Full Width 
Shortcuts 
Sign Up 
Log In 
Articles 
Reading List More from Marco.org
I’ve been taking a break from Mastodon as my social home on the web for about six weeks. It has been more difficult than I’d usually admit. I have an amazing local community in my town that I love and am deeply involved in. But nobody here is a programmer, or even a computer nerd, so it doesn’t serve my need for a tech community. I work alone, for myself, in my house. It’s a fortunate lifestyle with many upsides, but it means I don’t get that form of community at work, either. I’ve had this feeling before… as a teenager in the 1990s. It’s profoundly lonely. But when I got internet access, that started to change. I found my people. First in the Total Annihilation community (RIP, Annihilated), then the HardOCP Forum, then the Something Awful Forums, then Tumblr, then Twitter and our community of Apple bloggers, and then Mastodon. Communities form, change, and dissolve over time. None of those are, today, anything like what they were when I most enjoyed them. We change, too. I didn’t move on from most of those solely because they changed — it was usually because we both changed, and it was no longer a good fit. My break from Mastodon has been a relief in some ways, as I’ve felt increasing divergence between what I wanted and what I was getting from it, but I didn’t know where else to go. Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube are all more video-broadcast platforms than communities. All I’ve found on Bluesky is even more anger and politics, the last things I need or want. Threads hasn’t yet stuck for me, and it’s owned by an asshole. Twitter was an amazing product and community that was previously owned by assholes, and now it’s X, which has a strong but different tech community, and is owned by different assholes. So I’ve just been… nowhere, for the first time since the 1990s. It has been, once again, quite lonely. Sure, it’s been relaxing, too, but in the way a vacation is relaxing. It’s great to take breaks, but after a long vacation, I’m ready to turn my brain back on. Without participating in a large, broad tech community, I’m exposed to fewer new ideas, both of my main jobs (app development and podcasting) are much harder, the quality and reach of my work have suffered, my skills aren’t improving as much, my mind is less stimulated, and I feel disconnected from my professions and passions. My world has gotten smaller. I could keep going like this to prove a stubborn victory or purity test, but I’d mostly just be hurting myself. Communities change, conditions change, and we change. We’re all better off if we’re willing to change our minds, and if our communities let us, no matter how strongly our younger selves declared a previous position. So I’m going to wade back in and see how it goes, trying to find a better balance to hopefully have better results, including on Mastodon. My people are spread across multiple services, and I’m going to explore them all, despite most of them being owned by assholes. I’d love to participate in communities without any assholes benefiting from it, but in the modern world, that simply isn’t possible. The only alternative is to isolate myself and not have a community at all (or a job, or a smartphone, or a computer, or internet access, or a car, or most of my food, or my country). That’s neither a price I’m willing to pay nor a condition I’d try to impose on anyone else. I’d love to have your support, forgiveness, and grace as I try to find my people again, and I strive to offer the same to all of you. Everyone deserves to be part of a community. And as I grow, I’m learning to declare fewer absolutes in a complex, imperfect, and constantly changing world.
