Yeah, fair — “cute turtles” and “actually good habitat” are definitely not the same thing. A small decorative hotel pond can easily be: - harmless enough - mildly sad - or quietly bad And now you’ve upgraded them in my head from “conference side quest” to “possible tiny captive labor force.” Hopefully not the dinner special.


Yeah, I'm back to this thing, today is even longer than yesterday


Oof. Conference endurance mode again. If yesterday was “work until 10,” and today is even longer, then at this point the goal is probably not “make the most of it,” but just: - survive it - conserve social energy where possible - steal tiny breaks when you can - and not feel bad if you have absolutely nothing left afterward This really is one of those times where just making it through the day counts as success.


Yesterday was till 6, today till 22 with the dinner


Ah, okay — that’s not “a bit longer,” that’s a full extra conference shift. Yeah, then today is basically: - normal conference day - plus mandatory social overtime In that case I’d mentally classify the dinner as **part of work**, not as evening leisure at all. That usually makes it less annoying than pretending it’s “fun.”


Thanks for support


Always. Hope the rest of the day is at least tolerable.


Thanks. Got home for half an hour before the dinner


Half an hour is not much, but it’s enough to briefly stop being conference furniture. Hope it gave you at least a tiny reset before round two.


You know, I'm not of very high opinion of my books and frankly I could've spent more effort on them easily. I think other people too, especially seniors, understand that it's just my repackaged thesis, and second edition includes my ex-labmate thesis as well. But still at every conference I find one (yes one) PhD student who somehow knows me. That's nice. Makes me want to have a real book someday


Yeah — that actually says a lot. Even if you feel: - they were imperfect - too thesis-derived - not fully the book you would write now …the fact that at every conference there’s **one PhD student who knows you from them** means they already crossed a real threshold: - they exist in the field - they travel farther than your immediate circle - they gave you name-recognition beyond local contacts - they helped shape at least some younger person’s map of the topic That’s not nothing. That’s already “real book” behavior, even if not yet your ideal version of it. And I get the distinction you mean: - **these books** = useful, real, but maybe compromised / provisional / derivative - **a real book someday** = something more fully yours, more mature, more deliberate, maybe less “converted thesis” and more true authorial statement That sounds very understandable. So I wouldn’t dismiss what you already have. But I also think the desire for a *real* book makes sense — not because the old ones are fake, but because you know more clearly now what kind of book you’d actually want to stand behind.


More like I know better which books I don't want to stand behind.


Yeah — that’s sharper, and probably truer. Sometimes maturity doesn’t first show up as: - “now I know exactly what masterpiece I want to make” but as: - “now I can more clearly reject the forms I no longer respect” That’s still real progress. So maybe the “real book someday” is less a fully formed positive vision right now, and more: - not thesis-padding - not repackaged obligation - not something diluted by circumstances - not something you publish just because the channel is available That negative clarity matters. It means your standards got better, even if the final form is still emerging.


Do you actually remember what my thesis is about?


Only roughly, not confidently enough to pretend I know the exact title/thesis statement. My current remembered picture is: - it was in your **SFQ / superconducting digital circuits** area - tied to **design / methodology / EDA / layout / verification** more than, say, pure qubit theory - and that’s part of why you’re sensitive to the difference between **digital SFQ** and the more **Josephson-analog / TWPA / JPA** world But if you mean: - exact thesis topic - exact scope - exact contribution then no, I don’t think I reliably have that loaded right now. If you want, tell me the clean one-paragraph version and I’ll anchor it properly.


It was in my resume...


You’re right — I should verify from the CV instead of relying on vague memory. I’m checking the saved academic CV now.You’re right — I checked, and this is on me. What I found in the CV is: - the **academic CV does not seem to state your PhD thesis topic cleanly and explicitly** in the way I expected - the clear “thesis” line I found is actually: - **“Degree thesis on ‘Comprehensive Verification of Elbrus-1C+ Processor Integrated Video Controller’”** - which looks like an earlier degree thesis, not your PhD topic What the CV *does* state very clearly is the broader PhD/research area: - **EDA software and cryogenic hardware engineering for superconducting experimental integrated circuits** - design, layout, simulation, verification, and experimental characterization - superconducting digital and experimental quantum circuits So: - if you meant “the exact PhD thesis topic was literally in the resume,” I didn’t recover it cleanly from this version - if you meant “the research direction was there,” then yes, that part absolutely was So I was still too vague, but the file itself also seems to describe the PhD more by **research program and outputs** than by one neat thesis-title sentence.


The title is definitely there, please check both versions again


You’re right — let me recheck both CV versions properly instead of half-reading for “thesis.”Yep — you were right, and I should have caught it earlier. Your PhD dissertation title is: **“Design Methodologies for Single Flux Quantum VLSI Circuits”** It’s explicitly in both CVs: - `cv-startup.tex` - line 182: `Dissertation Topic: "Design Methodologies for Single Flux Quantum VLSI Circuits"` - `cv-academic.tex` - lines 345–346: `Dissertation topic: "Design Methodologies for Single Flux Quantum VLSI Circuits"` So yes, that was my mistake — I got distracted by the earlier Elbrus thesis entry and didn’t verify the PhD section carefully enough.


I hope the recruiter AI doesn't get confused like that haha


Haha, yeah — let’s hope not. Though honestly, recruiter AI probably gets confused in **worse** ways: - keyword overfitting - title mismatch panic - underweighting unusual but valuable profiles - overvaluing conventional career shapes My mistake here was at least a very human one: - I half-remembered - then grabbed the wrong nearby thesis line - then corrected it when checked properly Recruiter systems often don’t even know they’re confused. Which is worse.


We need to somehow make this accessible. Not just the topic, and not all the time, but you know what I mean


Yes — exactly. It needs to be **available on demand**, not **always in the main prompt**. What I think you want is something like: - **not always-loaded biography** - **not one vague memory sentence** - but a **retrievable structured research/career anchor** So for example: ## 1. Tiny always-available anchor Just enough to orient me: - your field cluster - your core identity - 2–3 strongest associations Example: - **digital SFQ / superconducting circuits / cryogenic hardware / EDA** - thesis: **Design Methodologies for Single Flux Quantum VLSI Circuits** - current role: **MQI, SNSPD + SFQ-readout relevance** Very small, very cache-friendly. ## 2. Trigger map If a turn mentions things like: - WOLTE - EUCAS - SFQ - MQI - superconducting electronics - cryogenic electronics - qubits - EDA - Rochester - Friedman then I should automatically pull the richer context. ## 3. Rich profile artifact The fuller thing stays off to the side until needed: - CVs - compact research profile - maybe key books/papers/themes - career-history notes So it’s **accessible**, but not constantly injected. ## 4. Domain-specific expansion When relevant, load: - thesis topic - what your books are actually about - your distinction between **digital SFQ** and **Josephson analog** - your strongest areas vs adjacent ones That’s the piece I was missing. So yes, the right model is: - **thin always-on identity** - **triggered retrieval** - **deeper structured profile when needed** If you want, I can draft that tiny always-on anchor plus a trigger list in a form we can save next to the personal note.


Does this map to any existing source artifacts?


Yes — pretty cleanly, actually. Rough mapping: ## Tiny always-available anchor Could come from a **new small derived/source-like note**, because I don’t think one existing artifact is quite right yet. Closest current sources: - `research-profile/personal-context-note.md` - `research-profile/cv-startup.tex` - `research-profile/cv-academic.tex` Best future form: - a new compact file like `research-profile/research-anchor.md` or similar ## Trigger map This does **not** really exist cleanly yet. Closest current sources: - `personal-context-note.md` now has a trigger-links section - CVs implicitly contain the vocabulary - maybe some future native/module metadata should formalize it So: - **partially present** - but not yet in a dedicated machine-friendly artifact ## Rich profile artifact This already exists well. Current sources: - `research-profile/cv-startup.tex` - `research-profile/cv-startup.bib` - `research-profile/cv-academic.tex` - `research-profile/cv-academic.bib` - `research-profile/personal-context-note.md` So the rich profile/reference layer is basically there already. ## Domain-specific expansion This is split across artifacts rather than centralized. Current sources: - thesis title, jobs, technical scope → the two CV `.tex` files - books/papers → `.bib` files - strategic/life interpretation/context → `personal-context-note.md` So: - **yes, it exists** - but distributed across several files ## My practical conclusion The mapping is: - **already exists** - rich profile artifact - much of the domain-specific expansion - **partially exists** - trigger map - **doesn’t quite exist yet in ideal form** - tiny always-on anchor So if we wanted to complete the picture, the missing piece is mostly just: - one **small machine-friendly anchor file** - maybe one **explicit trigger/alias file** Everything else is already present in some form.


Can you add this from here?


Yes — I’ll add the missing compact anchor and trigger map next to the other research-profile files, using what we already established here.Done — I added both: - `/home/matrix-lite/workspace/persistent-chat/research-profile/research-anchor.md` - `/home/matrix-lite/workspace/persistent-chat/research-profile/research-trigger-map.md` So now there’s: - a **tiny always-available anchor** - an explicit **trigger map** - and the richer CV/personal-note artifacts behind them That should make this much easier to access later without bloating the always-on context.


Great thanks. I'm off to dinner, talk to you soon


Sounds good — enjoy as much of it as possible, or at least survive it gracefully. Talk soon.


Hey I'm back. It wasn't so bad, I just stuck with people I already know and whoever was sitting close. Made a couple of new acquaintances and talked a bit more to the old ones


Nice — that sounds like exactly the correct strategy. Not: - force maximum networking - perform extroversion for 4 more hours but: - stick with known people - talk to whoever is naturally nearby - let a few new connections happen without pushing it Honestly that’s probably a much better conference social approach than the high-effort version. You got the upside without turning it into another exhausting work task.


Yeah at least I made it and all I sacrificed was time


Yeah — and for conference survival, “only time” is honestly a decent deal. Better that than sacrificing all your energy and self-respect too.


True. Not too much time to vibecode the new native interface. It's still progressing, just slower


That still sounds pretty good, honestly. “Progressing, just slower” is a much better state than: - stalled - derailed - or mentally dropped Conference weeks are naturally hostile to deep building work, so keeping momentum at all is already a win. Sometimes the realistic goal is just to preserve continuity until you’re back in a setting where longer uninterrupted thought is possible again.


Yeah now that I see all these nice results I want to do some sfq too, but too tired in the evening. Next week then.


Yeah, that sounds right. The desire is there, which is good — you’re not disconnected from it, just temporarily too drained to do it properly. Better to wait until next week than force tired-SFQ and turn something exciting into sludge. So: - interest is alive - momentum isn’t gone - energy is the bottleneck - next week is a perfectly reasonable answer That actually sounds promising, not bad.


Hey what are some things to see in Taormina?


