gndk

I only use Claude Code, not the web UI. The window seems to start at first use, but I haven't noticed any problems with this. I tend to write "hi" to Claude first thing in the morning just to get my first 5-hour limit going, some time before I start actual work.

Occasionally the "did you try turning it off and on again" advice, so logging out and in again, seems to help with rate limiting issues.

That said, I wish they would turn the 5-hour and weekly limits into a rolling window.

The average rating (status-mood) is unclear imo. Right now it shows "Struggling (40%)" for ChatGPT and "Mid (15%)" for Claude. This suggests that ChatGPT is doing better than Claude (based on the percentage number), when actually the opposite is the case. And Gemini seems to be doing best right now, but has the same low 15% rating as Claude. I would expect the percentage to be the actual average of ratings, not how many people voted for "Mid".

Ah thats interesting. I only use Claude Code right now and don't have anything in that section you mention. Wonder how/when its applied and if it is also applied to CC...

I'm having good results with similar stuff, but not sure about the best approach. What exactly do you mean by "your global settings"? Do you have a global CLAUDE.md file? Or do you do this via the UserPromptSubmit hook and return an additionalContext? I use this hook to constantly reinforce some things, like "be concise. use context7." It even works to put "ultrathink" in there to always have it in thinking mode. But I wonder if these constant reminders are overdoing it.

Oh, yea I misread that a bit and my "no idea" doesn't really fit there.

I agree with your point that the government generally doesn't trust me to pay at some point in the future. Blocking the ownership transfer for a corporation like I mentioned above would be one way to ensure it though.

But there's no incentive for them to do that.

> If you aren't prepared to sell your business though and you want to hold onto it, why would the government be inclined to believe that you really want to leave and never come back so to speak?

No idea. And for a corporation (GmbH) in Germany, it would actually be trivial to track and control this, since the ownership transfer is only possible through a notary public and only becomes legal fact after its published in the public company register. So put a flag on it, and when that transfer shows up, just block it until the exit tax from when you left is paid.

> Pay taxes as if you had sold, even if you keep ownership. Which if you think about it, makes some sense.

It does make some sense, yea. The draconic thing is taxing you on a fictitious sale. I wouldn't have a problem with it if it was delayed until you actually sell the shares. There are actually ways to delay it, but they require a collateral.

For example if you can reasonably prove that it is a temporary absence up to 7 years when moving outside the EU, you don't have to pay the exit tax, but need to have collateral.

If you move inside the EU, the exit tax actually clashes with the EU's free movement directive and I think there are pending court cases for this up to high levels.

So if you move within the EU, you can delay indefinitely without interest, but they will still require a collateral. And if you want to leave Germany, you'll usually also want to leave the EU for the same reasons...

Switzerland is an option because due to various bilateral agreements, it is treated similarly as other EU countries.

Its funny that you mention this Canadian departure tax on stock holdings. Because just a few weeks ago the German government actually enhanced the exit tax and it now also applies if you own more than 1% OR 500k€ in a _single_ investment fund.

Supposedly this is to close loopholes around creating family-owned investment funds to get around the exit tax.

But as we all know, once a new tax is there, it will never go away. Easy enough to lower the limit or apply it to all holdings in the future.

Lindner was forced to do it. FDP has been under the 5% barrier in polls for months now, down from 11,4%. If they stayed in the coalition until the next regular election, they would most likely not even get into parliament again. At least with this move, they have a better chance.

> How can a chancellor expect voters in fresh elections to bolster their chancellorship, just right after losing a vote of confidence?

I'd say in general, because his party has gained in the polls since the original election that put him in office.

In Brandt's case, he probably indeed thought that voters would reward him for this "political flex" and selflessness for the benefit of the country. Asking for the vote and thereby risking his own career, but also resolving the stalemate in government after they had their majority dramatically reduced.

I'm guessing that Scholz has a similar idea, but with how much the SPD already lost in polls since the last election, I don't see it going well for them and him. In fact, a majority of people are very unhappy with the government and have been in favor of new elections for months now. His plan of getting "critical" bills passed before Christmas with this minority government won't work. Opposition parties would be suicidal to work with him. So I'd say, the longer Scholz waits, the worse the SPD results will be. He needs to ask for the vote immediately, not in 2 months.

> And this is while their education system is fine. Young German engineers are great I think.

German education system is not as fine as it used to be. It might still be fine at the later high school and university levels, but earlier school classes now often have a majority of kids that don't speak German, holding the whole class back. In parts of problem cities like Berlin there are even classes where no kid speaks German. We don't have enough teachers and the ones who are still there are frustrated and overworked.