Surprisingly, I haven't heard of Uruky yet, even though I'm actively looking for EU replacements to a lot of international companies.
I have subscribed for a month and will give it a try.
One feedback already though. Some of the German translations are...not great.
For example, on the landing page under the "Not another AI tool". In English you write "We find it hard to do in a sensible, responsible, and respectful way."
In the German translation its "Es fällt uns schwer, vernünftig, verantwortungsvoll und respektvoll zu handeln."
The German translation makes it sound like you (as in you as a company and person) have a hard time being respectful, not the actual AI implementation.
Thank you so much for the kind words, suggestions, and support! We don't natively speak German, and we used DeepL for most of the translations.
We are currently working with a professional technical translator for German (should get updated translations in a week or two) and will consider that for other languages, but it's quite expensive to do more of that right now.
I know its effecitvely a vendor lock-in and not what you are looking for but I love the SimpleLogin integration that Proton made with Proton Pass.
I have it setup in my browser and phone. Whenever a website or app would like an email for an order or something else, it takes a single click to generate a named alias (using the website name) e
Which forwards emails to my normal inbox. Replying to any received emails also uses the alias.
The SimpleLogin interface could use some improvement though. Deleting unused ones is a bit tidious.
I use SimpleLogin with custom domains but kinda meh.
Brilliant for quick creation of temporary emails, but app troublesome and doesn't show the all options, but much to my disappointment they don't do proper SRS, so it invalidates any, ANY benefits from DMARC or such.
Emails that with SRS would have a proper From, organisation logo from BIMI record, now immediately end up in Spam and are marked as phishing attempts.
I had a better success with personal postfix server forwarding my catch-all alias mail to Gmail than I have with SimpleLogin.
The only thing that is better is that replying to emails is easier, but that could be done while staying compliant with SRS.
I regret buying the subscription and I won't be extending it. Should've go with a proper email service, not a glorified alias generator.
This is purely speculation on my end but paypal has too much friction from a consumer standpoint for me.
I pay mostly with credit card (debit really but entering the number etc). When paying with PayPal, I need to click through several screens to even be able to enter my details. They almost always show a login screen, then I have to find the small text at the bottom that says I dont want one. Then by default they want my SEPA details, which Im not going to give them, before allowing me to select Credit Card. Even then I still have to double check that the "Create PayPal Account" checkbox is unchecked before paying.
Stripe immediately shows you a form and doesn't ask any questions.
I think the social experiment is a cop-out used after it failed. If the PR was accepted, we'd probably see a blog post show up on HN saying that agents can successfully contribute to open source.
Most of the people I know with money are difficult to convince to spend it. e.g. rich people don't buy designer bags; poor people do. My wife makes all of our food; we do delivery or go out to eat maybe once every year or two. We have no recurring subscriptions (other than utilities). Our phone bill is $20 for both of us. etc.
We also live in an area where outdoor ads are banned (which tends to be the case in wealthy areas IME), and I block ads on our computers, so we rarely encounter them. Consumerism is gauche.
I think that's debatable, there's arguments like quantity over quality to be made, but I also think it's somewhat beside the point of "ad supported services are a favour to the poor."
Which is why a lot of things are moving to "pay w/ ads". Not only do you get paid twice, your ad space is more valuable because you've weeded out the people who can't pay.
I agree. I think the main problem is personalized advertisement that incentivizes companies to record as much data as possible. I'd prefer if they worked like they do in print magazines. Every reader sees the same.
Lets say I'm reading a laptop review. Show me adds from the laptop manufacturer or of websites that sell said laptop. People reading the review are likely in the market for a laptop so it makes sense to show it. At most you could probably narrow it down to the country so a German doesn't get shown a Best Buy ad but thats as far as I would go.
> Sales figures collated by The Game Business last month showed that U.S. Switch 2 sales over the holiday period were down around 35% versus the Switch 1's first holiday sales performance back in 2017. In the UK, a similar comparison saw Switch 2 lagging Switch 1 by 16%. Even in Nintendo's homeland of Japan, Switch 2 holiday sales couldn't match Switch 1, and were down by 5.5% over the year's final nine weeks.