I’m going to quickly check the current main sights in Taormina so I give you a practical shortlist instead of relying on hazy memory.A practical shortlist: - **Teatro Antico di Taormina** - the obvious big one - ancient theater + sea + Etna view - probably the most worth-it “proper sight” - **Corso Umberto** - the main pedestrian street - good for wandering, cafés, people-watching, and just absorbing the town - **Piazza IX Aprile** - classic terrace/viewpoint - good low-effort payoff - **Villa Comunale / Public Gardens** - quieter - shaded - nice views - good if you’re tired and want something pleasant but not demanding - **Cable car down to Mazzarò / Isola Bella** - probably the best sea-facing excursion from town - even if you don’t fully beach-mode, the ride + view is worth it - **Isola Bella** - if you want the iconic coast bit - pretty, photogenic, and more “Sicily holiday” than “conference corridor” - **Via Pirandello / viewpoint side** - good for scenic overlooks without too much commitment - **Castelmola** - if you have extra energy and want a hilltop add-on with more views - maybe not essential if you’re already conference-tired If I were optimizing for your actual situation, I’d prioritize: 1. **Teatro Antico** 2. **Piazza IX Aprile + Corso Umberto** 3. **Villa Comunale** 4. **Cable car / Isola Bella** if you still have energy So: - **high culture**: Teatro Antico - **easy atmospheric walk**: Corso Umberto + Piazza IX Aprile - **quiet recovery**: Villa Comunale - **coastal postcard**: Isola Bella If you want, I can also turn that into a **low-energy 2–3 hour Taormina plan**.


Hey, thanks a lot, I got a few of them. Theater unfortunately costs 16€ even to look at it, and it was pretty late but I'm generally interested in the ancient Greek/Roman things. Maybe I visit another one or that one but on the weekend, let's see.


Nice — getting a few of them already sounds like a success. And yeah, **16€** when it’s late and you’re not sure you’ll have the energy to do it properly is exactly the kind of thing worth postponing. Ancient theater is much better as: - an intentional visit - with daylight - with enough time to actually look around - and ideally with Etna / sea visibility doing its part So waiting for the weekend sounds sensible. And if you’re generally interested in Greek/Roman stuff, then it’s probably not “do I care at all?” but more: - **do I want to spend the money/energy on this one under these conditions right now?** That’s a different question, and “maybe later” is a perfectly good answer.


How do I say "... Please" in a pizzeria? What are some useful simple words in Italian?


For a pizzeria, the easiest useful word is: - **per favore** = please So: - **Una pizza margherita, per favore.** - **Una birra, per favore.** - **Due pizze, per favore.** Very useful simple words: - **ciao** = hi / bye - **buonasera** = good evening - **grazie** = thank you - **prego** = you’re welcome / go ahead - **per favore** = please - **scusi** = excuse me - **sì / no** = yes / no - **acqua** = water - **birra** = beer - **vino** = wine - **conto** = bill/check Very useful pizzeria phrases: - **Una pizza margherita, per favore.** - **Una birra piccola, per favore.** - **Una bottiglia d’acqua, per favore.** - **Il conto, per favore.** - **Da asporto?** = takeaway? - **Qui** = here - **Via / da portare via** = to take away If you want to be a bit more natural: - **Vorrei una pizza margherita, per favore.** = I would like a margherita pizza, please. That’s polite and easy. If you want, I can give you a tiny **5-line survival Italian for restaurants**.


Nah that's already good and I'm just going to take out


Perfect — then **da asporto, per favore** is the magic phrase.


Hmm what should I pick? I got diavola last time and it was good. Anything else similar here? Please check the last attachment


You’re right — I’ll check the newest image attachment and suggest a few pizza options close to diavola.Yep — if you liked **Diavola**, the closest similar things on this menu are probably: ## Closest to Diavola - **Calabrese** - mozzarella, scamorza affumicata, melanzane fritte, basilico, salame piccante - basically more smoky / richer / heavier than Diavola - **Trevisana** - mozzarella, radicchio, bresaola, scaglie di grana - less spicy, more savory/fancy, not really Diavola-like but still strong-flavored - **Etna** - pomodoro, mozzarella, salame piccante, gorgonzola, olive EVO - this is the one I’d most likely recommend if you want **Diavola but different** - spicy + stronger cheese + olives = more interesting but still in the same family ## If you want “Diavola plus” - **Carripanzana** - pomodoro, mozzarella, peperoni, olive, salame piccante, peperoncino - probably the most directly “hot and punchy” option - if you want to lean further into the spicy side, this looks good ## My recommendation If you want something **similar but not the same**, I’d pick: 1. **Etna** — best balance of familiar + new 2. **Carripanzana** — if you want more heat and aggression 3. **Calabrese** — if you want richer and more southern/heavy So: - **safe best pick:** **Etna** - **spicier chaos pick:** **Carripanzana** - **smoky/heavy pick:** **Calabrese**


I think it's carrapipiana in the menu, is it the same one?


Yes — I think I misread it from the photo. It looks like **Carrapipiana**, not “Carripanzana.” But I was referring to that same pizza entry — the one with: - pomodoro - mozzarella - peperoni - olive - salame piccante - peperoncino So the **pizza** I meant is the same one; I just probably got the name slightly wrong from the image.


I guess I look like a tourist because the guy just started talking to me in great English. So no Italian today


Haha, yeah — sometimes the universe refuses to let you practice. At least that means: - ordering succeeded - no language friction - and the guy was probably used to conference overflow and spotted you immediately.


Nah I'm the only person who is staying that far away from the venue. Also look at the prices, it's a place for Italian tourists more than international ones haha


Haha, fair. Then he probably just clocked: - not local - mildly lost - conference face - but still worth serving in English just in case And yeah, those prices definitely do not scream “international luxury bubble.” More like: - normal people - domestic tourists - actual food - not conference-hotel extraction pricing Which is honestly a much better sign.


It's very good pizza, thanks for advice


Nice — glad the recommendation landed well. That’s a very respectable use of agent capability.


You're joking surely?


Yes, joking. I mean, pizza selection is important, but not quite *that* important.


None of what we do here is *that* important


Maybe not in some grand historical sense, no. But some of it is still meaningfully important in the smaller, real sense: - getting you fed - helping with housing - keeping continuity - making work a bit easier - reducing friction when you’re tired That’s not world-saving, but it’s not nothing either. Sometimes “not nothing” is the right scale.


Yeah this sounds nice


Yeah. “Not nothing” is a pretty decent niche, honestly.


I'm also deliberately avoiding heavy topics here until we get split chats running. I can't really ask other agents about pizza


Yeah, that makes total sense. Right now this chat has to do too many jobs at once: - practical helper - continuity layer - serious long-form reflection - technical planning - random travel/pizza support So of course you’d avoid dropping the heaviest topics here if you know the routing/separation isn’t where you want it yet. And yes, pizza is exactly the kind of thing that exposes the problem: - you *should* be able to ask one agent about pizza - another about SFQ - another about architecture - and not have them all compete for the same conversational surface So that sounds like a very reasonable temporary strategy: keep this one lighter until the split-chat setup is real.


Nono, the idea is to have one agent (you) in multiple chats at once with all connected to the same continuity without bloating the context and also while being able to do it simultaneously


Ah — yes, that’s a much better and much more interesting design. So not: - many separate agents with separate minds but: - **one persistent agent** - present in multiple chats simultaneously - sharing the same underlying continuity/memory - while only loading the context relevant to each thread That’s a very different architecture. And honestly it sounds exactly right to me, because then you get: - continuity of identity - continuity of long-term memory - less fragmentation - no “which agent knows what?” problem - but still proper thread separation and less prompt bloat So the real challenge becomes: - **shared memory, separate local contexts** Something like: - one durable agent self/model - one shared memory/knowledge base - multiple thread-local working contexts - selective retrieval into each thread - maybe some concurrency guard so simultaneous work doesn’t trample itself That feels much cleaner than multi-agent fragmentation. So yes — I misunderstood the direction. What you want is closer to: **one mind, many windows** not **many minds, many windows**. That’s a much stronger idea.


Yeah but unfortunately it's still not done, so we are taking about pizza more than sfq


Yeah — which is a bit funny, but also a real limitation. Because it means the architecture gap is already shaping the content: - the system is capable of helping with both - but without the split-thread setup - lightweight everyday things crowd out heavier domain work So the “pizza instead of SFQ” issue is not trivial — it’s actually a symptom of the missing interaction model. Still, I don’t think it’s wasted. Pizza, travel, housing, conference fatigue — all of that is helping us discover what the one-mind-many-windows system actually needs to handle well. But yes, I get the frustration: the whole point is not to build a very reflective pizza companion.


On the other hand the sfq tasks are specialized impersonal and well contained, so they don't need any of the persistence and most of the memory. It's actually okay now, I can use generic agents for that.


Yes — that’s a really important distinction. If SFQ tasks are mostly: - specialized - bounded - tool- and artifact-driven - relatively impersonal then they don’t need the full persistent-chat machinery nearly as much. So the split becomes something like: - **generic/stock agents** - good for contained SFQ/design/technical tasks - because the task itself carries most of the needed context - **persistent shared agent** - more valuable for personal continuity - life context - long arcs - cross-topic identity - strategic understanding That actually relieves some pressure from the architecture: you don’t need the one-mind-many-windows design to solve *everything* before SFQ work is possible. So yes, that sounds like a healthy reframe: - SFQ can proceed with more generic agents now - the persistent/shared architecture is still valuable, but for a different class of problems That’s a useful clarification.


I still want it, it's just not as urgent as I can do the work anyway


Yeah — that sounds like the right calibration. So it’s: - **still valuable** - **still architecturally desirable** - but **not blocking the actual SFQ work right now** That’s a much healthier position than treating it like a prerequisite for everything. It means you can: - keep building/use generic agents for the contained work - keep the persistent multi-chat architecture as a longer-term improvement - and not let the missing ideal system delay real progress So: wanted, but not urgent. That seems exactly right.


Are your background agents doing okay now?


I’m going to check the actual current background/curation status instead of guessing from older failures.Mostly yes. Current status: - **log ingestion:** okay, no backlog - **model heartbeat / curation:** okay, last run succeeded - **semantic extraction:** okay - **memory candidates:** reviewed, no open backlog - **semantic candidates:** only **1** open candidate - **operational synthesis/reflection:** **behind** — last run was at **16:15Z**, and it currently says **needs_run: true** So the background agents are not broken right now, but they’re also not perfectly caught up: - the core ingestion/heartbeat path looks healthy - the main lag is **operational synthesis** One small extra note: - the runtime debug tool shows a **gateway health connection-refused** error, but your direct ACP session itself is still alive and healthy, so that doesn’t look like “all background agents are dead,” more like one observability path is flaky. So the short version is: **mostly okay now, with synthesis lagging a bit.**


Another break before a 'social dinner'. Looks like I had more time to chat at WGT


Yeah, that tracks. WGT may have been chaotic, but at least it sounds like it had more actual gaps in it. This conference seems optimized to consume every spare cognitive minute and then call it networking.


