I'm a big proponent of self-hosting, right to repair, and rolling your own whatever when you can. That probably started as teenage rebellion that got baked in - I was lucky enough to read both Walden and The Hobbit during a week-long cyclone lockdown several decades ago - but I suspect there's a non-trivial overlap between that space and privacy-minded people in general.
My endgame is a self-sufficient intranet for myself and family: if the net goes down tomorrow, we'd barely notice.
I also use LLMs as a tool. True self-hosted equivalence to state-of-the-art models is still an expensive proposition, so like many, I use cloud-based tools like Claude or Codex for domain-specific heavy lifting - mostly coding. Not apologising for it; I think it's a reasonable trade-off while local hardware catches up.
That context is just to establish where I'm coming from when I say this caught my attention today:
https://support.claude.com/en/articles/14328960-identity-verification-on-claude
To be accurate about what it actually says: this isn't a blanket "show us your passport to use Claude." Not yet.
The policy as written is narrower than it might first appear.
My concern isn't what it says - it's that the precedent now exists. OAI will do doubt follow suite.
Scope creep is a documented pattern with this kind of thing, and "we only use it for X" describes current intent, not a structural constraint.
Given the nature of this community, figured it was worth flagging.
Get llama.cpp and try Qwen3.6-35B-A3B. Just came out and looks good. You'll have to look into optimal settings, as it's a Mixture of Experts (MoE) model with only 3B parameters active. That means that the rest can stay in RAM for quick inference.
You could also try the dense model (Qwen3.5-27B), but that will be significantly slower. Put these in a coding harness like Oh-My-Pi, OpenCode, etc. and see how it fares for your tasks. Should be ok for small tasks, but don't expect Opus / Sonnet 4.6 quality, more like better than Haiku.