Not sure I fully understood what you meant by 'the open category is done'?

Also, from the categories that you mentioned, do you compete in West Coast Swing?

Reverse the benefits != increase the net risk

It took a while going through the data in the results section to see this.

They actually do compare against a control group. This is the study that is being referenced.

https://bmjmedicine.bmj.com/content/5/1/e002150

The data on the results section shows almost parity between the control group and participants who discontinued for 2 years.

Note that while it is a well conducted study at the US VA with 300,000+ patients, it is not a randomized study so fully eliminating confounding variables and reverse causality is hard.

This is the study that the article references. (The linked one on the post is an older study)

https://bmjmedicine.bmj.com/content/5/1/e002150

I came across this site earlier, but at a quick search could not find any other sources corroborating the fact that this vote indeed happened.

Source for the amendments discussed:

- https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-10-2026-007...

In the day of so much AI content, that straight-up-rant felt oddly... human.

It felt like sitting on the old college dorm a lifetime ago unwinding at the end of the day over a beer; and listening to the rant of a batchmate who has obsessed over every single alternative available for their specific use-case and not found one that even comes close.

Yeah, it's been awhile since I've seen a truly dumb Apple fanboy opinion and it somehow feels fresh among AI slop.

I'm seeing a lot of this same bottle neck show up around code review.

Very interested to hear more experiences of attempts to solve this pragmatically.

Couldn't that also be viewed as the beauty of it?

Python is a rather accessible language to learn, and that the performance gap has closed enabling this simple language to operate at all levels It's fascinating.

You both hit on the core paradox of 2026. _wire_33 is right about the irony of high-end AI relying on a 'scripting' syntax, but as r-johnv noted, the performance gap has effectively closed. In my view, the shift is no longer about the language itself—it's about the Orchestration Layer. Whether it's Python or an AI-Native IDE like Cursor, the 'intelligence' of the tool is becoming more critical than the syntax. We are moving from being 'Authors' to 'Architects'. What do you think—will the IDE eventually make the language choice irrelevant?

> Vertical slice architecture — organizing code by feature with each slice self-contained — is emerging as the AI-friendly pattern because it maximizes context isolation.

> Three architectural principles are gaining consensus: "token efficiency" as a design constraint (structuring code to minimize the context an AI model needs for any given task), explicit over implicit everywhere (explicit types, explicit error handling, explicit interfaces), and co-location of related code. These principles aren't new, but AI has given them renewed urgency.

I found the architecture section of his article (which is pretty far down) to be the most interesting.

That is real bad advice

The rules and guidelines for good code have not changed. Don't change that for the sake of today's Ai and limitations