right in the onboarding process.

When I investigated the issue, I found a bunch of hardcoded developer paths and a handful of other issues and decided I'm good, actually.

    sre@cypress:~$ grep -r "/Users/steipete" ~/.nvm/versions/node/v24.13.0/lib/node_modules/openclaw/ | wc -l
    144

    sre@cypress:~$ grep -Fr "workspace:*" ~/.nvm/versions/node/v24.13.0/lib/node_modules/openclaw/ | wc -l
    41

I really don't understand how anyone just hands this vibe coded mess API keys and access to personal files and accounts.

From my experience: TDD helps here - write (or have AI write) tests first, review them as the spec, then let it implement.

But when I use Claude code, I also supervise it somewhat closely. I don't let it go wild, and if it starts to make changes to existing tests it better have a damn good reason or it gets the hose again.

The failure mode here is letting the AI manage both the implementation and the testing. May as well ask high schoolers to grade their own exams. Everyone got an A+, how surprising!

I think point a) is actually backwards and potentially counterproductive to the petition's stated goals.

The petition explicitly highlights maintainer burnout and the "unausgewogene Verantwortungslast" (unbalanced responsibility burden) as core problems. Excluding project owners/maintainers from recognition would exclude precisely the people carrying the heaviest load – the ones triaging issues at 2am, reviewing PRs, making architectural decisions, and bearing the psychological weight of knowing critical infrastructure depends on their continued engagement.

The XZ Utils incident is instructive here: the attack vector was specifically a burned-out solo maintainer who was socially engineered because he was overwhelmed and desperate for help. If anything, recognition and support structures should prioritize these individuals, not exclude them. Your concern about "pet projects with no impact" is valid, but the solution isn't to exclude owners categorically – it's to define impact criteria. A threshold based on adoption metrics, dependency chains, or inclusion in public infrastructure would filter out portfolio projects without penalizing the people doing the most critical work.

Point c) also seems problematic for similar reasons: much of maintainer work isn't "merged contributions" – it's code review, issue triage, documentation, community management, security response. Under your criteria, the person who reviews and merges 500 PRs per year while writing none themselves would receive no recognition.

The petition is trying to address a structural problem where society extracts massive value from unpaid labor while providing no support structures. Excluding the most burdened participants seems like it would perpetuate rather than solve that problem.

Strange framing, isn't it?

Bariatric surgery shows 25-65% significant regain rates depending on definition and timeframe. And regular dieting is even worse. Nobody would frame that as a safety issue. That's... just how weight loss works, not a unique GLP-1 problem.

Calling a return of symptoms (obesity) a "safety issue" is like saying insulin has "no safe off-ramp" because diabetics get hyperglycemic when they stop taking it.

Fear gets clicks, I guess.

This screams of classic techno-optimist "just build one simple solution" mindset.

Yes, consent fatigue is real and nobody likes these cookie banners. Which is also the exact reason why I think they are important. Making tracking visible to the user is the point. It creates an actual "cost" for tracking by forcing websites to actively ask the user to consent. The moment you hide it in a one-time set-and-forget browser setting is the moment when informed consent dies, tracking becomes invisible, and accountability disappears.

We are also looking at very perverse incentives here: Who controls the biggest browsers? Google's Chromium is basically the engine behind 80% of the browser market right now. Apple and Microsoft aren't exactly neutral parties either. Google is an advertising company, and Apple and Microsoft still have a huge interest in data. The idea that you should trust these parties to implement a "simple" consent system that runs counter to their business model is... optimistic, to put it mildly.

You would also have to trust websites to accurately categorize their cookies. If your cookie preferences are a set-and-forget setting in your browser, are you sure that random website you just visited didn't declare Google Analytics as "essential" for their website to work? Are you going to check?

The blog post also assumes cookie preferences are universal, but perhaps I'm okay with analytics on a random tech blog but absolutely not on a website about medical issues.

The funniest part: The "Do Not Track" signal already exists, and it failed spectacularly. The post even mentions it. DNT was supposed to be exactly this simple, browser-level signal. And websites just ignore it.

Sidenote:

Imagine if every time you got into your car, you had to manually approve the engine's use of oil, the tires' use of air, and the radio's use of electricity. It’s absurd, right? You’d set your preferences once, and the car would just work.

