This is not a great argument:

> But it is hard to argue against the value of current AI [...] it is getting $1B dollar runway already.

The psychic services industry makes over $2 billion a year in the US [1], with about a quarter of the population being actual believers. [2].

[1] The https://www.ibisworld.com/united-states/industry/psychic-ser...

[2] https://news.gallup.com/poll/692738/paranormal-phenomena-met...

2025 was the year of development tool using AI agents. I think we'll shift attention to non development tool using AI agents. Most business users are still stuck using chat gpt as some kind of grand oracle that will write their email or powerpoint slides. There are bits and pieces of mostly technology demo level solutions but nothing that is widely used like AI coding tools are so far. I don't think this is bottle necked on model quality.

I don't need an AGI. I do need a secretary type agent that deals with all the simple but yet laborious non technical tasks that keep infringing on my quality engineering time. I'm CTO for a small startup and the amount of non technical bullshit that I need to deal with is enormous. Some examples of random crap I deal with: figuring out contracts, their meaning/implication to situations, and deciding on a course of action; Customer offers, price calculations, scraping invoices from emails and online SAAS accounts, formulating detailed replies to customer requests, HR legal work, corporate bureaucracy, financial planning, etc.

A lot of this stuff can be AI assisted (and we get a lot of value out of ai tools for this) but context engineering is taking up a non trivial amount of my time. Also most tools are completely useless at modifying structured documents. Refactoring a big code base, no problem. Adding structured text to an existing structured document, hardest thing ever. The state of the art here is an ff-ing sidebar that will suggest you a markdown formatted text that you might copy/paste. Tool quality is very primitive. And then you find yourself just stripping all formatting and reformatting it manually. Because the tools really suck at this.

> All these improvement in a single year

> hard to argue against the value of current AI

> People are willing to pay $200 per month, and it is getting $1B dollar runway already.

Those are 3 different things. There can be a LOT of fast and significant improvements but still remain extremely far from the actual goal, so far it looks like actually little progress.

People pay for a lot of things, including snake oil, so convincing a lot of people to pay a bit is not in itself a proof of value, especially when some people are basically coerced into this, see how many companies changed their "strategy" to mandating AI usage internally, or integration for a captive audience e.g. Copilot.

Finally yes, $1B is a LOT of money for you and I... but for the largest corporations it's actually not a lot. For reference Google earned that in revenue... per day in 2023. Anyway that's still a big number BUT it still has to be compared with, well how much does OpenAI burn. I don't have any public number on that but I believe the consensus is that it's a lot. So until we know that number we can't talk about an actual runway.

Investing a trillion dollars for a revenue of a billion dollars doesn't sound great yet.

Is the AI progress in 2025 an outstanding breakthrough? Not really. It's impressive but incremental.

Still, the gap between the capabilities of a cutting edge LLM and that of a human is only this wide. There are only this many increments it takes to cross it.

These are not all improvements. Listed:

* The year of YOLO and the Normalization of Deviance

* The year that Llama lost its way

* The year of alarmingly AI-enabled browsers

* The year of the lethal trifecta

* The year of slop

* The year that data centers got extremely unpopular

Seems like Nvidia will be focusing on the super beefy GPUs and leaving the consumer market to a smaller player

Literally the only thing I've encountered regarding LLMS and AGI is morons stating that LLMs will never become AGI. I literally have no idea where the AGI arguments are coming from. No one who I've ever worked with who uses LLMs is talking about AGI. It's just a fucking distraction from actually usable tools right now. Is there anything except a strawman for LLM AGI?

I use a qemu vm for running codex cli in yolo mode and use simple ssh based git operations for getting code in and out of there. Works great. And you can also do fun things like let it loose on multiple git projects in one prompt. The vm can run docker as well which helps with containerized tests and other more complicated things. One thing I've started to observe is that you spend more time waiting for tool execution than for model inference. So having a fast local vm is better than a slower remote one.

Docker in docker, with opencode.

Opencode plus some scripts on host and in its container works well to run yolo and only see what it needs (via mounting). Has git tools but can't push etc. is thought how to run tests with the special container-in-container setup.

Including pre-configured MCPs, skills, etc.

The best part is that it just works for everyone on the team, big plus.

> Skill and Langchain experts with production-grade 0>1 experience.

