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.

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.

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

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.

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

Like Buy EuroCan or But Caneu (maybe better names)

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.

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.

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.

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"

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.

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".

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?

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

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.

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.

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.

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.