> In France, 2025's final tally of Switch 2 sales was down by "over 30%" versus the amount Switch 1 notched up back in 2017
Switch 2 is the fastest selling console of all time right now. [0]
They sold more than 17 million units in less than a year. The Wii U only sold 13 million over its entire lifetime. The Switch 1 took 2 years to reach 20 million, and the Switch 2 will very likely reach that number in less than half the time.
Nintendo may have expected even higher sales numbers but saying that
I find that with more complex projects (full-stack application with some 50 controllers, services, and about 90 distinct full-feature pages) it often starts writing code that simply breaks functionality.
For example, had to update some more complex code to correctly calculate a financial penalty amount. The amount is defined by law and recently received an overhaul so we had to change our implementation.
Every model we tried (and we have corporate access and legal allowance to use pretty much all of them) failed to update it correctly. Models would start changing parts of the calculation that didn't need to be updated. After saying that the specific parts shouldn't be touched and to retry, most of them would go right back to changing it again. The legal definition of the calculation logic is, surprisingly, pretty clear and we do have rigorous tests in place to ensure the calculations are correct.
Beyond that, it was frustrating trying to get the models to stick to our coding standards. Our application has developers from other teams doing work as well. We enforce a minimum standard to ensure code quality doesn't suffer and other people can take over without much issue. This standard is documented in the code itself but also explicitly written out in the repository in simple language. Even when explicitly prompting the models to stick to the standard and copy pasting it into the actual chat, it would ignore 50% of it.
The most apt comparison I can make is that of a consultant that always agrees with you to your face but when doing actual work, ignores half of your instructions and you end up running after them to try to minimize the mess and clean up you have to do. It outputs more code but it doesn't meet the standards we have. I'd genuinely be happy to offload tasks to AI so I can focus on the more interesting parts of work I have, but from my experience and that of my colleagues, its just not working out for us (yet).
I noticed that you said "models" & not "agents". Agents can receive feedback from automated QA systems, such as linters, unit, & integration tests, which can dramatically improve their work.
There's still the risk that the agent will try to modify the QA systems themselves, but that's why there will always be a human in the loop.
Should've clarified in that case. I used models as a general stand-in for AI.
To provide a bit more context:
- We use VS Code (plus derivatives like Cursor) hooked up to general modals and allowing general context access to the entire repository.
- We have a MCP server that has access to company internal framework and tools (especially the documentation) so it should know how they are used.
So far, we've found 2 use-cases that make AI work for us:
1. Code Review. This took quite a bit of refinement for the instructions but we've got it to a point where it provides decent comments on the things we want it to comment on. It still fails on the more complex application logic, but will consistently point out minor things. It's used now as a Pre-PR review so engineers can use it and fix things before publishing a PR. Less noise for the rest of the developers.
2. CRUD croft like tests for a controller. We still create the controller endpoint, but providing it with the controller, DTOs, and an example of how another controller has its tests done, it will produce decent code. Even then, we still often have to fix a couple of things and debug to see where it went wrong like fixing a broken test by removing the actual strictlyEquals() call.
Just keeping up with newest AI changes is hard. We all have personal curiosity but at the end of the day, we need to deliver our product and only have so much time to experiment with AI stuff. Nevermind all the other developments in our regulatory heavy environment and tech stack we need to keep on top off.
Fair, however at some point of a companies size/spending the complexity of integrating with a SaaS becomes as large as the one to run your own open source tool.
Beyond that, and Im aware this is very much application/company dependent, theres plenty of SaaS companies that offer horrendous or no support no matter what you pay. We used to use splunk for monitoring and logging. Paid a ton of money because we were handling financial data and needed tracibility and reliability. We constantly had to put out fires that were caused by their unreliable platform. It was not a good experience.
Ultimately, we jumped ship to Prometheus. We pay a fraction of the price and spent less time on it.
I have subscribed for a month and will give it a try.
One feedback already though. Some of the German translations are...not great. For example, on the landing page under the "Not another AI tool". In English you write "We find it hard to do in a sensible, responsible, and respectful way." In the German translation its "Es fällt uns schwer, vernünftig, verantwortungsvoll und respektvoll zu handeln."
The German translation makes it sound like you (as in you as a company and person) have a hard time being respectful, not the actual AI implementation.
reply