derryck.eth

We all know everything but the truth.

@davidlynchlfc @tonyasrobbie why do journalists not ask questions in press conferences, ‘like what was your thought process starting frimpong as a winger and Curtis jones as a RB, and why is wirtz our LW when we have Rio fit? its ridiculous at this point

@tonyasrobbie You can’t have watched them much this season!

Only concern here is that Liverpool couldn’t possibly be this bad in the second half! #mufc

can’t believe we have a manager that prefers to start a RB as a winger, a CM as a RB, a CAM as a winger, while having players that are natural wingers, RBs fit. And the club keeps reinforcing their stance of backing him🫠 #slotout

recession indicator

🚨TRENDING: A player in the Canadian Premier League celebrated a goal by promoting his 2nd job: Tomas Skopala took out his real estate agent card, showed it to the camera & told people to call him. x.com/Hayderljoz/sta…

@lilyraynyc wrote about it here beserp.com/learn/non-comm…

Google recently reminded everyone that "non-commodity content" is what wins in search, meaning content with a unique perspective, real E-E-A-T, and genuine lived experience. (BTW, this is an extension of what Google has been promoting in its quality guidelines for years.) I made a half-joke the next day that many marketers' first thought would be: "How can I automate non-commodity content with AI?" Real talk: the entire point of non-commodity content is that it requires what AI alone can't deliver: real human experience, real expertise, real mistakes, real product testing, real opinions, real emotions, etc. These are the kinds of insights that only come from actually living through something, and the valuable "human" stuff that other humans actually want to read. Google's Search Quality Rater Guidelines made a change a couple of years back to emphasize the amount of "effort" that goes into building a page. While content creation and scaling have become dramatically easier with AI, I don't see Google's fundamental approach changing much. If anything, this leveling of the technological playing field raises the bar for what truly helpful, original content looks like. If a piece of content can be built with a few button clicks and a 25-minute Claude session, there isn't a lot of effort or originality behind it, even with the best possible workflows and a polished-looking deliverable. Take product review sites as an example - as this is a category where Google has become extremely strict when it comes to evaluating content quality. The better-performing product review sites actually buy the products, test them for weeks or months, take their own photos, film side-by-side comparison videos, and document genuine pros and cons from hands-on use. A single piece of content like that can take *days or even weeks* to produce. That's real expertise, real experience, and real effort, and it's exactly the stuff that AI can't replicate. What will stand the test of time, and what I believe search engines and AI assistants will continue to promote, is the hard work being done by sites with real humans providing their opinions, their experiences, their humor and authenticity, and years of detailed expertise. The kind of evaluations only a human can do. If there's a middle ground where AI assists the process and creates efficiencies, but the content is still truly evaluated and generated by genuine human expertise, then *that's* the happy medium worth chasing. But my concern is that - in the spirit of AI - many companies will try to automate something that fundamentally shouldn't be automated. They'll build "non-commodity content" workflows and miss the entire point of why users prefer it. The sites that succeed long term are the ones with real human evaluation happening throughout the process. That part can't be automated. By design, it takes time and effort. That's what makes it good content in the first place.

wash me clean, take away all my suffering.

gakpo needs to catapulted away from merseyside

@suganthan built a tool that does this plus generate a content brief for the content calendar with google content warehouse signals baked into it for quality control beserp.com/seo/keyword-in…

no way these guys in suit are watching this team play like this and are like yeah this manager will lead us next szn.

“Como as pistas de fórmula 1 são desenhadas”

Exposed by the inherent Nigerian anyhowness. You decide to go full bigot, and can’t even pay attention to detail.

@hekitike9 come back stronger ❤️‍🩹

It’s hard, maybe even unfair… but I’m grateful this is happening to me here, among you. I’m not alone. Your strength and your love will be my driving force. See you again soon, Anfield ❤️

@leoobai @sharbel beserp.com does this

@sharbel The interesting part isn’t just cost replacement. It’s compressing the SEO loop: brief → SERP research → draft → on-page fixes in one workspace. The real moat is evals for factuality + search intent drift, not generation