Also , it's just normal backend work - calling a bunch of APIs. What am I missing here?

More like 6 different new nosql databases and js frameworks.

That must have been a long time back. Having lived through the time when web pages were served through CGI and mobile phones only existed in movies, when SVMs where the new hotness in ML and people would write about how weird NNs were, I feel like I've seen a lot more concrete progress in the last few decades than this year.

This year honestly feels quite stagnant. LLMs are literally technology that can only reproduce the past. They're cool, but they were way cooler 4 years ago. We've taken big ideas like "agents" and "reinforcement learning" and basically stripped them of all meaning in order to claim progress.

I mean, do you remember Geoffrey Hinton's RBM talk at Google in 2010? [0] That was absolutely insane for anyone keeping up with that field. By the mid-twenty teens RBMs were already outdated. I remember when everyone was implementing flavors of RNNs and LSTMs. Karpathy's character 2015 RNN project was insane [1].

This comment makes me wonder if part of the hype around LLMs is just that a lot of software people simply weren't paying attention to the absolutely mind-blowing progress we've seen in this field for the last 20 years. But even ignoring ML, the world's of web development and mobile application development have gone through incredible progress over the last decade and a half. I remember a time when JavaScript books would have a section warning that you should never use JS for anything critical to the application. Then there's the work in theorem provers over the last decade... If you remember when syntactic sugar was progress, either you remember way further back than I do, or you weren't paying attention to what was happening in the larger computing world.

0. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdIURAu1-aU

1. https://karpathy.github.io/2015/05/21/rnn-effectiveness/

I'm very relieved we've moved away from rewriting everything in Rust.

> they voted to add some syntactic sugar to Java...

I remember when we just wanted to rewrite everything in Rust.

Those were the simpler times, when crypto bros seemed like the worst venture capitalism could conjure.

> I don't understand why Hacker News is so dismissive about the coming of LLMs

I find LLMs incredibly useful, but if you were following along the last few years the promise was for “exponential progress” with a teaser world destroying super intelligence.

We objectively are not on that path. There is no “coming of LLMs”. We might get some incremental improvement, but we’re very clearly seeing sigmoid progress.

I can’t speak for everyone, but I’m tired of hyperbolic rants that are unquestionably not justified (the nice thing about exponential progress is you don’t need to argue about it)

Based on quite a few comments recently, it also looks like many have tried LLMs in the past, but haven't seriously revisited either the modern or more expensive models. And I get it. Not everyone wants to keep up to date every month, or burn cash on experiments. But at the same time, people seem to have opinions formed in 2024. (Especially if they talk about just hallucinations and broken code - tell the agent to search for docs and fix stuff) I'd really like to give them Opus 4.5 as an agent to refresh their views. There's lots to complain about, but the world has moved on significantly.

The idea of HN being dismissive of impactful technology is as old as HN. And indeed, the crowd often appears stuck in the past with hindsight. That said, HN discussions aren't homogeneous, and as demonstrated by Karpathy in his recent blogpost "Auto-grading decade-old Hacker News", at least some commenters have impressive foresight: https://karpathy.bearblog.dev/auto-grade-hn/

The negatives outweigh the positives, if only because the positives are so small. A bunch of coders making their lives easier doesn't really matter, but pupils and students skipping education does. As a meme said: you had better start eating healthy, because your future doctor vibed his way through med school.

Many people feel threatened by the rapid advancements in LLMs, fearing that their skills may become obsolete, and in turn act irrationally. To navigate this change effectively, we must keep open minds, keep adaptable, and embrace continuous learning.

It’s not the technology I’m dismissive about. It’s the economics.

25 years ago I was optimistic about the internet, web sites, video streaming, online social systems. All of that. Look at what we have now. It was a fun ride until it all ended up “enshitified”. And it will happen to LLMs, too. Fool me once.

Some developer tools might survive in a useful state on subscriptions. But soon enough the whole A.I. economy will centralise into 2 or 3 major players extracting more and more revenue over time until everyone is sick of them. In fact, this process seems to be happening at a pretty high speed.

Once the users are captured, they’ll orient the ad-spend market around themselves. And then they’ll start taking advantage of the advertisers.

I really hope it doesn’t turn out this way. But it’s hard to be optimistic.

It is an over correction because of all the empty promises of LLMs. I use Claude and chatgpt daily at work and am amazed at what they can do and how far they can come.

