diff --git a/site/blog/2025-07-04-derive-broken.md b/site/blog/2025-07-04-derive-broken.md
deleted file mode 100644
index b052a12..0000000
--- a/site/blog/2025-07-04-derive-broken.md
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,126 +0,0 @@
----
-title: "`#[derive(Clone)]` is broken"
-description: "Not just `#[derive(Clone)]`, but all of the standard trait derives are"
-
-tags:
-- rust
----
-
-```rs
-use std::sync::Arc;
-
-struct NoClone;
-
-#[derive(Clone)]
-struct WrapArc<T>(Arc<T>);
-
-fn main() {
-  let foo = WrapArc(Arc::new(NoClone));
-  let foo_ = foo.clone();
-}
-```
-
-Do you think this code should compile?
-
-What about the following code:
-
-```rs
-struct AlwaysEq<T>(T);
-
-impl<T> PartialEq for AlwaysEq<T> {
-   fn eq(&self, _other: &Self) -> bool {
-      true
-   }
-}
-
-impl<T> Eq for AlwaysEq<T> {}
-
-struct NotEq;
-
-#[derive(PartialEq, Eq)]
-struct WrapAlwaysEq<T>(AlwaysEq<T>);
-
-fn assert_is_eq(_: impl Eq) {}
-
-fn main() {
-   let x = WrapAlwaysEq(AlwaysEq(NotEq));
-   assert_is_eq(x);
-}
-```
-
-The second example is a bit far fetched, but you probably answered yes.
-
-But
-[neither](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2024&gist=0d9a89eccb4773ce32e7a3cec5cf8603)
-[do](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2024&gist=30233aea9cf20c3299cd5c1fc6e7ec8c).
-
-# Why not?
-
-The
-[implementation of `#[derive(Clone)] in the Rust compiler`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/0c4fa2690de945f062668acfc36b3f8cfbd013e2/compiler/rustc_builtin_macros/src/deriving/clone.rs)
-generates a `Clone` implementation with the following requirements on the
-derived type:
-
-- All fields must be `Clone`.
-- All generic parameters must be `Clone`.
-
-Can you spot the issue here? It's the latter requirement: **we cannot just
-require all generic parameters to be `Clone`, as we cannot assume they are used
-in such a way that requires them to be cloned**.[^The reason this is the way it
-is is probably because Rust's type system wasn't powerful enough for this to be
-implemented back in the pre-1.0 days. Or it was just a simple oversight that got
-stabilized.]
-
-This applies to practically all builtin derive traits, such as `Clone`,
-`PartialEq`, `Eq`, or
-[even `Debug`](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2024&gist=b419e34c9f00d0fca92c40739f6c9fb2).
-
-# What can we do to fix this?
-
-There are two solutions to this. Both require deleting that second requirement.
-
-## The hard way
-
-We could create a Rust RFC, hopefully not bikeshed it to death, and get it
-stabilized in the next Rust edition as it is a breaking change.[^Surely it is a
-breaking change, or the compiler people would've fixed it already. Right?]
-
-This would take 4+ years to stabilize and be available to everyone. That sucks,
-but is the correct thing to do in the long-term.
-
-## The quick way
-
-We can just write our own macro that generates the following code:
-
-```rs
-/* input */
-#[derive(CustomClone)]
-struct WrapArc<T>(Arc<T>);
-
-/* generated code */
-impl<T> Clone for WrapArc<T>
-where
-   Arc<T>: Clone,
-   // and so on, `FieldType: DerivedTrait` for each field
-{
-   // ...
-}
-```
-
-This does the job correctly.
-
-And it's not even hard to do. I know people who do this internally in their
-company codebases - it's not much code.
-
-So I've [opened an issue](https://github.com/JelteF/derive_more/issues/490)
-about replicating the builtin derive traits in a less restrictive and thus
-correct way in the `derive_more` crate's GitHub repository. The reason I chose
-this crate is because it already has a lot of users and is the main place for
-derive implementations.
-
-Replicating already-existing behaviour of the std may not be in the scope of the
-crate, which is a perfectly fine stance to take. If that doesn't get accepted,
-I'll probably create my own crate and release it on
-[crates.io](https://crates.io/).
-
-Stay tuned, I'll update this blog post.