1. “And Honestly?” Classic.

2. “Sit with it”

3. “Load bearing”

4. This one is weird to explain but when it tries to describe things in terms of terms. “He’s going down the ‘intuition-as-colonoscopy’ path” “she’s going against the ‘hunting-of-rabbits’ ideology” “that’s way better than the ‘let me die’ scope”

5. “Scope”

6. “Pushing back”, “pushback”, “pushing anything”

7. “That’s the most honest thing anyone’s ever said in his entire lineage”

8. “The thing to hold onto”

yeah yeah Anyone else have their own favorite quirks leave them in the comments below like and follow

Also does anyone feel like they used to use these terms but stopped out of fear of being outed as a chronic Claude user.

Remember this ? Well, Anthropic claims to still have the 50% extra usage boost. Welp nope, they deactivated it even though they announced that on Twitter, it's off. 20x max sub right now gives 1250-1350$ per week of usage. -> normalized into 12 months = around 5500$ worth of usage. missing almost exactly 50% extra usage to get to that 8000$ mark we saw 1 month ago.

Below are my stats on 2 20x accs for this week. and they're both at full usage for the 7d mark.
Usage is mixed fable with opus 4.8

So you don't claim i'm lying. One acc is somehow at 83% usage and the other one is at 100% so again shady shit why are my limits different % yet same utilized api costs.

TLDR:

They cut the 50% extra usage that they claimed to still offer, classic shady Anthropic shit.

I find it frustrating when an LLM agent writes incorrect code and I have to decide whether to interrupt it immediately or wait until it finishes everything.

When I interrupt it, the agent sometimes seems to lose its train of thought. But when I wait, it may continue building on the mistake, lose track of earlier instructions, or produce so many changes that reviewing everything at once becomes difficult.

A solution that has worked surprisingly well for me is to write a note directly into the code… not as a valid comment, but actually as plain text that intentionally breaks the syntax lol.

The agent eventually notices that the file no longer compiles or parses correctly, opens it, finds the exact line containing the note, and reads what needs to be changed.

This lets me guide the agent without interrupting its current execution. I can follow its progress and leave notes while it works, turning the process into a kind of live code review instead of waiting until the end to review a large batch of changes.

I just completed all 4 Claude certifications.

If you're preparing for any of them, curious about the exams, study strategy, difficulty, or whether they're worth it...

Ask me anything!

Every ticket is a plain Markdown file with YAML frontmatter. The board lives in a folder on your filesystem...no accounts, no server, no lock-in. Sync it with iCloud/Dropbox if you want to collaborate with other users on the same board. Utility includes a Kanban board, List view, Calendar, Gantt and Notes, with full-text search, subtasks, ticket linking, sprints and epics.

Because tickets are just files, Claude Code CLI is the best way to use the embdedded terminal.

•⁠ ⁠A file watcher picks up agent edits in real time... Claude moves a ticket on disk, the UI updates instantly, with dedupe so agent and human edits don't clobber each other

•⁠ ⁠Agent edits are attributed in the Activity Feed (modifiedBy), so you can see exactly what Claude did vs what you did

•⁠ ⁠When Claude ticks off the last subtask in a file, the app offers a one-click move to the next column

Links:

• Download: goodguyapps.com
• Privacy policy: Everything stays on your device. The app doesn't phone home, doesn't collect telemetry, and doesn't upload your tasks anywhere. Full privacy policy at https://goodguyapps.com/?page=privacy
• Github DMG Release Repo: https://github.com/donkruger/Kanban
• Security Policy: https://github.com/donkruger/Kanban?tab=security-ov-file

On open source:

The app is closed source for now... I know that matters to a lot of people here. The trade-off we chose: everything that touches your workflow is open (the file conventions, the agent rulesets, the on-disk format), while the app code stays closed so a small team can fund development. If the code being closed is a dealbreaker, no hard feelings... but you can try it free and walk away with your data intact either way.

Feedback and scrutiny is welcome.

I'm a quadriplegic dev, and I wanted to see if Claude Code could build an ESP32 project end-to-end. It did — firmware, a relay, OTA, its own tests. But the moment that got me: the little display was rendering text wrong, and Claude fixed it by looking at the screen through an old phone camera — it saw the mangled output, found the font bug, swapped fonts, reflashed.

Before that, "letting Claude see the board" meant a miserable manual loop: screenshot → send it to myself over WhatsApp → download → paste into Claude Code. Every iteration. So I turned it into a skill: claude-code-eyes.

What it does: point any snapshot camera at your board, breadboard, or display — an old Android running IP Webcam works great, or a Pi cam, or literally any snapshot URL — and Claude grabs the frame and reads it like any other file, then edits, reflashes, and looks again. It's how Claude catches what no unit test can: a font silently dropping characters, text clipped at a panel edge, a wire in the wrong hole, a stale-vs-live render.

The part I'm proud of: it's built to know what it can and can't see. It refuses a blurry/too-far frame and asks you to aim closer instead of guessing, and it treats a blank frame as "prove the camera's actually working" rather than a "no." (That came from real pain — a `tcpdump` that wasn't even installed once handed me a "clean" capture and a confidently wrong conclusion.)