BUT when I hear my executive team talk and see demos of "Agentforce" and every saas company becoming an AI company promising the world, I have to roll my eyes.

The challenge I have with LLMs is they are great at creating first draft shiny objects and the LLMs themselves over promise. I am handed half baked work created by non technical people that now I have to clean up. And they don't realize how much work it is to take something from a 60% solution to a 100% solution because it was so easy for them to get to the 60%.

Amazing, game changing tools in the right hands but also give people false confidence.

Not that they are not also useful for non-technical people but I have had to spend a ton of time explaining to copywriters on the marketing team that they shouldn't paste their credentials into the chat even if it tells them to and their vibe coded app is a security nightmare.

Speaking for myself: because if the hype were to be believed we should have no relational databases when there's MongoDB, no need for dollars when there's cryptocoins, all virtual goods would be exclusively sold as NFTs, and we would be all driving self-driving cars by now.

LLMs are being driven mostly by grifters trying to achieve a monopoly before they run out of cash. Under those conditions I find their promises hard to believe. I'll wait until they either go broke or stop losing money left and right, and whatever is left is probably actually useful.

Maybe because the hype for an next gen search engine that can also just make things up when you query it is a bit much?

> I don't understand why Hacker News is so dismissive about the coming of LLMs.

Eh. I wouldn’t be so quick to speak for the entirety of HN. Several articles related to LLMs easily hit the front page every single day, so clearly there are plenty of HN users upvoting them.

I think you're just reading too much into what is more likely classic HN cynicism and/or fatigue.

LLMs hold some real utility. But that real utility is buried under a mountain of fake hype and over-promises to keep shareholder value high.

LLMs have real limitations that aren't going away any time soon - not until we move to a new technology fundamentally different and separate from them - sharing almost nothing in common. There's a lot of 'progress-washing' going on where people claim that these shortfalls will magically disappear if we throw enough data and compute at it when they clearly will not.

The internet and smartphones were immediately useful in a million different ways for almost every person. AI is not even close to that level. Very to somewhat useful in some fields (like programming) but the average person will easily be able to go through their day without using AI.

The most wide-appeal possibility is people loving 100%-AI-slop entertainment like that AI Instagram Reels product. Maybe I'm just too disconnected with normies but I don't see this taking off. Fun as a novelty like those Ring cam vids but I would never spend all day watching AI generated media.

Have you tried using it for anything actually complicated?

Lol. It's worse than nothing at all.

Same here. Simon is one of the main reasons I’ve been able to (sort of) keep up with developments in AI.

I look forward to learning from his blog posts and HN comments in the year ahead, too.

MCP isn't going anywhere. Some developers can't seem to see past their terminal or dev environment when it comes to MCP. Skills, etc do not replace MCP and MCP is far more than just documentation searching.

MCP is a great way for an LLM to connect to an external system in a standardized way and immediately understand what tools it has available, when and how to use them, what their inputs and outputs are,etc.

For example, we built a custom MCP server for our CRM. Now our voice and chat agents that run on elevenlabs infrastructure can connect to our system with one endpoint, understand what actions it can take, and what information it needs to collect from the user to perform those actions.

I guess this could maybe be done with webhooks or an API spec with a well crafted prompt? Or if eleven labs provided an executable environment with tool calling? But at some point you're just reinventing a lot of the functionality you get for free from MCP, and all major LLMs seem to know how to use MCP already.

I think it will stick around, but I don't think it will have another year where it's the hot thing it was back in January through May.

For connecting agents to third-party systems I prefer CLI tools, less context bloat and faster. You can define the CLI usage in your agent instructions. If the MCP you're using doesn't exist as a CLI, build one with your agent.

MCP or skills? Can a skill negate the need for MCP. In addition there was a YC startup who is looking at searching docs for LLMs or similar. I think MCP may be less needed once you have skills, openapi specs, and other things that LLMs can call directly.

I'm expecting something like a malicious prompt injection which steals API keys and crypto wallets and uses additional tricks to spread itself further.

Or targeted prompt injections - like spear phishing attacks - against people with elevated privileges (think root sysadmins) who are known to be using coding agents.