Yes, absurd. Except that's more or less happening with different features. Every time I start my car, I need to manually disable the speed limit warning because it's annoying, and the lane keep assist because I feel like it is overly aggressive and sometimes genuinely dangerous. Also, the analogy is exceptionally weak. The author compares mechanical necessities (oil, air) with optional data extraction. That's hardly the same thing. Cookies required for basic functionality of websites is usually enabled by default. A more appropriate equivalent would be a popup by the car's dealership asking you to track everywhere you drive, and how fast, and if you looked at some billboards along the way.

You're absolutely right that named credit has tangible career benefits that go well beyond feelings. But I think Vincke threaded that needle well with the anonymous public credit - it creates a documented public record of innovative work at the company level while preserving the engineer's privacy.

The engineer can still leverage this (LinkedIn, internal promotions, industry networking) without being forced into a public-facing role they might not want. When they're interviewing or networking, they can point to Vincke's public acknowledgment and say "that was my project" in contexts where it's professionally relevant, without having their personal social media permanently associated with it.

Considering Vincke was impressed enough to publicly acknowledge this individual's passion and initiative, there's no doubt in my mind that this engineer could get named credit or something that would acknowledge their role in the project if they wanted it.

But to go a bit meta: I think it's strange that we are discussing this in the context of a CEO publicly acknowledging one of their engineers (even if anonymously). Vincke is, at least in the context of the broader industry, going above and beyond. I doubt you'd see Ubisoft, EA, or Blizzard publicly acknowledging a single engineer's after-hours passion project in this way.

Feels a bit like misdirected energy, I guess? Why are we debating about the nuances of named vs anonymous credit and recognition when industry leaders don't give any?

It's like calling someone out for only tipping 10% while ignoring the guy in the top hat who's tipping 0. If you want gaming companies to get better about giving credit and recognition, you should support the companies that are at least moving in the right direction. I know it's easy to be cynical, but don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

I'm not necessarily saying they'd get pilloried. I'm saying that having your personal digital space colonized by people who think you're customer support is insanely disruptive. Think replies full of "I only get 8 fps in Act 3, pls fix" when you just wanted to post a photo of your vacation.

I can't think of specific names anymore since it's been a while since I have played it, but a lot of the developers for World of Warcraft used to be and likely still are active on Twitter. For a lot of them, the community knew fairly well which features of the game or which class they were responsible for. When I used to look at the replies to some of their Tweets (even ones completely unrelated to WoW), they were often full of complaints about their area of perceived responsibility.

I fully understand every engineer who just wants to put their head down and work on their stuff they're passionate about without having to also be public-facing. Even in a small company like mine, some of our devs constantly complain that some customers know that they are responsible for certain features of our product and email them directly rather than going through the proper support channels.

Your point about the games industry often struggling with providing proper credit to devs is well taken - it's absolutely an issue. But in this case, Vincke did actually do that, in a way. He could've just kept quiet and let the playerbase think it was a company effort, but instead he publicly highlighted and recognized the passion and work of one of their engineers (even though anonymously). That engineer can look at the countless positive replies to that post and get the nice fuzzy feeling without getting dragged into the spotlight.

Not that I'm aware of. I thought that was weird at first as well, but I assume it might be in a way to protect the engineer.

Unfortunately, singling out any individual developer, even for praise, can attract unwanted negative attention online. By acknowledging the passion and the work without naming the person, Swen gives them full credit internally while shielding them from becoming a public target.

This doesn't even necessarily have to be intentional harassment, but if this engineer is now the "SteamDeck guy" at Larian, their social media might get flooded by people who mistake their personal social media accounts for a support ticket.

I'm sure the engineer has the option to self-identify if they wish, but this approach feels like a sign of good and thoughtful leadership.

This is a gigantic effort from Larian, who among all things is still updating its software instead of resting on its own laurels.

What makes this story even better is how it actually came about - this wasn't initially a top-down corporate initiative, but rather a passion project from a single engineer who worked on it after hours. The fact that Larian immediately recognized the value and threw their full support behind it says everything about their culture.

Swen Vincke shared the backstory:

The story of how this came to be really is one of true passion. The Steam Deck native build was initiated by a single engineer who really wanted a smoother version of the game on Steam Deck and so he started working on it after hours. When we tried it out, we were all surprised by how good it felt and so it didn't take much to convince us to put our shoulders behind it and get it released. It's this type of pure passion for their craft that makes me fall in love with my developers over and over again. Considering myself very lucky to have people like him on my team. Try it out!

https://x.com/LarAtLarian/status/1970526548592623969

That combination of individual passion and company willingness to back good ideas is what makes Larian special.