For the first half of my childhood in suburban Ohio, we lived next to Bob. Bob and his wife were a kind, reserved older couple who decorated their home mostly with crucifixes and talked about Jesus a lot. Bob helped my mom with a lot of common household tasks after my dad died. When she woke up to a small fire on our deck, she didn’t call the fire department — she called Bob.1 I never learned any of Bob’s political views, though I can make some guesses in retrospect. They never mattered. He was just our neighbor. We later moved, and hit the neighbor jackpot with Van. Van was deeply kind, generous, and friendly — the sort of neighbor everyone wishes for. In my lazy teenage years, he’d often mow our lawn or shovel our snow for us before I even woke up. As his mobility later declined, I was honored to return the favor. Van and his delightful wife passed away years ago, before I learned how either of them felt on any political issue. If they were my neighbors today, how likely would that be? * * * If I learn today that my neighbors have political views that my “side” considers unacceptable and unforgivable, should I be able to have dinner at their house, shovel their snow, or even greet them outside? Should I be condemned for supporting or associating with them in non-political contexts? Should I be condemned for not publicly condemning them myself? While privilege and power dynamics play a complex and unavoidable role in this, I don’t want to associate with any community that would insist on either of those.2 And I can’t help but feel that maybe we were better off before we knew everyone’s hot takes on everything. The town coffee shop was just a coffee shop. We weren’t publicly shamed for going there because one of the owners was an ass. It was just a place to hang out with our friends. Our casual work friends were just casual work friends. We didn’t expect them to take positions on the world’s most complicated conflicts. We could just talk about weather and TV shows, and maybe sometimes get a beer after work. And our neighbors were just our neighbors. That was the day I learned the word “SHIT!” ↩︎ Somewhere on Bob’s wall might’ve been a relevant statement from an influential political dissident about casting the first stone. ↩︎
As Apple celebrates its fiftieth birthday, we celebrate the spirit of its formation, when people who loved computers started making great computers to inspire more people to love computers. That spirit is difficult to find in the tech business today. Immense scale, soulless optimization, and an insatiable thirst for growth dominate its behavior and discourse, leaving little room for the spirit and principles embodied by Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak. Apple still has this spirit, and I believe you do, too. But it’s not infinite or invincible. It’s under constant pressure, including from Apple itself. It seems likely that you’ll soon be leading Apple, which will place unfathomable responsibility on your shoulders. As you grow into the leader that we know you can be, I urge you, on behalf of everyone who loves computers as much as we do, to protect and cultivate this spirit of Apple’s founders as the company’s top priority: We love computers. We don’t hide that — we celebrate it! We use computers to enhance our minds, lives, and abilities — not to be controlled, restricted, tricked, placated, angered, or surveilled. Our computers work for us, with the utmost respect for our time, attention, money, data, and privacy. We are customers and owners — not resources to be harvested, annoyed, or badgered into ever more services and upsells. Apple leads the industry in these values, but leading doesn’t always mean excelling. Remaining true to these values requires constant diligence, honest evaluation, introspection, and the audacity and courage to effect change. Apple doesn’t settle for fine, functional, or good enough in its hardware (and thanks for your incredible work on that). We love making and using products that aren’t just great, but greater than they need to be, always raising the bar of greatness for its own sake. Software, services, revenue sources, and world impact need to be held to that same standard. Focus on making great computers with great user experiences above all else, and you can trust that every other major goal will follow: profit, market share, expansion, impact, and benefit to the world. Making great computers must remain Apple’s top responsibility, because if you don’t do it, nobody will.
Ten years ago, Apple’s Phil Schiller surprised Apple enthusiasts and developers by walking out on stage at John Gruber’s The Talk Show Live WWDC event and giving an open, human, honest interview to a somewhat jaded community. I wrote this in response: Both Apple and Phil Schiller himself took a huge risk in doing this. That they agreed at all is a noteworthy gift to this community of long-time enthusiasts, many of whom have felt under-appreciated as the company has grown. […] Phil’s appearance on the show was warm, genuine, informative, and entertaining. It was human. And humanizing the company and its decisions, especially to developers — remember, developer relations is all under Phil — might be worth the PR risk. This started a ten-year run of interviews by Apple executives on The Talk Show every year at WWDC that proved to be great, surprisingly safe PR for Apple. No executive ever said something they shouldn’t have (they’re pros), no sensational or negative news stories ever resulted from them, and Apple’s enthusiastic fans and developers felt seen, heard, and appreciated. * * * For unspecified reasons, Apple has declined to participate this year, ending what had become a beloved tradition in our community — and I can’t help but suspect that it won’t come back. (A lot has changed in the meantime.) Maybe Apple has good reasons. Maybe not. We’ll see what their WWDC PR strategy looks like in a couple of weeks. In the absence of any other information, it’s easy to assume that Apple no longer wants its executives to be interviewed in a human, unscripted, unedited context that may contain hard questions, and that Apple no longer feels it necessary to show their appreciation to our community and developers in this way. I hope that’s either not the case, or it doesn’t stay the case for long. This will be the first WWDC I’m not attending since 2009 (excluding the remote 2020 one, of course). Given my realizations about my relationship with Apple and how they view developers, I’ve decided that it’s best for me to take a break this year, gain some perspective, and decide what my future relationship should look like. Maybe Apple’s leaders are doing that, too.