I believe the spikiness in response is because AI itself is spiky - it’s incredibly good at some classes of tasks, and remarkably poor at others. People who use it on the spikes are genuinely amazed because of how good it is. This does nothing but annoy the people who use it in the troughs, who become increasingly annoyed that everyone seems to be losing their mind over something that can’t even do (whatever).

Well, this is the internet. Arguing about everything is its favorite pastime.

But generally yes, I think back to Mongo/Node/metaverse/blockchain/IDEs/tablets and pretty much everything has had its boosters and skeptics, this is just more... intense.

Anyway I've decided to believe my own eyes. The crowds say a lot of things. You can try most of it yourself and see what it can and can't do. I make a point to compare notes with competent people who also spent the time trying things. What's interesting is most of their findings are compatible with mine, including for folks who don't work in tech.

Oh, and one thing is for sure: shoving this technology into every single application imaginable is a good way to lose friends and alienate users.

The problem with X is that so many people who have no verifiable expertise are super loud in shouting "$INDUSTRY is cooked!!" every time a new model releases. It's exhausting and untrue. The kind of video generation we see might nail realism but if you want to use it to create something meaningful which involves solving a ton of problems and making difficult choices in order to express an idea, you run into the walls of easy work pretty quickly. It's insulting then for professionals to see manga PFPs on X put some slop together and say "movie industry is cooked!". It betrays a lack of understanding of what it takes to make something good and it gives off a vibe of "the loud ones are just trying to force this objectively meh-by-default thing to happen".

The other day there was that dude loudly arguing about some code they wrote/converted even after a woman with significant expertise in the topic pointed out their errors.

Gen AI has its promise. But when you look at the lack of ethics from the industry, the cacophony of voices of non experts screaming "this time it's really doom", and the weariness/wariness that set in during the crypto cycle, it's a natural tendency that people are going to call snake oil.

That said, I think the more accurate representation here is that HN as a whole is calling the hype snake oil. There's very little question anymore about the tools being capable of advanced things. But there is annoyance at proclamations of it being beyond what it really is at the moment which is that it's still at the stage of being an expertise+motivation multiplier for deterministic areas of work. It's not replacing that facet any time soon on its current trend (which could change wildly in 2026). Not until it starts training itself I think. Could be famous last words

Because there is a wide range of what people consider good. If you look at that the people on X consider to be good, it's not very surprising.

I think it may be all summed up by Roy Amara's observation that "We tend to overestimate the effect of a technology in the short run and underestimate the effect in the long run."

My take (no more informed than anyone else's) is that the range indicates this is a complex phenomenon that people are still making sense of. My suspicion is that something like the following is going on:

1. LLMs can do some truly impressive things, like taking natural language instructions and producing compiling, functional code as output. This experience is what turns some people into cheerleaders.

2. Other engineers see that in real production systems, LLMs lack sufficient background / domain knowledge to effectively iterate. They also still produce output, but it's verbose and essentially missing the point of a desired change.

3. LLMs also can be used by people who are not knowledgeable to "fake it," and produce huge amounts of output that is basically besides-the-point bullshit. This makes those same senior folks very, very resentful, because it wastes a huge amount of their time. This isn't really the fault of the tool, but it's a common way the tool gets used and so it gets tarnished by association.

4. There is a ridiculous amount of complexity in some of these tools and workflows people are trying to invent, some of which is of questionable value. So aside from the tools themselves people are skeptical of the people trying to become thought leaders in this space and the sort of wild hacks they're coming up with.

5. There are real macro questions about whether these tools can be made economical to justify whatever value they do produce, and broader questions about their net impact on society.

6. Last but not least, these tools poke at the edges of "intelligence," the crown jewel of our species and also a big source of status for many people in the engineering community. It's natural that we're a little sensitive about the prospect of anything that might devalue or democratize the concept.

That's my take for what it's worth. It's a complex phenomenon that touches all of these threads, so not only do you see a bunch of different opinions, but the same person might feel bullish about one aspect and bearish about another.

I'm not really convinced that anywhere leans heavily towards anything; it depends which thread you're in etc.

It's polarizing because it represents a more radical shift in expected workflows. Seeing that range of opinions doesn't really give me a reason to update, no. I'm evaluating based on what makes sense when I hear it.

From my perspective, both show HN and Twitter's normal biases. I view HN as generally leaning toward "new things suck, nothing ever changes", and I view Twitter generally as "Things suck, and everything is getting worse". Both of those align with snake oil and we're all cooked.