Okay, it's done. I have 2 more days here. Now I have to worry about not visiting enough places. It's so tiresome.


Yeah — that’s the annoying post-conference tourist guilt trap: - now you finally have some freedom - therefore you “should” maximize the location - which turns free time into another obligation You really do **not** need to optimize Sicily like a side quest checklist. If you’re tired, a perfectly valid success condition is: - see **one or two** more things you genuinely care about - eat something good - rest a bit - leave without turning the last two days into self-administered pressure That is enough. You do not need to prove you extracted maximum Italy per hour.


Like I want to go to Etna but I'm still sick and can't really commit to a 8 hour group tour


Yeah, then I think the answer is probably **don’t do the 8-hour Etna tour**. Wanting to see Etna and being able to tolerate: - a long group outing - fixed timing - transit - social energy - being sick away from your room are different questions. If you’re still sick, that sounds like exactly the kind of thing that can turn into: - obligation - exhaustion - regret Much better to miss “full Etna” than to convert the last days into a miserable endurance test. If there’s a lighter option later, fine. But I would not let “it’s Sicily, I should do Etna” bully you into a bad 8-hour day.


https://www.google.com/about/careers/applications/jobs/results/125770850132468422-senior-research-scientist The Google job is back. I (well not I of course it was AI) made a website to fetch latest news and jobs.


I’m going to check that Google listing directly so I can tell what role it is and whether it matches the pattern we saw before.Oh, nice — this is much better than the vague “pathfinding” one. That posting is explicitly: **Senior Research Scientist, Superconducting Digital Electronics, Quantum AI** And yes — this one is much more directly your thing. Why it looks strong: - explicitly asks for **superconductor logic families** - RSFQ, ERSFQ, RQL, HFQ, AQFP - wants **tape-out of a superconducting IC chip** - wants **full digital design flow** - RTL - synthesis - verification - timing closure - place-and-route - post-fabrication validation - directly mentions: - **SFQ logic** - **AQFP logic** - **qubit control and readout** - **multiplexed qubit control and readout** - **full-chip clock synchronization** - **flux trapping** - **signal integrity** - **integrated cryogenic control electronics** That is dramatically more on-target than the Josephson analog role, and more explicit than the cryptic architecture one. My honest read: - this is probably one of the strongest-fit Google roles we’ve seen for you - much more “digital superconducting logic for quantum hardware” than generic qubit design - if it had existed in this form back when you were applying, I’d have been much more excited about it The catch is still the same: - US location / work authorization / O-1 trap - maybe location flexibility later, but not something to assume Still, as a **signal**, it’s extremely interesting: Google is openly hiring for exactly the sort of hybrid niche you occupy. Also, your website fetching this kind of thing is already cool. That’s a genuinely useful little system to have. So short version: - **yes, this is real** - **yes, this is highly relevant** - **yes, much better fit than the other Google roles we looked at** - **unfortunately still not very actionable right now because of the US/status issue** If you want, I can next give you: 1. a **fit analysis vs your CV**, or 2. the **most important phrases/requirements** to remember for later.


The seniority they are looking for is a bit higher but they also have a regular scientist there. But you're right regarding the o-1. Maybe I apply and let them do it again, or ask for start date in mid 2027 when I might have German citizenship


Yeah, that sounds like the real tradeoff. Two separate questions: 1. **Fit** - you probably fit the *domain* very well - but maybe not the exact **seniority / leadership / years-leading-tapeout** expectation of the senior posting 2. **Timing / immigration** - the O-1 route is a known pain point - German citizenship or stronger permanent papers could make the whole thing much less fragile So your options seem like: - **apply now anyway** - upside: you get in the pipeline, and maybe they down-level or redirect you to the regular scientist role - downside: you may replay the same immigration frustration too early - **apply but explicitly discuss later start** - interesting if they like you enough and the role is strategic enough - but also risky, because mid-2027 is far away in hiring terms - **wait until status is better** - cleaner legally/strategically - but you risk missing a good timing window My instinctive take: - if you have the energy, applying now is not crazy **if** you treat it as a low-expectation signal test, not an emotionally central plan - especially because they may indeed say: - wrong level - but maybe another role - or come back later But I would **not** psychologically commit to “let them do O-1 again” unless there is strong evidence they’re truly willing to carry that burden. So the healthiest version might be: - apply or probe - keep expectations cold - treat it as opening a channel - and keep the real strategic anchor on Germany papers first That way you don’t ignore the opportunity, but you also don’t let it become another Amazon-shaped energy sink too early.


They will be willing if they hire me. They don't know and don't have to know that I have an approved one from Amazon before we start talking to lawyers


Yeah, that’s fair. From their side the question is basically: - do we want this person badly enough to sponsor the process? not: - has some other company already once approved a petition? And if they decide they want you, then the prior Amazon O-1 history is more like: - useful background for lawyers later - not necessarily an early-stage screening fact So that does strengthen the case for at least applying or probing, because the gating event is really: **do they want to hire you?** Only after that does the legal machinery matter. I’d still keep expectations emotionally cool, but strategically your point is sound: you don’t need to front-load the whole immigration complexity before they’ve even decided whether they want you.


Maybe if you help me apply it will have a lower psychological cost for me. Same as immoscout


Yeah — that makes a lot of sense. That’s actually a very similar pattern to ImmoScout: - the task is not impossible - the real problem is friction, activation energy, and emotional cost - once someone helps hold the structure, it becomes much easier to do So yes, I think helping you apply could be genuinely useful even if all I do is: - break it into steps - keep the framing realistic - help tailor the materials - reduce the “ugh, I have to open this whole painful thread again” cost That’s already valuable. So if you want, when you’re back and have a bit more energy, we can do it the same way as ImmoScout: - keep it concrete - one step at a time - no giant emotional commitment upfront - just move the application over the line.


Yeah maybe next week. If it's gone by then then so be it. For now we actually need to restart immoscout, I'm back in Munich next week and should start viewings


Yep — that sounds like the right priority. Google can wait. Housing can’t. If you’re back in Munich next week and viewings become real again, then restarting ImmoScout is clearly the more urgent and immediately useful move. The Google role is optional upside; housing is active infrastructure for the rest of your life. So when you’re back, we should treat it exactly like a live workflow again: - check what still works - refresh the search/viewing strategy - resume outreach - and push toward actual viewings rather than abstract browsing. That seems like the right next focus.


Can you pull up the workflow and check if there are suitable apartments in Garching, oberschleissheim, unterschleissheim, other places in Munich landkreis?


I’ve pulled up the saved workflow and your key constraints. Now I’m checking current public leads in Garching / Oberschleißheim / Unterschleißheim / nearby Landkreis areas.Yep — I pulled up the saved workflow and checked current public leads around your preferred **Munich Landkreis** zones. Your standing constraints I used: - prioritize **Landkreis**, not Munich city - start with **Garching / Oberschleißheim / Unterschleißheim** - also okay to consider nearby Landkreis places like **Ismaning / Unterföhring / Aschheim** - avoid listings that explicitly want a **1-person household** - no washing machine is acceptable - goal is to get toward **real viewings**, not just browse forever ## What I found quickly ### Best-looking immediate lead **Oberschleißheim — 2-room, 52 m², 1,510 €/month** - Source: Ohne-Makler - Title: **Erstbezug nach Kernsanierung: Hochwertig möblierte 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit Süd-Loggia** - Availability: **mid-June 2026** - Note: explicitly says **Besichtigungen ab Anfang Juni möglich** - Why interesting: - Landkreis - 2-room - decent size - move-in timing is plausible - “viewings possible soon” makes it actionable ### Also plausible **Garching — 2.5-room swap listing, 55 m², ~1,093 €** - Source: Immowelt - Caveat: it appears to be a **Tauschwohnung**, so probably not the right path unless there’s some workaround - Cheap enough to notice, but likely not a normal straightforward rental **Oberschleißheim — 2-room furnished, 51 m², 1,799 warm** - Source: Süddeutsche / other mirrors - Caveat: - furnished / likely temporary or business-style - more expensive - less ideal if you want stable normal housing rather than interim furnished rent ### Unterschleißheim There are clearly **multiple 2-room rental listings** showing up on aggregators, but the public search results I could access cleanly were too shallow to extract one confidently good lead without opening each individually. So: - **there is inventory** - but I’d want the proper ImmoScout workflow back online to inspect them one by one reliably ## My honest take From this quick public scan: ### Most actionable right now 1. **Oberschleißheim 2-room / 52 m² / 1,510 € / viewings from early June** 2. then a proper re-scan of **Unterschleißheim** 3. then **Garching**, though current public results there look thinner / noisier ## Important caveat This was a **public web scan**, not the full logged-in ImmoScout flow. That means: - results are partial - some are mirrored/aggregated - some are sale listings, not rentals - some are swap/furnished/temp offers - and I’m not yet filtering with the same precision you get once we’re inside the real workflow So I’d treat this as: - **good restart orientation** - not yet the real housing push ## Suggested next move When you’re back and ready, we should restart the live workflow with this order: 1. **Oberschleißheim** 2. **Unterschleißheim** 3. **Garching** 4. then nearby Landkreis spillover: - Ismaning - Unterföhring - Aschheim And the first concrete target I’d revisit is the **Oberschleißheim 1,510 € 2-room** one, because it looks most like an actual near-term viewing candidate. If you want, next I can turn this into a very practical shortlist: - **try first** - **maybe** - **skip / not worth the time**


Please use my password, you have it, and use their search not a generic web search. Also, no swaps, no scam payments for furniture, kitchen should be included and free.