🚨 Someone open sourced a Claude Code workspace that writes, researches, and optimizes long-form SEO blog posts automatically. It's called seomachine. +2,548 stars this week. Why it's great: Hiring an SEO content agency costs $3,000 to $8,000 per month. A single optimized post from a freelancer runs $300 to $800. Seomachine gives you a Claude Code workspace pre-wired for keyword research, content structure, competitive analysis, and readability scoring. Most teams ship 2 posts a month. This runs the full pipeline end to end. How to use it: Clone the repo and drop it into Claude Code as your workspace. Feed it your business, your target keywords, and your audience. It researches, writes, analyzes, and optimizes in one session. No prompting from scratch. No formatting cleanup. Just point it at a topic and ship.

nothing more i could have said

Mashallah🙏🏾

Mashallah 🎥 : @seyislik dalte.art

3-4-2-1 it seems

all these to still get slapped😭

@LFC sack him from the fanbase too

@Blodyxe1 @LenovoGuru @ReasoningWthRao 😂😂, that not… it’s ….

@LenovoGuru @ReasoningWthRao What a pile of AI slop

Big up @ReasoningWthRao for his Sept 2025 piece. Got loads right. rilewawrites.com/liverpools-sta… Here’s mine. Black Swan: A 25/26 Tale. A black swan event is rare, unexpected, disruptive. It only makes sense in hindsight. First, it sounds like noise. Later, you realise it was shaping everything underneath. In Sept 2025, Rao spotted the pattern early. Six from six, five by one goal, most decided late. Games stayed alive too long. He nailed the risk. If matches keep drifting into the final phase, superiority drops, variance takes over. Not getting out of second gear yet was prophetic. Hindsight gives you the layer underneath. This wasn’t style but constraint. Physical, tactical, psychological. The base never fully formed. What he saw was real. This explains why it kept repeating. The root sits in pre-season. Not just disruption, something more serious. A shock in the squad changes everything. Training optional, preparation secondary. Not an excuse, a black swan event. It matters, because that is the exact window where the base is built. If the block is compromised, it doesn’t stay in July. It carries through the season. It wasn’t the cause of everything. But it disrupted the phase where everything is built. Physically, you end up managing load instead of building it. Injuries to Leoni, Frimpong, Bradley and Isak. Ongoing issues for Wirtz and Ekitike don’t just reduce availability, they force a team to pull intensity back. More rest, less continuity, lower ceiling. You play and get through 90. You can’t repeat high-intensity actions to control games. That’s why you saw the same pattern. Game after game. Week after week. Tactically, the issue is timing. Liverpool needed to put games away earlier. That’s outcome, not mechanism. The real question is could they force the game to break early? But if the first progressive action lands late, the opponent resets, everything slows. Your best players face set blocks instead of moving ones. That’s why the series of cup matches line holds up. It was a team that couldn’t make league-game control stick. Psychologically, it starts to rot. Early nail biters get called mentality. There’s truth in that. But living in those margins constantly drains. Jeopardy becomes default. And you keep seeing it. Spurs. Wolves. Leeds. Fulham. Burnley. Bournemouth. Man City. Wolves again. Spurs again. That’s why his piece reads even better now. It was right, it just didn’t have the full picture yet. In September you could only see output. Tight games, late winners, thin margins. Summer gave way to an autumn of pain, to a winter of discontent, to an uneasy spring. Through it, the loop kept repeating. Injuries, volatility, a team reacting instead of imposing. The postmortem is clean. The pattern was identified early. The season confirmed it. Hindsight adds the why. This wasn’t a team choosing chaos. It was a team pushed into it by a base that never settled, a structure that couldn’t land early control, and an environment shaped by constantly playing games that should have been done but were not. So the start being both encouraging and discouraging wasn’t about aesthetics, but the first sign of a team that could still win moments, yet couldn’t control games enough to see it through. Once that repeats enough times, it’s not a blip. It’s the season. One last thing, because this keeps getting repeated (not by Rao, but by the wider commentariat). This is not a continuation of 24/25. 24/25 tailed off because of fatigue. Small squad, heavy minutes, legs going late. The base was there, it just got depleted over time. That’s why performances held for most of the year and dropped off late. But they won. This season is different. The base was never properly built in the first place. That’s deficit, not depletion. The symptoms can look similar. Tight games, drop-offs, lack of control. But they don’t come from the same root. If you treat them as the same problem, you’ll keep coming to the wrong conclusion. Don’t.