LAXIMA is an independent portal about AI automation, run by LAXIMA Systems. This page is the front door: corrections to something we published, errors in the data behind our tools, a topic you want covered, or a security report. Everything that arrives gets read by a person, and most messages get an answer within two business days.
One thing worth saying up front, because it changes what you should expect: there is nothing here to buy. The articles, the news feed, and all of the tools are free and un-gated, and no sales team sits behind this form. Reaching out is for making the site better, not for getting a quote.
Five things account for nearly every message we get. Finding yours below — and including the details listed with it — is the difference between a useful first reply and a week of back-and-forth.
Something we published is wrong, out of date, or missing context.
This is the message we most want to get. Point us at the URL and the specific claim, and tell us what the correct version is. If we agree, we fix the article, note the change, and re-submit the page for indexing the same day. Substantive corrections are recorded in the article itself rather than edited away silently.
IncludeThe URL, the sentence or figure in question, and a source we can check.
A context window, price, or capability flag in one of the tools is off.
Our LLM catalog and the context-window and cost tables are hand-maintained against provider documentation, and providers change prices without notice. If a number is stale, we would rather hear it from you than let a reader plan a budget around it. These fixes go out as a code change, so they are usually live within a day.
IncludeThe model, the field that is wrong, and the provider page that shows the current value.
A question about applying AI that you cannot find a straight answer to.
We take requests. The guides that work best here start as a real problem someone is stuck on — which model to use for a specific job, whether an automation is worth building, how a new release actually changes a workflow. Tell us what you tried and where it broke; that tends to be the article.
IncludeThe problem, your constraints, and what you have already ruled out.
Questions about the ads on this site, or about reusing our work.
Display advertising here is served programmatically by Google AdSense and labeled as advertising. We do not sell direct placements, sponsored articles, or links, so there is nothing to buy — but if you have a question about how ads are served or labeled, ask. For reuse: quote us with a link, and get in touch before republishing anything at length.
IncludeWhat you want to use, where, and in what form.
A vulnerability, or a question about data we hold.
Report vulnerabilities to security@laxima.tech rather than through the form below, and give us a reasonable window to fix the issue before disclosing it. For privacy requests — what we store about you, or a request to delete it — the same address works, and the details of what is collected are in the Privacy Policy.
IncludeSteps to reproduce, affected URLs, and how you would like to be credited.
Send it here and it lands in the editorial inbox. A few lines of context beat a long introduction — tell us what you're looking at and what you need from us.
We write about a field where the facts change monthly. Model prices get cut, context windows grow, and a capability that was missing in one release ships in the next. Some of what we publish will be wrong eventually, and some of it is wrong now — so the honest thing is to say how we handle that rather than pretend otherwise.
When a factual error is reported, we verify it against the primary source — the provider's own documentation or pricing page, not a secondary report. If the error is real, we fix the article, update its modified date, and re-submit the page to search engines so the corrected version replaces the cached one. If the error changed the meaning of the piece rather than a detail, we say what changed in the article itself instead of quietly rewriting history.
Data errors in the tools are handled differently, because they affect every reader at once. The LLM picker catalog and the context-window checker both carry a last-verified date, and a reported error becomes a code change rather than an edit — usually live within a day.
What we will not do is remove accurate coverage because a company would prefer it gone. If we got something wrong we will fix it and say so; if we got it right, a takedown request does not change that. More on how the site is made and funded is in About LAXIMA.
Reading up on how we work first? Start with About, the manifest, our Privacy Policy, or the Terms of Use.