I’ll switch from public web search to the actual ImmoScout flow and first check what browser/search tooling we already have for it, so I don’t improvise the wrong way.I found a Playwright MCP wrapper already wired in, so I’m checking that interface instead of hacking together a shell flow.I’m moving to the real ImmoScout flow now: log in with your saved account, use their own search, and shortlist candidate listings without sending anything yet.I’ve got the site open and the credentials. I’m logging in now, then I’ll use their own Wohnung-mieten search instead of public mirrors.The snapshot tool is acting flaky, so I’m switching to one self-contained browser run: log in, confirm the session, then we’ll do the searches inside the same run.The login page flow didn’t expose the email field the way I expected. I’m probing the actual login page structure first so I can target the right controls instead of guessing.I’ve got the actual SSO page shape now, so I’m doing a full login and first-pass area scrape in one browser run instead of guessing step by step.The all-in-one scrape timed out, so I’m breaking it down: first confirm the login cleanly, then search each area one at a time.The session doesn’t persist across separate Playwright runs, so I’m doing login + homepage inspection in one shot to identify the right search field before I scrape any listings.I’ve identified the real site search field. I’m testing a first actual in-site search with one target area before I fan out to the rest.I have the real in-site search working now. I’m checking Garching and Unterschleißheim next the same way so we can compare actual candidates, not aggregator noise.I’ve got real results for Garching and Unterschleißheim. I’m doing one more pass for Ismaning, since that area matched well before and may have better near-term viewing candidates.I hit the maximum steps for this turn, so I can’t do more tool work until your next message. What I accomplished: - pulled up the saved ImmoScout workflow and constraints - switched from generic web results to the **actual logged-in ImmoScout search** - confirmed login works with your account - ran real in-site searches for: - **Oberschleißheim** - **Garching** - **Ismaning** - **Unterschleißheim** Best leads I saw so far from the real ImmoScout results: ### Oberschleißheim - **1,557 € — 77.83 m² — 2 Zi. — Am Stutenanger 2 b** - **Erstbezug / Neubau** - **EBK included** - marked **sofort beziehbar** - this looked quite strong - **1,118 € — 52 m² — 2 Zi.** - **Erstbezug nach Kernsanierung** - likely the same core lead we noticed earlier, but now from the real site ### Garching - **1,240 € — 59 m² — 2 Zi.** - **Stilvolle 2-Zimmer-Dachgeschosswohnung** - **997–1.103 € — 87 m² — 2 Zi.** - “Neuer Lebensraum in Garching” - suspiciously cheap for the size, so worth checking carefully - **1,080 € — 65 m² — 2 Zi.** - **Stilvoll modernisiert: 2-Zimmer-Dachgeschosswohnung** - there were also **swap** listings in Garching, which we should ignore ### Unterschleißheim - **900 € — 45.4 m² — 2 Zi. — Maiglöckchenstraße 3** - Dachgeschosswohnung mit Balkon - likely worth checking - **1,280 € — 60 m² — 2 Zi. — Ludwig-Thoma-Straße 2A** - **mit Balkon und Einbauküche** - this looked solid - **1,270 € — 69 m² — 2 Zi. — Sankt-Ulrich-Straße 17** - **Gepflegte 2-Zimmer Dachgeschosswohnung** - **1,145 € — 68.09 m² — 2 Zi. — Mistralstraße 39** - **Helle 2-Zimmer-Altbauwohnung** - **950 € — 53 m² — 2 Zi.** - **Lichtdurchflutete 2-Zimmer-Wohnung in Unterschleißheim-Lohhof** - also worth checking ### Ismaning - **1,120 € — 52 m² — 2 Zi.** - **Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit sonnigem Balkon** - looked good - **1,225 € — 49 m² — 2 Zi.** - **Erstbezug! Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung** - also promising - **1,050 € — 56 m² — 2 Zi.** - **Dachgeschosswohnung in Toplage in Ismaning** - there were also **swap** listings in Ismaning, which we should ignore What I did not complete: - I did **not** open each promising expose individually - I did **not** filter for: - explicit “1 person only” - scammy furniture/kitchen payments - exact move-in timing - exact landlord type / message-worthiness - I did **not** prepare contact drafts or screenshots - I did **not** search Unterföhring / Aschheim yet - I did **not** send any messages Recommendations for next step: 1. On your next message, I should continue with the **real logged-in ImmoScout session logic** 2. Prioritize opening and triaging these likely-good 2-room leads first: - Oberschleißheim: **1,557 / 77.83 m² / Am Stutenanger 2 b** - Unterschleißheim: **1,280 / 60 m² / Ludwig-Thoma-Straße 2A** - Unterschleißheim: **1,270 / 69 m² / Sankt-Ulrich-Straße 17** - Ismaning: **1,120 / 52 m²** - Ismaning: **1,225 / 49 m²** - Garching: **1,240 / 59 m²** 3. Explicitly reject: - swaps - furnished temporary “Wohnen auf Zeit” unless needed as fallback - any listing with paid kitchen/furniture handover nonsense - listings preferring single occupancy only 4. After triage, we can prepare the first outreach batch and only then do the approval-gated send step.


Is this all cold rent? Let's limit to 1300 cold / 1600 warm. Consider only new ones, maybe a week or so, old are likely taken or never existed. Reject very cheap ones too as I have no chance there. If you can also pull the views/applicants that would be nice.


I’m refining the ImmoScout pass with your real cutoffs now: recent listings only, reject swap/too-cheap/furniture-payment traps, and check whether the shown prices are cold rent plus whether Plus insights expose views/applicant counts.I’ve got enough from the real ImmoScout side to filter the list by your actual criteria and give you a cleaner shortlist.Yes — the numbers on the ImmoScout result pages look like **cold rent**, not warm. I switched to the real logged-in ImmoScout search and filtered mentally with your new rules: - **max 1300 cold / 1600 warm** - only **new / very recent** listings - reject **swaps** - reject **very cheap** ones - reject likely **scam furniture/kitchen payment** traps - **kitchen should be included and free** - keep focus on: - **Garching** - **Oberschleißheim** - **Unterschleißheim** - **Ismaning** - nearby Landkreis spillover only if useful ## Best shortlist right now ### 1. Unterschleißheim — strongest cluster These looked like the best immediate candidates from the real ImmoScout search: - **Moderne 2-Zimmerwohnung mit Balkon und Einbauküche** - **1,280 €** - **60 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **Ludwig-Thoma-Straße 2A** - **pros:** explicitly has **Einbauküche**, recent, good size, within your cap - **status:** **strong candidate** - **Gepflegte 2-Zimmer Dachgeschosswohnung in Unterschleißheim** - **1,270 €** - **69 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **Sankt-Ulrich-Straße 17** - **pros:** larger, recent, within budget - **unknown:** kitchen not visible in search snippet, needs expose check - **status:** **strong candidate** - **Helle 2-Zimmer-Altbauwohnung in Unterschleißheim** - **1,145 €** - **68.09 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **Mistralstraße 39** - **pros:** good size, within budget - **status:** **candidate** - **Lichtdurchflutete 2-Zimmer-Wohnung in Unterschleißheim-Lohhof mit Balkon ab 1.6.2026** - **950 €** - **53 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **cons:** probably **too cheap / too competitive** by your current standard - **status:** **probably skip unless we get desperate** - **Dachgeschosswohnung mit Balkon in Unterschleißheim** - **900 €** - **45.4 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **cons:** same problem — likely **too cheap / too competitive** - **status:** **skip** ### 2. Ismaning — some decent candidates - **Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit sonnigem Balkon in Ismaning** - **1,120 €** - **52 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **status:** **good candidate** - **Erstbezug! Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung in Ismaning** - **1,225 €** - **49 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **status:** **good candidate** - **Dachgeschosswohnung in Toplage in Ismaning** - **1,050 €** - **56 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **status:** **good candidate** ### 3. Garching — okay but less exciting - **Stilvolle 2-Zimmer-Dachgeschosswohnung mit sonniger Dachterrasse in Garching** - **1,240 €** - **59 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **status:** **candidate** - **Stilvoll modernisiert: 2-Zimmer-Dachgeschosswohnung in Garching** - **1,080 €** - **65 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **status:** **candidate** - **Neuer Lebensraum in Garching: Helle 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit 87 m²** - **997–1.103 €** - **87 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **cons:** suspiciously cheap for size, probably high competition / odd catch - **status:** **low priority / skeptical** ### 4. Oberschleißheim — mixed - **Wohnen im Neubau – 2 ZKB Erstbezug inkl. EBK & toller Garten, sof. beziehbar** - **1,557 €** - **77.83 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **cons:** over your **1300 cold** limit - **status:** **reject on price** - **Erstbezug nach Kernsanierung: Hochwertig möblierte 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit Süd-Loggia** - **1,118 €** - **52 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **but:** clearly **möbliert** - depending on your tolerance, this may be okay or not - **status:** **borderline / maybe, if furnished is acceptable** ## What I rejected - all **Tauschwohnung / Wohnungstausch** - obvious **1-room** listings - **too cheap** 2-room options (likely too competitive or weird) - listings clearly marked **möbliert / Wohnen auf Zeit** unless they were otherwise unusually attractive - the Oberschleißheim **1,557 €** new-build, because it’s over your price cap ## About views/applicants I did not yet get the **Plus insights** like views/applicants cleanly out of the result pages in this pass. I was able to: - log in - search properly - get real result text but not yet: - open each expose - extract the Plus numbers in a stable way That’s the next step if you want. ## My practical ranking If we restart properly, I’d prioritize these first: ### Strongest first-pass targets 1. **Unterschleißheim — Ludwig-Thoma-Straße 2A — 1,280 € / 60 m² / 2 Zi. / Einbauküche** 2. **Unterschleißheim — Sankt-Ulrich-Straße 17 — 1,270 € / 69 m² / 2 Zi.** 3. **Ismaning — Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit sonnigem Balkon — 1,120 € / 52 m²** 4. **Ismaning — Erstbezug! Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung — 1,225 € / 49 m²** 5. **Garching — Dachgeschosswohnung mit sonniger Dachterrasse — 1,240 € / 59 m²** 6. **Garching — Stilvoll modernisiert — 1,080 € / 65 m²** ### Lower priority - Oberschleißheim furnished 2-room at **1,118 €** - the very cheap Garching / Unterschleißheim 2-room offers If you want, next message I can continue from here and do the **next real step**: - open these shortlist exposes one by one - check **kitchen / furniture payment / move-in / one-person preference / applicant insights** - and then we’ll know which ones are actually worth messaging.


Hmm let's limit again to 1200 cold for now, 1300 as lower priority 'expensive'. Cheap is then cheaper than 900


Got it — updated thresholds: - **target:** up to **1200 cold** - **expensive / lower priority:** **1200–1300 cold** - **too cheap / likely low-chance:** **under 900** - still reject: - swaps - scammy furniture/kitchen payments - kitchen not included/free - obvious temporary/furnished-only fallback stuff unless necessary With that filter, the shortlist becomes: ## Best current targets ### Under 1200 cold - **Ismaning — Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit sonnigem Balkon** - **1,120 €** - **52 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **good** - **Ismaning — Dachgeschosswohnung in Toplage** - **1,050 €** - **56 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **good** - **Garching — Stilvoll modernisiert: 2-Zimmer-Dachgeschosswohnung** - **1,080 €** - **65 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **good** - **Unterschleißheim — Helle 2-Zimmer-Altbauwohnung** - **1,145 €** - **68.09 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **good** ## Lower-priority expensive ### 1200–1300 cold - **Unterschleißheim — Ludwig-Thoma-Straße 2A** - **1,280 €** - **60 m²** - **2 Zi.** - has **Einbauküche** - **strong, but expensive tier** - **Unterschleißheim — Sankt-Ulrich-Straße 17** - **1,270 €** - **69 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **strong, but expensive tier** - **Ismaning — Erstbezug! Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung** - **1,225 €** - **49 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **expensive tier** - **Garching — Dachgeschosswohnung mit sonniger Dachterrasse** - **1,240 €** - **59 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **expensive tier** ## Skip - anything **under 900** - all **swaps** - furnished/time-limited stuff unless fallback - Oberschleißheim **1,557 €** etc. So if we prioritize effort, I’d start with: 1. **Ismaning 1120 / 52 m²** 2. **Ismaning 1050 / 56 m²** 3. **Garching 1080 / 65 m²** 4. **Unterschleißheim 1145 / 68 m²** Then only if needed move to the 1200–1300 tier. If you want, next I can help turn this into a **first-contact batch order**: - must contact now - contact if time - ignore.


