I think one difference between OpenJev and Jev would be, then, is what it's trained on.

Jev is, on the surface, cheap enough for me not to seek self-hosted alternatives. On the other hand, I wish the free/open weight alternatives to Pangram were better.

I wonder if anyone reads these? If you do, if you want to complain to me about observability, please shoot me an email at hello@telemetrymachine.com!

We have worked in the observability industry for a combined 15 years and we are trying to right the wrongs we have seen in the industry. It seems like the existing companies are more interested in extracting more and more money from giant customers than actually helping people run their software well.

I won't bury the lede: what we've built is OTel native, wide events native, and works well with agents. We are also, shamelessly, cheaper than everyone else. One of the reasons observability is struggling with adoption is because it's too damn expensive.

So that's what we're building at telemetrymachine.com: an observability product focused on helping you actually track your software (starting with OTel traces and logs). We are really inspired by Observability 2.0/wide events, which really just is an invitation to stuff as many attributes, with as much cardinality as you want, into your spans/logs.

One thing we are also doing differently is trying to be as lean as efficient as possible. We are just two people now, and we are going to be very careful about hiring anyone. Most importantly, what we need to do is avoid a giant salesforce as much as possible. I wrote about this in a blog post[1] but the reason observability is so expensive is actually the giant sales force these companies tend to have.

We also put a lot of work into actual infra efficiency – ie we run on bare metal, and wrote a state of the art[2] storage engine. All of this is to help get prices down while still building a sustainable business.

We are very keen to engage with observability users, so if you do, or do NOT, use observability in your services, please reach out and we'd love to hear your problems and thoughts!

[1] https://telemetrymachine.com/blog/observability-doesnt-have-... [2] https://telemetrymachine.com/blog/the-new-state-of-the-art-i...

In my own childhood, seeing a satellite fly overhead used to be rare.

Now I see one every 2 minutes.

* I wish I could turn it on selectively. Many of my requests do not require the "verification before completion" and TDD ceremony. For example, agents using stock Superpowers will go so far as to grep a file every time you ask to add something to them to verify that the edit really landed.

* While I like speccing out/designing a project before implementation (nothing new in that regard), I don't like how precisely superpowers plans out the implementation in the /writing-plans skill. It tells future agents exactly what files to edit. There are two big issues with this:

  * We need to manage context rot. If one LLM session is responsible for writing out the entire plan, we aren't solving context rot. Not only is the "smart window" of context exhausted by the time the agent is planning, eg, step 7 out of 15, but it's also dragging forward all the possibly bad ideas it had earlier. It would be better if steps were planned independently.

  * Implementation is an iterative process. You find things out as you go. Your assumptions turned out to be wrong, you realize APIs don't behave the way you thought you did, etc. This is why writing out a precise plan ahead of time is an issue – it's written without this iteration.

Instead of writing a super detailed spec, I think I'd like /writing-plans to come up with appropriate "units" of work (sometimes called slices) and to brainstorm with the user regarding implementation, but to leave it looser than "edit this exact file in this exact way". That should leave a lot more leeway to implementation agents but still give the review agents something to check compliance against.

We have done loads of research into using object storage wherever we can (given how cheap it is compared to SSDs), and so far it seems like making your application object store-aware is a far surer bet than abstracting S3 behind the file system. The behavior is just too different.

I'm more interested in applications that cleverly use object storage, e.g. AutoMQ, which is quite compatible with Kafka APIs but needs no HDDs.

For me, the #1 feature of the Advantage2 is ortho. Everything else is a distant second. I don't understand how anyone can use anything but ortho.

Yes, another layout would make your fingers travel even less, but ortho lets you reduce a lot of seeking/travel without learning anything new.

Every year, I try the stock iOS keyboard, but then I always go back.

Boy did I hate when a "secure" input came up and I was forced to use the default keyboard.

Wrt the “occasional bug”, what happens is that sometimes (enough to make it bad) the keyboard doesn’t render at all!

But in general, there is no giant improvement, none of the major ones are even competent enough to figure out a grid of numbers is better than a row, but Apple is even worse - it doesn't even let you type a number on long hold, for some reason thinking that a letter ų you'll never type in your English life is a better alternative

To me, not being able to type in numbers easily is a permanent suffering, though ok, not the end of the world

And unfortunately don't think there is a single swipe keyboard that's properly customizable to fix those glaring issues...