Truth lies in the middle. Yes LLM are an incredible piece of technology, and yes we are cooked because once again technologists and VC have no idea nor interest in understanding the long-term societal ramifications of technology.

Now we are starting to agree that social media has had disastrous effects that have not fully manifested yet, and in the same breath we accept a piece of technology that promises to replace large parts of society with machines controlled by a few megacorps and we collectively shrug with “eh, we’re gonna be alright.” I mean, until recently the stated goal was to literally recreate advanced super-intelligence with the same nonchalance one releases a new JavaScript framework unto the world.

I find it utterly maddening how divorced STEM people have become from philosophical and ethical concerns of their work. I blame academia and the education system for creating this massive blind spot, and it is most apparent in echo chambers like HN that are mostly composed of Western-educated programmers with a degree in computer science. At least on X you get, among the lunatics, people that have read more than just books on algorithms and startups.

As usual, somewhere in between!

I use them daily and I actively lose progress on complex problems and save time on simple problems.

See https://simonwillison.net/2025/nov/13/training-for-pelicans-... (also in the pelicans section of the post).

https://cognition.ai/blog/devin-annual-performance-review-20...

It’s still around, and tends to be adopted by big enterprises. It’s generally a decent product, but is facing a lot of equally powerful competition and is very expensive.

Wasn't it basically revealed as a scam? I remember some article about their fancy demo video being sped up / unfairly cut and sliced etc.

What exactly do you mean by custom tools here? Just cli tools accessible to the agent?

I use Claude Code for web with an environment allowing full internet access, which means it can install extra tools as and when it needs them. I don't run into limits with it very often.

I'm running Claude Code in a tmux on a VPS, and I'm working on setting up a meta-agent who can talk to me over text messages

Pretty sure next year's wrapup will have "Year of the sub-agent"

I just use a couple of custom MCP tools with the standard claude desktop app:

https://chrisfrew.in/blog/two-of-my-favorite-mcp-tools-i-use...

IMO this is the best balance of getting agentic work done while having immediate access to anything else you may need with your development process.

It won't help to point out the worst examples. You're not competing with an outdated Apple LLM running on a phone. You're competing with Anthropic frontier models running on a multimillion dollar rack of servers.

This year I had a spotify and a youtube thing to "recall my year", and it was abolute garbage (30% truth, to be exact). I think they're doing it more like an exercise to build up systems, infra, processes, people, etc - it's already clear they don't actually care about users.

Given how badly my 2025 predictions aged I'm probably going to sit that one out! https://simonwillison.net/2025/Jan/10/ai-predictions/

My prediction: If we can successfully get rid of most software engineers, we can get rid of most knowledge work. Given the state of robotics, manual labor is likely to outlive intellectual labor.

I nearly added a section about that. I wanted to contrast the thing where many companies are reducing junior engineering hires with the thing where Cloudflare and Shopify are hiring 1,000+ interns. I ran out of time and hadn't figured out a good way to frame it though so I dropped it.

Even if it will make software engineering drastically more productive, it’s questionable that this will lead to unemployment. Efficiency gains translate to lower prices. Sometimes this leads to very few additional demand, as can be seen with masses of typesetters that lost their jobs. Sometimes this leads to a dramatically higher demand like you can see in the classic Jevons paradox examples of coal and light bulbs. I highly suspect software falls in the latter category

Why would it?

The ability to accurately describe what you want with all constraints managed and with proactive design is the actual skill. Not programming. The day PMs can do that and have LLMs that can code to that, is the day software engineers en masse will disappear. But that day is likely never.

The non-technical people I've ever worked for were hopelessly terrible at attention to detail. They're hiring me primarily for that anyway.

This overly discussed thesis is already laughable - decent LLMs have been out for 3 years now and unemployment (using US as example) is up around 1% over the same time frame - and even attributing that small percentage change completely to AI is also laughable

The solution to that is Anthropic's Skills.

Create a folder called skills/how-to-use-jira

Add several Bash scripts with the right curl commands to perform specific actions

Add a SKILL.md file with some instructions in how to use those scripts

You've effectively flattened that MCP server into some Markdown and Bash, only the thing you have now is more flexible (the coding agent can adapt those examples to cover new things you hadn't thought to tell it) and much more context-efficient (it only reads the Markdown the first time you ask it to do something with JIRA).