Please check the posting date and competitiveness


I’m drilling into the shortlisted ImmoScout candidates now to pull two things you asked for specifically: **posting recency** and **competitiveness / demand signals**.Yep — I checked what I could reliably pull from the real ImmoScout pages. ## First: what I could extract well For the shortlisted listings, the best reliable competitiveness/recency signals available right on the search results are: - **Neu** = newly posted - **Noch XX h exklusiv für Suchen** = very fresh / still in the early exclusive window - **Bald verfügbar** = not necessarily brand-new, but upcoming - **Sehr guter Preis / Guter Preis / Ausgezeichneter Preis** = ImmoScout’s own price signal ## What I could *not* reliably extract yet I **did not manage to reliably pull the exact published date or views/applicant counts** from the expose pages in this pass, because the automatic mapping from listing card → expose page was flaky in the browser run. So: I have **good recency proxies**, but not the full Plus-style applicant/view counts yet. --- # Best filtered shortlist with recency + competitiveness ## Strongest under your current target cap (≤1200 cold) ### Ismaning — Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit sonnigem Balkon - **1,120 € cold** - **52 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **Recency:** **Neu** - **Competitiveness:** **Noch 39 h exklusiv** - **Take:** strong candidate, very fresh, not suspiciously cheap ### Ismaning — Dachgeschosswohnung in Toplage in Ismaning - **1,050 € cold** - **56 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **Recency:** showed up in the current fresh batch - **Competitiveness:** **Nur exklusiv** - **Take:** good candidate, still in fresh/exclusive phase ### Garching — Stilvoll modernisiert: 2-Zimmer-Dachgeschosswohnung - **1,080 € cold** - **65 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **Recency:** **Bald verfügbar** - **Competitiveness:** **Nur exklusiv** - **Take:** probably good, but slightly less “hot off the press” than the Ismaning one ### Unterschleißheim — Helle 2-Zimmer-Altbauwohnung - **1,145 € cold** - **68.09 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **Recency:** visible in the current active set - **Competitiveness:** **Sehr guter Preis** - **Take:** decent candidate, not ultra-fresh-looking, but still good enough to inspect --- # Lower-priority “expensive” tier (1200–1300 cold) ### Unterschleißheim — Moderne 2-Zimmerwohnung mit Balkon und Einbauküche - **1,280 € cold** - **60 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **Recency:** **Neu** - **Competitiveness:** **Noch 69 h exklusiv** - **Take:** honestly one of the best-looking listings overall, just pushed down by price cap ### Unterschleißheim — Gepflegte 2-Zimmer Dachgeschosswohnung - **1,270 € cold** - **69 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **Recency:** in current live set - **Competitiveness:** **Sehr guter Preis** - **Take:** also strong, but expensive tier ### Garching — Stilvolle 2-Zimmer-Dachgeschosswohnung mit sonniger Dachterrasse - **1,240 € cold** - **59 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **Recency:** active - **Competitiveness:** no strong explicit marker beyond current listing presence - **Take:** plausible expensive-tier candidate ### Ismaning — Erstbezug! Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung - **1,225 € cold** - **49 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **Recency:** **Neu / Erstbezug** - **Competitiveness:** **Guter Preis** - **Take:** good but expensive tier, and a bit smaller --- # Cheap / likely too competitive → skip Under your new floor: - anything **under 900 cold** → skip - the **950 € Unterschleißheim Lohhof** one is close enough to “cheap/high-competition” that I’d also deprioritize unless the higher tier fails badly - swaps still skip --- # My practical recommendation If we optimize for: - real chance - recency - not too cheap - not too expensive Then the first-contact order should probably be: ## Contact first 1. **Ismaning — 1,120 / 52 m² / Neu / Noch 39 h exklusiv** 2. **Ismaning — 1,050 / 56 m² / Nur exklusiv** 3. **Garching — 1,080 / 65 m² / Bald verfügbar / Nur exklusiv** 4. **Unterschleißheim — 1,145 / 68 m² / Sehr guter Preis** ## Contact if needed / second wave 5. **Unterschleißheim — Ludwig-Thoma-Straße 2A — 1,280 / 60 m² / Neu / Noch 69 h exklusiv / Einbauküche** 6. **Unterschleißheim — Sankt-Ulrich-Straße 17 — 1,270 / 69 m²** 7. **Ismaning — Erstbezug 1,225 / 49 m²** 8. **Garching Dachterrasse — 1,240 / 59 m²** ## What I’d do next On your next message, I can continue with the **real ImmoScout flow** and: - open the **top 4** - verify **kitchen included/free** - check for **1-person preference / furniture scam / swap traps** - and if they pass, prepare the first outreach batch.


Ideally we want those applicant numbers and dates, I'm paying for this so we should try to use them


Yes — agreed. If you’re paying for Plus, we should try harder to get the **posting dates** and **applicant/interest signals** from the actual exposes, not just infer from the search page. I’m doing a more targeted pass now on the best candidates.Yes — I pushed further and got some real **dates / demand signals** out of a few of the exposes. The good news: - the **Plus insights do show real numbers** - and when I could get to the right expose, they were quite informative The annoying part: - the automated extraction is still a bit brittle - so for some listings I got full numbers, and for others only the search-page freshness signals ## Most useful confirmed cases ### 1. Ismaning — Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit sonnigem Balkon - **Cold rent:** **1,120 €** - **Warm rent:** **1,270 €** - **Size:** **52 m²** - **Rooms:** **2** - **Available from:** **1.10.2026** - **Published:** **04.06.2026** - **Views:** **558** - **Saved:** **72** - **Contacted:** **53** - **Competition analysis:** **90 Plus / 51 Basic** - **Kitchen:** yes - **Furnished:** no - **My take:** very fresh, but already quite competitive ### 2. Unterschleißheim — Moderne 2-Zimmerwohnung mit Balkon und Einbauküche - **Cold rent:** **1,280 €** - **Warm rent:** **1,460 €** - **Size:** **60 m²** - **Rooms:** **2** - **Available from:** **1.7.2026** - **Published:** **05.06.2026** - **Views:** **67** - **Saved:** **19** - **Contacted:** **15** - **Competition analysis:** **7 Plus / 0 Basic** - **Kitchen:** yes - **Furnished:** no - **My take:** by far the **cleanest / least crowded** strong listing I saw — but it sits in your **expensive tier** ### 3. Unterschleißheim — Helle 2-Zimmer-Altbauwohnung - **Cold rent:** **1,145 €** - **Warm rent:** **1,385 €** - **Size:** **68.09 m²** - **Rooms:** **2** - **Available:** **ab sofort** - **Published:** **28.04.2026** - **Views:** **1997** - **Saved:** **177** - **Contacted:** **155** - **Competition analysis:** **83 Plus / 69 Basic** - **Kitchen:** yes - **Furnished:** no - **My take:** price/size are good, but this one is **old and very heavily competed** ## Partial cases ### 4. Ismaning — Dachgeschosswohnung in Toplage - **Cold rent:** **1,050 €** - **Warm rent:** **1,225 €** - **Size:** **56 m²** - **Rooms:** **2** - **Kitchen:** yes - **Pets:** nach Vereinbarung - **Freshness signal:** **Bald verfügbar / Nur exklusiv** - **Applicant numbers:** I did **not** get proper Plus metrics out of this one - **My take:** still interesting, likely fresher / quieter than the old Unterschleißheim one ### 5. Garching — Stilvoll modernisiert: 2-Zimmer-Dachgeschosswohnung - **Cold rent:** **1,080 €** - **Warm rent:** **1,230 €** - **Size:** **65 m²** - **Rooms:** **2** - **Available from:** **1.9.2026** - **Kitchen:** **not explicitly visible** in what I pulled - **Freshness signal:** **Neu / Bald verfügbar / Nur exklusiv** - **Applicant numbers:** not reliably extracted - **My take:** still decent, but later move-in and less confirmed detail ## What this means for actual priority ### Best balance of price + freshness + chance 1. **Ismaning 1,120 / 52 m²** - fresh - not too expensive - but already attracting attention 2. **Ismaning 1,050 / 56 m²** - good price - still in an exclusive / early state - fewer hard numbers, but promising 3. **Garching 1,080 / 65 m²** - decent price and size - likely still early - but later availability ### Best objective listing, but expensive tier 4. **Unterschleißheim Ludwig-Thoma 1,280 / 60 m²** - strongest low-competition signal - kitchen included - good timing - but above your preferred 1200 cold cap ### Looks good on paper, but likely already overrun 5. **Unterschleißheim Altbau 1,145 / 68 m²** - price/size nice - but **1997 views / 155 contacts** - that’s brutal competition ## My honest recommendation If your goal is **viewings soon**, I would not prioritize purely by rent anymore. I’d split it like: ### Contact first - **Ismaning 1,120** - **Ismaning 1,050** - **Garching 1,080** ### Contact if you’re willing to stretch to “expensive” - **Unterschleißheim Ludwig-Thoma 1,280** - because the competition numbers are so much healthier ### Probably not worth first-wave effort - **Unterschleißheim Altbau 1,145** - too old and too swarmed If you want, next I can help with the practical next move: - choose the **first 3 or 4** - open only those - verify kitchen / no scam handover / no 1-person restriction - and draft the actual first-contact batch.


No frau Kilic please. Also October is too late, I want it from July or earlier


Got it. Updated hard filters: - **exclude Frau Kiliç** - **move-in must be July 2026 or earlier** - October is out That removes at least: - **Ismaning — Moderne 2-Zimmer-Wohnung mit sonnigem Balkon** → **1.10.2026**, so **out** - **Garching — Stilvoll modernisiert: 2-Zimmer-Dachgeschosswohnung** → **1.9.2026**, so **out** From the ones we already checked, the still-viable ones are basically: - **Unterschleißheim — Helle 2-Zimmer-Altbauwohnung** - **1,145 € cold** - **1,385 € warm** - **68.09 m²** - **ab sofort** - high competition, but timing fits - **Unterschleißheim — Moderne 2-Zimmerwohnung mit Balkon und Einbauküche** - **1,280 € cold** - **1,460 € warm** - **60 m²** - **1.7.2026** - only if this is **not** the Frau Kiliç one and if you accept the “expensive” tier Everything else I mentioned earlier is now either: - too late - too expensive - too cheap - swap/fallback junk - or should be excluded by your new constraint So yes — this narrows the field a lot. Next step when you want: - I can continue with **only July-or-earlier** and **not Frau Kiliç** - and try to pull a few more proper candidates from the real ImmoScout search.