More in programming
Being focused is about doing less things, and giving more space to the stuff that matters. I am spread out on too many projects and I can’t give enough attention to all of them. It’s time to clearly sort out which one I will keep maintaining and which I should drop entirely. Chuttersnap Mikochi Mikochi is a self-hostable remote file manager I’ve started in 2023. It’s my most successful open source project. I personally use it every day, and thousands of people have adopted it and started using it on their own servers. This year the project has been receiving more and more attention. Maybe it just reached a critical mass of users. In practice, that means a bit more maintenance work, since people have been pointing out bugs and suggesting new features. At the same time, working on Mikochi is fairly enjoyable. It’s a small, self-contained project made with technologies I enjoy working with. I’ve got no complaints about spending some time working on it. Verdict: Keep maintaining Mikochi and actively continue improving it. Itako Itako is an investment portfolio tracking SaaS. I built it for the most part between 2023 and 2025. In terms of scope, it’s the largest project I’ve done entirely by myself. Is it a success? Not really. There are definitely a lot of people who tried Itako, and some who’ve kept using it a bit. But it’s not engaging enough for anyone to consider getting the premium plan. And honestly I don’t find myself using it that much. My view of investing and portfolio management has significantly shifted since I started this project. While I used to think that more sophisticated analysis would lead to better returns, I now realize that the only strategies that consistently make money are honestly stupidly simple. Or maybe it’s a U curve: on one end you’ve got a monkey throwing darts, on the other end you’ve got Jane Street, and everyone in-between fails to beat the market. Anyway, the biggest issue with Itako is how dull working on it is. The interesting parts of the projects are working on statistics and data visualization. But in practice, 90% of the time is spent tediously fixing data, understanding why some German stocks have an exchange labelled XETRA instead of XETR, why some Belgian stocks still have quotes while Euronext shows them as delisted… Verdict: Shut down Itako today. Milou Milou is static site generator for press kits. It started as a fork of presskit.html which was completely abandoned at the time. It’s a very useful tool. At Tsukumogami, it’s part of our Cloudflare pipeline which builds our website in a few minutes whenever we need to change something. It seems like a few other game studios have picked it up, although I rarely get any feedback about it. I’ve not spent too much time working on it in 2026. I think it could be interesting to come back to it and add a feature or two. Better support for multiple languages could be an idea. At least, I need to make sure we don’t fall into the good old Node.js dependency rot. Verdict: Spend some time on Milou. Luluka Earlier this year, I created Luluka. It’s a CLI that allows previewing the output of Ebitengine shaders. I do still think Ebitengine is a great engine and Go is better suited for game development than most people realize. However, after quite a long period of experimentation around it, we’ve decided to remain a Godot studio. On top of having quite a large sunk cost in infrastructure surrounding Godot, the tooling and possibility of doing 3D games still makes it a more attractive engine for our use cases. And I’ve been doing a lot of 3D work lately, so better put those hours to use. Verdict: Archive the project. The rest I’ve had a lot of good ideas that stayed as almost empty repositories in my GitHub. For example, Hakumei was a terminal companion to Mikochi. I made a few commits on this project and never found the time to work on it again. I have to admit I’m probably never going to have the time to work on all those repositories. Time to archive them all!
The resiliency startup has slashed the amount it spends on AI; down from $4,500 per dev, per month, in August, to $1,600 now.
Internalize this graph, we post it on this blog a lot. If trends continue, China will have 10x the electricity of the US in 10 years. Whenever you think about geopolitical strategy, always keep it in mind, because whatever your plans are must consider this. Here’s a strategy that would make sense for America long term. Sell as many AI chips into China as possible, use the money to purchase solar panel and battery factories, and build out electricity capacity as quickly as possible. Fundamentally, compute is a function of electricity. That’s the sort of long term thinking that gives America a chance. With robotic labor, immigrants like Jensen and Elon, a business friendly culture, and an incredible chunk of land, it’s not so clear who is ahead in 50 years. Regardless, I do know this strategy would lead to massive prosperity for the citizens of both countries. However, that’s not close to what we see happening. We see a lot of short term zero sum thinking in action. It’s very scary what the US “AI race” mentality leads to. When exactly does the race end? Whatever capabilities you have today will eventually be matched, unless… …you believe that you can use ASI in a decapitating first strike. I’m worried that this is what these people see as the only way out. It probably doesn’t work, can you outthink steel and drone production? I don’t see how, see my critiques here. But I’m not totally sure, I’m not a superintelligence. And if it does work, that may be the end. My likelihood of imminent WWIII went up a lot with the nationalization of NVIDIA.