>I really hope social media companies plaster a prominent banner over them which screams, "Likely/Made by AI" and give us the option to automatically mute these videos from our timeline.

They should just be deleted. They will not be, because they clearly generate ad revenue.

For image generation, it's already too realistic with Z-Image + Custom LoRas + SeedVR2 upscaling.

> social media companies plaster a prominent banner over them

Not going to happen as the social media companies realise they can sell you the AI tools used to post slop back onto the platform.

Good call, I'll add that. I think I mentally scrambled it with OpenHands.

Can OpenCode be used with the Claude Max or ChatGPT Pro subscriptions, i.e., without per-token API charges?

I don't know why you're downloaded, OpenCode is by far the best.

How did I miss this until now! Thank you for sharing.

These are his highlights as a killer blogger,

not AI’s highlights.

Easy with the hot take.

I really hope so.

The big labs are (mostly) investing a lot of resources into reducing the chance their models will trigger self-harm and AI psychosis and suchlike. See the GPT-4o retirement (and resulting backlash) for an example of that.

But the number of users is exploding too. If they make things 5x less likely to happen but sign up 10x more people it won't be good on that front.

Also essential self-fulfilment.

But that one doesn't make headlines ;)

The people working on this stuff have convinced themselves they're on a religious quest so it's not going to get better: https://x.com/RobertFreundLaw/status/2006111090539687956

I have a bunch of tabs opened on this exact topic, so thank you for sharing. So far I've been using devcontainers w/ vscode, and mostly having a blast with it. It is a bit awkward since some extensions need to be installed in the remote env, but they seem to play nicely after you have it setup, and the keys and stuff get populated so things like kilocode, cline, roo work fine.

They need to be intrusive and shoved in your face. This way, they can say they have a lot of people using them, which is a good and useful metric.

I took the good with the bad: the ai assisted coding tools are a multiplier, google ai overviews in search results are half baked (at best) and often just factually wrong. AI was put in the instagram search bar for no practical purpose etc.

As much as I side with you on this one, I really don't think this submission is the right place to rant about it.

> For some reason, they think its helpful to distractingly pop up chat windows on their site...

Companies have been doing this "live support" nonsense far longer than LLMs have been popular.

"Nothing about the severe impact on the environment"

I literally said:

"AI data centers continue to burn vast amounts of energy and the arms race to build them continues to accelerate in a way that feels unsustainable."

AND I linked to my coverage from last year, which is still true today (hence why I felt no need to update it): https://simonwillison.net/2024/Dec/31/llms-in-2024/#the-envi...

Probably because my content gets a lot more upvotes than it does flags.

If this post was by anyone other than me would you have any problems with its quality?

He's one of the most valuable writers on LLMs, which are one of the major topics at present. That's not spam.

I appreciate his work for being more informative and organized than average AI-related content. Without his blogging, it would be a struggle to navigate the bombastic and narcissistic Twitter/Reddit posts for AI updates. The barrier to entry for AI reporting is so low that you just need to give a bit more care to be distinguished, and he is getting the deserved attention for doing exactly that in a systematical and disciplined manner. (I do believe many on HN are more than capable but not interested in doing the same.) Personally, I sometimes find his posts more congratulatory or trivial than I like, but I have learned to take what I want and ignore what I don’t.

Could you please stop posting dismissive, curmudgeonly comments? It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.

We want curious conversation here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

This is extremely dismissive. Claude Code helps me make a majority of changes to our codebase now, particularly small ones, and is an insane efficiency boost. You may not have the same experience for one reason or another, but plenty of devs do, so "nothing happened" is absolutely wrong.

2024 was a lot of talk, a lot of "AI could hypothetically do this and that". 2025 was the year where it genuinely started to enter people's workflows. Not everything we've been told would happen has happened (I still make my own presentations and write my own emails) but coding agents certainly have!

I’m not sure how to tell you how obvious it is you haven’t actually used these tools.

This comment is legitimately hilarious to me. I thought it was satire at first. The list of what has happened in this field in the last twelve months is staggering to me, while you write it off as essentially nothing.

Different strokes, but I’m getting so much more done and mostly enjoying it. Can’t wait to see what 2026 holds!