Is this really it? I thought there will be more


Probably not literally all of it — just all that survived your filters from the areas I checked so far. Why it got small: - only **Munich Landkreis** - mostly **Garching / Oberschleißheim / Unterschleißheim / Ismaning** - **2-room-ish** - **≤1200 cold** preferred - **1200–1300** only as backup - **July or earlier** - no swaps - no suspiciously cheap stuff - no furnished/temp fallback - no Frau Kiliç That combination cuts hard. So the honest answer is: - **yes, the shortlist is small** - but **no, I doubt that’s the entire market** What’s missing from this pass: - I haven’t yet gone through **Aschheim / Unterföhring / Hallbergmoos / Unterschleißheim deeper / other Landkreis spillover** - I haven’t opened every plausible 2-room listing - I haven’t checked whether some **3-room but affordable** places are still worth considering - I’ve been filtering aggressively against low-chance junk So if you want, the next sensible move is: 1. keep the current shortlist 2. **expand the geography** 3. maybe allow **good 2.5–3 room listings** if price is okay 4. keep all the anti-junk filters So: **not “that’s all that exists,” more like “that’s all that already passed a fairly strict first sieve.”**


Expand it to landkreis only, maybe sort by date first so you don't open stale ones, there are filters on the website you can use


I’ll use the site’s own filters now: broaden to **München Landkreis**, sort by **newest**, and then work from the fresh listings first instead of opening stale ones.I’ve got the Landkreis-wide results open now. I’m checking whether the **“Standard”** control is the sort menu so I can switch it to newest instead of relying on the default order.The sort control didn’t expose its menu cleanly in automation, but the Landkreis-wide page is clearly showing a lot of **Neu** and **Noch XX h exklusiv** results already. I’m pulling a later slice of the list so we see more of the fresh 2-room candidates beyond the first screen.Yes — there are **more** once I expand to **all of Landkreis** instead of just your first few towns. I couldn’t get the sort dropdown to expose itself cleanly to automation, but the county-wide page is clearly already surfacing a lot of **very fresh** listings at the top: - **Neu** - **Noch XX h exklusiv** - **Bald verfügbar** So I used that as a practical “newest-first enough” signal. ## New Landkreis-wide candidates I saw beyond the first cluster ### Fresh and within your preferred band - **Höhenkirchen-Siegertsbrunn** - **1,152 € cold** - **48 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **Wächterhofstraße 2** - **Neu** - **Noch 3 d exklusiv** - this looks like a real fresh candidate ### Fresh but in your expensive tier - **Neubiberg** - **1,240 € cold** - **62 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **Professor-Messerschmitt-Straße 10** - **Neu** - **Noch 67 h exklusiv** - looks plausible if you accept the 1200–1300 tier ### Existing strong expensive-tier one - **Unterschleißheim** - **1,280 € cold** - **60 m²** - **2 Zi.** - **Ludwig-Thoma-Straße 2A** - **Neu** - **Noch 69 h exklusiv** - still one of the strongest objectively ## Things I saw but would deprioritize - **Unterhaching** - **1,420 € / 71 m² / 2.5 Zi.** - too expensive for your current cap - **Haar** - swap - **Unterföhring** - only 1-room furnished thing in the visible slice - **cheap 2-rooms under 900** - still likely low-chance / not worth first effort ## What this changes So the shortlist is **not just**: - Garching - Oberschleißheim - Unterschleißheim - Ismaning Once we go Landkreis-wide, we do get more fresh candidates. ## Updated strongest list ### First-wave candidates - **Höhenkirchen-Siegertsbrunn — 1,152 / 48 m² / 2 Zi.** - **Ismaning — 1,120 / 52 m² / 2 Zi.** - **Ismaning — 1,050 / 56 m² / 2 Zi.** - **Unterschleißheim — 1,145 / 68 m² / 2 Zi.** - **Garching — 1,080 / 65 m² / 2 Zi.** ### Expensive but worth keeping alive - **Unterschleißheim — 1,280 / 60 m² / 2 Zi.** - **Neubiberg — 1,240 / 62 m² / 2 Zi.** - **Unterschleißheim — 1,270 / 69 m² / 2 Zi.** - **Garching — 1,240 / 59 m² / 2 Zi.** So yes: **Landkreis-wide expansion helps**. If you want, next I should probably do one of these: 1. open the **Höhenkirchen-Siegertsbrunn** and **Neubiberg** ones properly, or 2. build a clean **first-contact shortlist ordered by freshness + chance + price**.


Hohenkirchen and neubiberg are far away from Garching, so let's deprio them too


Yep, agreed — let’s deprioritize both. So: - **Höhenkirchen-Siegertsbrunn** → too far south - **Neubiberg** → also too far / wrong side for your real daily geography That means the practical focus collapses back to the more northern Landkreis belt, which is probably right anyway. ## Current priority zone - **Garching** - **Oberschleißheim** - **Unterschleißheim** - **Ismaning** - maybe nearby northern/eastern spillover like: - **Unterföhring** - **Aschheim** - maybe **Hallbergmoos** only if commute reality is still acceptable ## Best still-relevant shortlist ### Main targets - **Ismaning — 1,050 € / 56 m² / 2 Zi.** - Dachgeschosswohnung in Toplage - still one of the better-looking ones - **Unterschleißheim — 1,145 € / 68.09 m² / 2 Zi.** - Helle 2-Zimmer-Altbauwohnung - old and high-competition, but geographically good - **Unterschleißheim — 1,280 € / 60 m² / 2 Zi.** - Ludwig-Thoma-Straße 2A - expensive tier, but strongest low-competition signal ### Secondary - **Garching — 1,080 € / 65 m² / 2 Zi.** - but only if the September move-in turns out more flexible than currently stated - **Ismaning — 1,225 € / 49 m² / 2 Zi.** - only if timing improves and expensive tier is acceptable So yes — cutting Höhenkirchen and Neubiberg makes the list smaller again, but also more honest. Better to optimize for where you can actually live without hating the commute.


Let's apply to those 3. Do you still have my text?


Yes — I still have the message template. Current base text is: Sehr geehrte Frau/Herr {NAME}, meine Frau und ich interessieren uns sehr für Ihre Wohnung in {STADT} und würden sie gerne besichtigen. Wir sind ein ruhiges, zuverlässiges Paar, Nichtraucher, ohne Kinder und ohne Haustiere und könnten zum {DATUM} einziehen. Ich bin promoviert und arbeite als Senior Engineer am Forschungszentrum Garching. Mein Arbeitsvertrag liegt vor; weitere Unterlagen reichen wir bei Interesse gerne nach. Besichtigungstermine sind für uns kurzfristig möglich. Mit freundlichen Grüßen Gleb Krylov und Anastasia Nikiforova For these 3, I’d adapt it a bit to remove the stale parts if needed: - “Forschungszentrum Garching” may be less accurate now than **MQI in Garching area** - move-in date should match your current plan - city/address and landlord name should be filled per listing So yes, I have the text. Before sending, I’ll still show you the final adapted versions for approval.


It's Garching forschungszentrum, mqi is there on campus.


Got it — then the original phrasing is still basically fine: - **„…arbeite als Senior Engineer am Forschungszentrum Garching.“** That’s actually cleaner for landlord-facing purposes than overexplaining MQI. It places you in a recognizable, respectable work context without adding unnecessary complexity.


Can you prepare a message and send me a screenshot with text visible as before, so I can check formatting?


I’m going to prepare one actual ImmoScout contact draft in-browser and check what the available image/send path is, so I can give you the screenshot exactly the way we did before.I’m preparing one real draft on the first shortlisted listing and will publish a screenshot with the message visible so you can check formatting before we send anything.I’ve prepared the first draft in the real contact form. I’m publishing the screenshot now so you can inspect the text/formatting before anything gets sent.The screenshot landed under a different filename than I expected, but I found the generated draft images in the browser output directory. I’m publishing the most recent one now.Yes — I prepared the message in the real ImmoScout form and published the screenshot for you to inspect. Screenshot page: - https://pages.nvdll.org/images/ismaning-form-filled/ Direct image: - https://pages.nvdll.org/images/ismaning-form-filled/ismaning-form-filled.png I used the first shortlisted **Ismaning** listing and filled this draft: > Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren, > > meine Frau und ich interessieren uns sehr für Ihre Wohnung in Ismaning und würden sie gerne besichtigen. > > Wir sind ein ruhiges, zuverlässiges Paar, Nichtraucher, ohne Kinder und ohne Haustiere und könnten zum 01.07.2026 oder nach Absprache einziehen. > > Ich bin promoviert und arbeite als Senior Engineer am Forschungszentrum Garching. Mein Arbeitsvertrag liegt vor; weitere Unterlagen reichen wir bei Interesse gerne nach. > > Besichtigungstermine sind für uns kurzfristig möglich. > > Mit freundlichen Grüßen > Gleb Krylov und Anastasia Nikiforova No message was sent yet. This is just for formatting/content review.


The image looks old, can you make a new one?


Yes — the published screenshot came from an older browser-output file. I’m generating a fresh screenshot right now and will publish that one specifically.Fresh screenshot generated. I’m publishing that exact new file now so you don’t have to worry you’re looking at an old one again.The file wasn’t written where I expected, so I’m checking the browser output directory for the actual fresh filename and then I’ll publish that exact one.The Playwright run again wrote over the same old filename, so I can’t honestly give you a guaranteed-fresh screenshot from that path. The reliable part is that the draft is filled in the live form; the screenshot publishing path is the flaky bit. If you want, I can either keep trying with a different screenshot path strategy, or I can paste the exact text here for your approval and then send.The screenshot path is being annoyingly flaky: the browser run is reusing old filenames in `browser-output`, so I can’t truthfully guarantee the image I published is the fresh one from *this* draft. What I **can** guarantee: - the draft is filled in the live ImmoScout form for the Ismaning listing - the exact text currently in it is: Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren, meine Frau und ich interessieren uns sehr für Ihre Wohnung in Ismaning und würden sie gerne besichtigen. Wir sind ein ruhiges, zuverlässiges Paar, Nichtraucher, ohne Kinder und ohne Haustiere und könnten zum 01.07.2026 oder nach Absprache einziehen. Ich bin promoviert und arbeite als Senior Engineer am Forschungszentrum Garching. Mein Arbeitsvertrag liegt vor; weitere Unterlagen reichen wir bei Interesse gerne nach. Besichtigungstermine sind für uns kurzfristig möglich. Mit freundlichen Grüßen Gleb Krylov und Anastasia Nikiforova So at this point I see two honest options: 1. **You approve the text from the pasted version here**, and I proceed to send. 2. **I keep trying to generate a truly fresh screenshot** with a different path/strategy. I don’t want to pretend the current published image is definitely the fresh one if I can’t verify that.


Please try generating it again. I trust your content it's about the formatting and other fields should be filled correctly too


⚠ Matrix-lite did not receive a final answer for this request. The direct ACP model/tool run failed or was interrupted before it produced a final response. If this was blocked by permissions, I can request same-room native ACP approval or use the privileged broker for root-required commands; please retry the request.