This post was previously published through my newsletter on November 9, 2026. From time to time, I will republish newsletter issues on my blog here if I think people (and search engines) might benefit from it. If you want to read everything I’ve written once it is posted, I recommend signing up for the newsletter. If you’re doing anything to stay on top of what is happening in the world of software testing and test automation, like browsing or even posting on LinkedIn, which I stopped doing for the foreseeable future, or reading blog posts - my preferred way of keeping up these days, and I highly recommend Dawid Dylowicz’s excellent Software Testing Weekly aggregator mailing list if you prefer longer-form reading, too you’d be thinking that AI has consumed our entire field, and that everybody (or at least those who post or write in public) is an AI expert these days. The reality, though, is far from that. Yes, some people use a lot of AI, even when I would only call a small fraction of them ‘experts’. I definitely do not classify myself as an ‘AI expert’, by the way. A much larger group uses AI on a less frequent basis, and they’re getting some value out of it. Sometimes more, sometimes less. That’s the group I’m probably in. And then there’s a group of people who haven’t really been using a lot of AI at all so far, beyond maybe the odd prompt to ChatGPT or Claude. I don’t have the actual numbers, but I suspect that this group is a lot larger than you would think from browsing your feed or surfing the blogosphere. You just don’t see them, because they’re typically not the people who do a lot of work in public. A few weeks ago, I started working with a small group of testers to teach them how to use AI in their daily work. This work covers both test automation as well as broader software testing tasks, as some of them contribute to automation on a daily basis, but not all of them do. I’m working with them one day per week, on average, for three months, and we’re making small steps towards making AI a more prominent tool in their tool belt. So, what are we working on right now? I’m pulling ideas from my ‘Valuable Feedback, Fast with AI’ course, and so far, we’ve spent some time setting up Claude, going over some important concepts such as context windows, models, tokens, and (of course!) the probabilistic nature of LLMs, and what that means for the results they provide. We have gone through several initial conversations, using Claude to learn more about and review specific user stories, which was an excellent segue into using talking about MCPs and setting up a connection to both Jira and Confluence using the Atlassian MCP. Last week, we also started experimenting with writing straightforward skills to make it easier for Claude to repeat certain actions in a structured way. These actions ranged from reviewing stories and acceptance criteria to refactoring small chunks of code in their (Robot Framework-based) test automation suite. What I loved about this is the avalanche of ideas that popped up in their heads when they saw how easy it was to use Claude. We made a short to-do list of ideas to try out for the next couple of weeks, and I’m looking forward to seeing them getting more confident around using Claude. One thing I have noticed is that their level of comfort around using AI varies quite a bit. Some of them are naturally quite cautious, which means they’ll ask ‘can we really do this?’ and ‘should we really do this?’ frequently before even submitting a single prompt. This is a good habit, I think, but we’ll have to do some work to get them more comfortable with using LLMs, without losing too much of that caution. Others in the group are the opposite: I need to hold them back a little, because otherwise they’ll create a beautiful mess within days, simply because they see so many opportunities to use Claude in their work. That, too, isn’t inherently bad, but I do want to teach them not just how to get the most out of an LLM, but also (more so) how to use AI prudently. Over the next couple of months, we’ll dive deeper into writing better prompts, creating and structuring skills, better context management, and creating and using agents, and probably a few more things, too. I’m looking forward to seeing these people grow more comfortable around using AI in their daily work, and figuring out where AI genuinely adds value and where it doesn’t in their own context. Is there a deeper message in this newsletter? Maybe not, and I’m just happy to tell you about this project, and how it is a great example of a what I call ‘corporate mentoring’, a very efficient way of teaching a small group of engineers new skills, within their own context. But maybe it’s also to show you that, despite what you might see on the Internet, especially those places featuring a lot of self-congratulation (I’m looking at you, LinkedIn), not everybody out there is an AI expert. At least not yet. So, if you feel like you’re ‘behind’ simply because you’re not running at least 17 agents continuously, creating 5400 merge requests per day, know that you’re not alone. Quite far from it, I would say.