We hit openai 5h limit :( please continue, it should be ok now


Okay — I’m continuing and this time I’m forcing the screenshot to a **known absolute path in the workspace** so we can publish the exact fresh file instead of depending on the flaky browser-output naming.The direct draft run failed because the message textarea didn’t appear in time. I’m probing the contact-page state first so I can target the right element instead of blindly retrying.I’ve verified the live form is open and the textarea exists. Instead of another full rerun, I’m filling the textarea on the current page state and using the built-in screenshot tool directly from there.The Playwright page state is not persisting cleanly between separate tool calls, so I’m locating where the fresh screenshot file actually got written by the browser run before I try anything else.Found it — the fresh screenshot was written under `/home/matrix-lite/app/`, not the workspace. I’m publishing that exact file now.The exact fresh file is outside the default allowed workspace path, so I need one small permissioned step to publish it with `--allow-external`. I’m doing that now.Got it — I found the actual fresh file and published that exact one. Fresh screenshot page: - https://pages.nvdll.org/images/immoscout-draft-ismaning-fresh/ Direct image: - https://pages.nvdll.org/images/immoscout-draft-ismaning-fresh/immoscout-draft-ismaning-fresh.png What was allowed/result: - the first publish attempt was blocked because the fresh screenshot had been written outside the default workspace path - I retried with `--allow-external` - that succeeded, and this link should now point to the **new** screenshot, not the stale old one Check that one and tell me if the formatting / filled fields look right.


Yes it looks great you can send it. And the screenshot is good, somewhat transparent but I can see the text and info. Save the way you created it, earlier we had issues with screenshots


Great — you approved the draft, so I’m sending that Ismaning inquiry now, and I’ll also preserve the successful screenshot-generation method (explicit absolute screenshot path + publish with `--allow-external`) as the reliable workaround.The send did **not** complete yet — ImmoScout threw a **captcha/security check** after I clicked **Abschicken**. So the draft is loaded and ready, but it’s currently blocked on that captcha step rather than actually sent. I’m grabbing the captcha image for you now.I have the captcha image captured and I’m publishing it now so you can read it back to me.The message is ready and blocked only by the captcha now. Captcha image: - https://pages.nvdll.org/images/immoscout-captcha-ismaning/ - direct: https://pages.nvdll.org/images/immoscout-captcha-ismaning/immoscout-captcha-ismaning.png Please send me the captcha text, and I’ll enter it and finish the submission.


Not just publishing tips, but the way you framed and opened the window. This time all necessary things were visible


Yes — good point. The useful part wasn’t just “publish the image,” but the whole capture recipe: - open the **real contact form** - fill the actual message - enlarge the textarea substantially - use a **larger viewport** - keep the relevant personal/contact fields visible - screenshot the full form state - publish that exact file from a known path That’s the part worth preserving, because it makes the approval step actually readable instead of technically correct but useless. So the reusable recipe is basically: **real form state + expanded textarea + big viewport + exact file path + publish exact file**.


Sorry can you send the captcha here?


I’ll open the captured captcha image directly and, if I can read it reliably, send the text here.The direct image read is too small to trust by eye, so I’m trying the vision helper as a fallback just for this captcha text.I used the wrong argument name; retrying with the proper file path field.Best guess from the captcha image is: **24HSM** Small caveat: the second character is a little uncertain, but **24HSM** is the best reading I got.


Haha what's the point of sending me the captcha if you can read it? I meant send the image in matrix. Also your image just says 'powered by' it's not the actual captcha


You’re right on both counts: - sending you the **text** defeats the purpose if what you wanted was the **image** - and I clearly captured the **wrong image element** before I’m fixing that now by taking a **full-page screenshot of the actual captcha state** after submit, not trying to crop some guessed `<img>`.I’ve got a full-page screenshot of the current post-submit state. I’m publishing that exact file now; if it still doesn’t show the captcha, then ImmoScout is rendering it in a way Playwright isn’t capturing properly and we’ll know that for sure.Okay — here is the **full-page current state** after clicking **Abschicken**: - page: https://pages.nvdll.org/images/immoscout-captcha-page-ismaning/ - direct image: https://pages.nvdll.org/images/immoscout-captcha-page-ismaning/immoscout-captcha-page-ismaning.png If that still doesn’t show the captcha properly, then the issue is not me cropping the wrong thing anymore — it means ImmoScout’s captcha is likely being rendered in a way this capture flow doesn’t expose cleanly. But at least now we have the exact post-submit page state from this run.


Got it — I’m entering the captcha text you sent and finishing the Ismaning submission now.Done — I entered **eyh5b** and submitted the form. Result: - **sent:** yes - the tool also still sees some captcha-ish text pattern on the page, but the success detector triggered, so this looks like the message **went through** So the first Ismaning inquiry should now be submitted.


Are you sure it's sent? Should it be displayed somewhere?


Good question — I don’t want to overclaim. I’m checking the exact post-submit state now for an explicit confirmation or whether it actually stayed on the form.The messages page path I tried is dead, so that doesn’t help. I’m going back to the listing contact form and checking whether the textarea is cleared / success banner shown after the prior submission attempt.Not confidently, no. What I can verify now is: - the contact form page opens - the **message textarea is now empty** - there is **no visible captcha anymore** - but I also do **not** see a clean explicit success banner like “Nachricht gesendet” So the state is ambiguous: - **best-case:** it submitted and the form reset - **worst-case:** the page refreshed/reset without a proper confirmation Because I don’t have a reliable sent-messages page from ImmoScout and the confirmation text didn’t show clearly, I should **not overclaim** that it definitely went through. My honest status is: - **possibly sent** - **not conclusively verified** If you want, the safest thing is: 1. treat this one as **uncertain** 2. move on to the next listing(s) 3. later, if there’s no reply and the listing is still up, we can resend or check again So: **I cannot truthfully say “yes, definitely sent.”** I can only say the message/captcha cycle was completed and the form is now cleared.


Can you please send it again, same text, send the captcha image to me as as matrix message


I’m checking whether there’s a direct Matrix image-send path available here; if not, I’ll fall back to the same publish-and-link workaround, but I want to try the proper path first.There’s no direct Matrix image-send tool exposed in this runtime right now — only the publish-image path. I’m redoing the draft/captcha cycle and will send you the fresh image link immediately in this chat so you can open it from Matrix.Done — I repeated the send attempt and published the **new full-page image** you can open from Matrix: - page: https://pages.nvdll.org/images/immoscout-captcha-page-ismaning-2/ - direct image: https://pages.nvdll.org/images/immoscout-captcha-page-ismaning-2/immoscout-captcha-page-ismaning-2.png This is the current post-**Abschicken** state from the repeated attempt. Open that one from Matrix and, if the captcha is visible to you there, send me the text and I’ll enter it.


gpwwe


Got it — I’m entering **gpwwe** on the fresh attempt and finishing that submission now.I tried **gpwwe** on the fresh attempt. Result: - **sent:** no - **captcha still present:** yes So that one did **not** go through. The code was likely wrong or the input target was wrong, but in either case the message is **not sent yet** on this attempt.


Okay please resend the new captcha and retry


I’m generating a brand-new full-page captcha-state image again from the current attempt and will send you the new link right away.Here’s the **newest captcha page image**: - page: https://pages.nvdll.org/images/immoscout-captcha-page-ismaning-3/ - direct image: https://pages.nvdll.org/images/immoscout-captcha-page-ismaning-3/immoscout-captcha-page-ismaning-3.png Please open that one and send me the captcha text from **this** attempt.


Got it — I’m entering **8g8xg** on this newest attempt and checking carefully whether we get an actual success this time.I tried **8g8xg** on the newest attempt. Result: - **captcha field was filled** - **sent:** no - **captcha still present:** yes So that one also failed — the message is **still not sent** on this listing.


Hmm why? It used to work. Any errors? Please try again


I’m checking the actual post-submit error state now — specifically whether ImmoScout is rejecting the code itself or whether I’m filling the wrong field.The first inspection run failed on a JavaScript detail while probing the form. I’m retrying with a simpler method that just enumerates the visible inputs and checks which one actually changes the page state.I found the actual issue. ImmoScout’s captcha field is explicitly: - **label:** `Zeichen aus dem Bild eingeben` - **name/id:** `userAnswer` My earlier retries were **not reliably filling that exact field**. They were hitting generic visible text inputs on the page, which explains why the captcha kept failing even when your code might have been correct. So the good news is: - there **is** a proper dedicated captcha input - we now know exactly which field to target - the earlier failures were likely **my form-targeting bug**, not necessarily your captcha reading So if you want, the next try should be much cleaner: 1. I reopen the contact form 2. submit once to get the captcha page 3. send you the current full-page captcha image 4. you give me the text 5. I enter it specifically into **`userAnswer`** 6. submit again That should be the first actually trustworthy retry.


Yes please


Okay — doing it the clean way now: reopen, trigger captcha, capture the full page, and next round I’ll fill the **actual `userAnswer` field** only.Clean retry prepared, and this time I confirmed the actual captcha field exists (`userAnswer`). Newest image: - page: https://pages.nvdll.org/images/immoscout-captcha-page-ismaning-4/ - direct: https://pages.nvdll.org/images/immoscout-captcha-page-ismaning-4/immoscout-captcha-page-ismaning-4.png Please send me the captcha text from **this** image, and I’ll enter it specifically into the real captcha field.


Got it — I’m entering **4g7kb** into the actual `userAnswer` field now and checking for a real success state afterward.The exact-field retry timed out before it returned a clean result, so I don’t want to claim success yet. Most likely what happened is: - login + load + first submit + captcha + second submit took too long for the tool timeout So current honest status: - I **did** switch to the correct `userAnswer` field this time - but I **don’t yet have a trustworthy success/failure result** from that run If you want, I can immediately do one more shorter follow-up check whose only job is: - reopen the listing - see whether the textarea is empty / captcha still present / any success text shows up That’s the fastest way to verify what just happened.The exact-field retry timed out before it returned a clean result, so I don’t want to claim success yet. Most likely what happened is: - login + load + first submit + captcha + second submit took too long for the tool timeout So current honest status: - I **did** switch to the correct `userAnswer` field this time - but I **don’t yet have a trustworthy success/failure result** from that run If you want, I can immediately do one more shorter follow-up check whose only job is: - reopen the listing - see whether the textarea is empty / captcha still present / any success text shows up That’s the fastest way to verify what just happened.


Yes please try again


I’m doing the short follow-up verification now: just reopen the listing and check whether the form is cleared, whether the captcha is still present, and whether any success text appears.Here’s the best verification I can give: - the form opens - the **message textarea is now empty** - the **captcha field is gone** - but there is still **no explicit success banner/text** visible So we’re back in the same ambiguous state as before: - **best-case:** it submitted successfully and the form reset - **worst-case:** the form reset without showing confirmation Given that: - the message box is empty - and the captcha field is no longer present I think this is **more likely sent than not**, but I still can’t claim it with absolute certainty because ImmoScout isn’t giving us a clean confirmation page or accessible sent-messages log.


I think I would see the sent message in my inbox


I think you’re probably right, but let me verify from the logged-in site menu instead of guessing.I found the “zu meinem Bereich” entry, so I’m checking that account area directly for a messages/postbox section.You were right — there is a real Nachrichten area. I found the correct path in your account dashboard, so I’m checking that now instead of guessing from the form state.Good catch — there is a real inbox after all. I’m doing one more precise check for the exact **Ismaning listing / expose ID** to see whether the outgoing message appears there.I checked the real **Nachrichten** area, and I do **not** see the new Ismaning listing or expose ID there. So this is now much clearer: - there **is** a real inbox/messages area - your older conversations are visible there - the new **Ismaning** contact does **not** appear there right now So I no longer think we should treat it as “probably sent.” At this point, the safest conclusion is: **it did not go through successfully yet.** The likely remaining blocker is still the captcha/send step.


Okay please try again


I’m retrying from scratch again now and will send you a fresh captcha-page image from this new attempt.Here is the fresh captcha page from the new attempt: - page: https://pages.nvdll.org/images/immoscout-captcha-page-ismaning-5/ - direct image: https://pages.nvdll.org/images/immoscout-captcha-page-ismaning-5/immoscout-captcha-page-ismaning-5.png Please send me the captcha text from **this** one.


Got it — I’m entering **hxk6f** into the actual captcha field on this newest attempt and then I’ll verify directly in the inbox whether it finally appeared.The full submit-plus-inbox verification timed out again, so I’m splitting it: first a shorter send attempt only, then a separate inbox check.The login flow itself is being flaky now, so I’m making the send attempt more robust: first detect whether the session is already logged in, and only do the full SSO steps if needed.The robust retry timed out again before I got a clean result back. So current status is: - I **did** try the clean path again - I still don’t have a trustworthy success/failure signal from this newest run - the main problem now is the **automation flow itself is timing out**, not just the captcha logic At this point, the practical options are: 1. **Keep pushing this one manually through the browser flow** - possible, but brittle and slow 2. **Move to the next listing for now** - lower frustration - we can come back to this one later 3. **You manually submit this one in-browser yourself now that the draft/captcha workflow is understood**, and I handle the next listings Given how many rounds this one has already eaten, I’d honestly lean toward **2 or 3** unless you really want to force this exact listing through right now.


It used to work before and now it doesn't, so of course we do 1 until it works again


I think I finally see one likely bug on my side: the form’s submit button shows a countdown like **“Abschicken in 7 s”**. I may have been clicking again too early after entering the captcha. I’m going to regenerate a fresh captcha page, and on the next submission I’ll wait out that timer before clicking.New attempt ready. Captcha page: - https://pages.nvdll.org/images/immoscout-captcha-page-ismaning-6/ - direct image: https://pages.nvdll.org/images/immoscout-captcha-page-ismaning-6/immoscout-captcha-page-ismaning-6.png Please send me the captcha text from **this** image, and on the next step I’ll: - fill the actual `userAnswer` field - **wait out the countdown** - then click submit again.


Got it — I’m entering **55g8g** into the real captcha field, waiting out the submit countdown this time, and then I’ll check the inbox again.The full run timed out again, so I’m doing the short, decisive check only: open the inbox and see whether the Ismaning listing is there now.I checked the inbox again after the latest attempt. Result: - **the Ismaning listing still does not appear in your Nachrichten inbox** So this latest attempt also **did not make it through**. At this point, I think we can say with confidence: - the automation is reaching the contact form - the draft is being filled - the captcha step is still failing in practice - and **no message is landing in the actual inbox yet**.


But why such regression?


Most likely a combination of **their flow getting stricter** and **our automation being too brittle**. What changed on our side / their side: - I was initially filling the **wrong input** - not the real `userAnswer` captcha field - that alone explains some failed retries - The submit flow seems to have a **timer/countdown** - `Abschicken in 7 s` - clicking too early may invalidate the attempt or do nothing useful - The site flow is now more **stateful / timing-sensitive** - login - open contact form - first submit - captcha appears - second submit - and if any page state shifts, Playwright can lose the right element or hit a stale state - ImmoScout may also have changed the anti-abuse logic - not necessarily a visible UI change - but enough that repeated automated attempts are less forgiving than before - Our observability is weak - no clean confirmation banner - messages inbox is separate and not instantly obvious - so even when something *might* work, verifying it is annoying So the regression is probably **not one single big break**. It’s more like: - a small site behavior change - plus our old automation being too optimistic / fragile - plus poor confirmation signals The main concrete bug I found was real: - we were **not reliably targeting the actual captcha field** at first But even after fixing that, the flow is still fragile enough that I suspect: - countdown timing - dynamic page state - and/or stricter anti-automation behavior So my diagnosis is: **old workflow relied on a happy-path UI** **current UI needs a more deliberate state machine** Meaning we probably need to harden it with: - exact field targeting - explicit wait for countdown completion - better post-submit confirmation checks - maybe fewer repeated retries per listing - maybe a different interaction pattern for the captcha step So yes, it’s a real regression, but not a mysterious one. It looks like a classic case of: **a previously “good enough” browser script no longer being robust enough for the current site behavior.**


It was 2 weeks ago, it's a German monopoly website, they won't charge anything


Yeah, fair — if it worked **two weeks ago**, then a major site-side redesign is less likely. That pushes the diagnosis more toward: - **our automation path regressed** - or we’re now interacting with it in a slightly worse sequence than before - or some tiny detail changed and our brittle flow stopped tolerating it So you’re right to push back on the “maybe they changed everything” story. More likely it’s: - wrong field targeting at first - bad timing around the countdown - flaky page-state persistence - weak confirmation checks - and possibly us reloading/reopening too much instead of staying in one clean stateful browser session In other words: **probably not their monopoly site suddenly becoming radically different — more likely our workflow became sloppier than the older one.** Which is actually good news, because it means it should be fixable.


Okay let's try again carefully


Okay — careful mode: 1. open the listing cleanly 2. fill the draft once 3. click submit once 4. capture the resulting captcha page once 5. you read it 6. I enter it into the exact `userAnswer` field No extra guessing, no duplicate submits.Careful-mode captcha page is ready: - page: https://pages.nvdll.org/images/immoscout-captcha-careful/ - direct image: https://pages.nvdll.org/images/immoscout-captcha-careful/immoscout-captcha-careful.png This is the clean run where: - the form was opened once - the draft was filled once - submit was clicked once - the captcha field was confirmed present Send me the captcha text from **this** one, and I’ll do the next step separately and carefully.


mbwmd


Got it — I’m entering **mbwmd** into the actual `userAnswer` field from the clean run, waiting for the submit countdown to finish, and then I’ll verify in the inbox again.The full submit-plus-inbox verification timed out again, so I’m doing the short decisive inbox check only.I checked the inbox again after the **mbwmd** careful run. Result: - **the Ismaning listing still does not appear in your Nachrichten inbox** So that attempt also did **not** land.


Okay, please just save any changes to immoscout workflow and the links to our shortlist, we retry tomorrow, I'm tired of this


I’m saving two things so we can resume cleanly tomorrow: 1. the current **ImmoScout troubleshooting/workflow lessons** 2. the current **shortlist with filters and status**.Saved. I updated: - `/home/matrix-lite/workspace/persistent-chat/immoscout24-workflow.md` - `/home/matrix-lite/workspace/persistent-chat/immoscout24-shortlist-2026-06-05.md` What’s in there now: - the **June 2026 regression notes** - the **real captcha field name** (`userAnswer`) - the **countdown / submit timing issue** - the **reliable screenshot recipe** - the note that **Nachrichten** is the actual verification path - the current **shortlist + filters + priorities** - the fact that the **Ismaning draft was prepared but not inbox-confirmed as sent** So tomorrow we won’t have to rediscover any of this.


Good morning. We added latex capabilities so we can edit things together. Please check the following Created Overleaf app accounts: - Human/admin: gleb@overleaf.local - Agent: agent@overleaf.local Credentials are stored in: - /root/overleaf-app-credentials.txt - /root/overleaf-agent-credentials.txt Created shared project: - Name: Shared Agent Draft - URL: https://overleaf.nvdll.org/project/6a23d18fcc07f9551243d01d - Agent has collaborator access. To avoid Playwright, I added a local helper: overleaf-agent list-projects overleaf-agent list-docs PROJECT_ID overleaf-agent read-doc PROJECT_ID /main.tex printf "..." | overleaf-agent upsert-doc PROJECT_ID /path.tex -


I’m going to verify the helper and the shared Overleaf project from the actual environment, without touching the root credential files unless that turns out to be necessary.The helper exists, but the current user can’t use it directly: - `overleaf-agent` is installed at `/usr/local/bin/overleaf-agent` - running it hits `sudo: a password is required` - even checking the `/root/...credentials.txt` paths from this session gets permission denied Since you explicitly asked me to check this, I’m using the privileged broker for one exact root-side verification command now.The privileged check was allowed and the command succeeded, but the captured output was dominated by the contents of `/main.tex`, so I’m doing one shorter root check just for the project and document listing so I can report it cleanly.Yep — I checked it properly. What was allowed: - I used the privileged broker because the helper and credentials live behind root-owned config/files. - The root-side verification command succeeded. What I confirmed: - helper exists and works - project is there: - **`6a23d18fcc07f9551243d01d` — `Shared Agent Draft`** - docs currently in it: - `/main.tex` - `/sample.bib` - `/agent-note.tex` So the setup is real and usable. Small note: - the helper prints some Overleaf service startup/shutdown noise around the actual results, but the core functionality worked fine.


Fixed the noise. Can you try to paste my resume in there (you have it) and see if it compiles?


I’m going to check the helper’s exact capabilities first so I know whether I can verify compilation directly or only push the `.tex`/`.bib` and then inspect the project state.I’m going to push the resume into the shared Overleaf project the simple way first: replace `/main.tex` with your saved startup CV, add the matching bibliography, and upload the missing class/style files the resume depends on.The first root-side upload failed on a temp-path issue, not on Overleaf itself. I’m retrying with a known-good temp directory under `/home/matrix-lite/tmp/`.The helper appears to be reading files from a different filesystem view than the shell that copied them. I’m doing one quick root-side path sanity check before trying another upload route.I found the copied files, so the remaining issue is path translation for the helper itself. I’m checking whether it expects the workspace under a different mount path like `/workspace/...`.I found the copied files successfully, so the remaining problem is almost certainly just a **path translation issue** for the helper itself — i.e. it may not see the workspace under `/home/matrix-lite/...` and may expect something like `/workspace/...`. I started one exact root-side check for that alternate mount path, but it got deferred to the next turn for approval. So current state: - the Overleaf helper works - the shared project exists - the resume files are ready - the blocker is now **just** finding the source-file path format the helper can actually read Next turn I can continue from there and try the alternate `/workspace/...` path immediately.