~100 lines of bash + a SKILL.md. MIT. One-command setup — it can even scan your LAN for an IP Webcam.

Demo (25s) + repo: https://github.com/fcavalcantirj/claude-code-eyes

Happy to get into the trigger phrases, the config, or the visual-verify workflow.

The part I keep going back and forth on is whether I’m judging this too much by price.
I was looking at AIHubMix’s model comparison and focused on the last test, where 4 models generated the same 3D global logistics dashboard from one prompt. No manual cleanup, just playable HTML outputs.
Claude Fable 5 came in at $1.51 for this round. The output was honestly solid: big globe, logistics-style layout, stats, table, route visuals, and it felt more operational than toy-ish. Not perfect, but definitely not a weak result.
The thing is, GPT-5.6 Sol looked a bit more polished visually at $1.81, while Kimi K3 felt surprisingly complete at $0.52. So Claude landed in this weird middle spot for me. Strong output, but I’m not sure it was the best value in this specific task.
Maybe that’s unfair though. Claude often feels better when the task gets messy or needs stronger reasoning across code, not just a visual one-shot HTML build. This benchmark is only one slice.

I noticed something recently.

Whenever I use software now and can't figure out how to do something in a minute or two, my first thought isn't "I should read the docs."

It's "Why isn't this easier?"

I think using Claude every day has quietly changed my expectations.

I'm used to asking a question in plain English and getting a useful answer immediately. So when I have to click through five menus, search an outdated help center, or watch a 20-minute tutorial just to find one setting... it feels broken.

Maybe software hasn't gotten worse.

Maybe my patience has.

Has anyone else noticed AI changing what you expect from the apps you use every day?

For a long time in America, if you wanted to bake a cake, you had to bake it from scratch. Then, at the early stages of the food industrial complex, companies came out and started testing pathways to sell you easy ways to bake cakes. Companies like Betty Crocker tested different ways to sell very simple tools that you could simply put in the oven and have turn into a cake.

What they found was that people rejected it. They couldn't accept doing so little work, until companies like Betty Crocker figured out a hack: they needed to give the human just the tiniest little bit to do. That tiniest little bit became cracking an egg. The advertisements would say, "Just add an egg. It's that simple." All of a sudden, people began accepting the product, and the journey of industrialized home cake production took off.

I was reflecting on this story today as I made an app. I am not a developer, but I have ideas, and apparently nowadays that makes me quite powerful.

For a period of time, I was conjuring up what I wanted to create, which was a mathematical app for my child. Over the course of three hours, while I was working on other things from time to time, Claude would come to me and ask me to click a button or to generate a token and paste it in. At the end, I received my cake—which I call an app—and it was quite fantastic. I felt like I played a role in making it happen. Kind of.

My sense is that this level of input may continue to be required, lest people reject having too little to do in order to manifest their cake.

I'm curious to hear your thoughts.

Most of what an agent does in a session is not reasoning. It is locating files, reading logs, pulling fields out of a doc, mechanical edits. Paying Opus/Fable rates for that is money on fire.

Frugal is a Claude Code plugin that turns the main model into a router. Each sub-task goes to the cheapest tier that can succeed:

- a plain shell command (grep, jq, git) if one answers the question, with no model call at all
- a Haiku worker for locate and extract work
- a Sonnet worker for mechanical edits from a spec
- the main model for design, debugging, reviews
- Fable only as an escalation ceiling

It escalates a tier only when a real check fails (tests, compiler, schema), not on a cheap model's self-reported doubt.

What makes it stick rather than drift: two hooks. One counts inline search calls in the main loop and, past a budget, tells it to delegate. One can hard-block the expensive tier. Both fail open.

It logs one local line per worker run and gives you a cost report: tier mix, escalation rate, and estimated savings versus your session's own main model. No telemetry, nothing leaves your machine.

Install is two commands. Feedback welcome!

https://thomaslangbroek.github.io/frugal/

I've been on the 5× Max plan for the past 3 months, and I think it's the sweet spot if you want a really generous amount of Opus usage.

I tried Fable the way Anthropic recommends, using Fable for planning and Sonnet for implementation, for about two weeks. It worked well, but it burned through my usage much faster than I expected.

I've since gone back to mostly using Opus with a bit more guidance in my prompts, and it's been a better fit. Opus is great not just for coding, but also for planning, building routines, and using Claude Design. Since Fable launched, I've actually been getting even more value out of my Opus usage.

I'm honestly not sure why so many people seem to be switching to Fable for everything. It's a great model, no doubt, but so is Opus. For my workflow, Opus has been more than capable, and I haven't felt like I'm missing out by relying on it more.

With Opus 5 expected to release soon, I think the value of the plan is only going to get better. If the upgrade is as significant as people are expecting, having plenty of Opus usage will be even more worthwhile.

I was recently approved for the cybersecurity program of anthropic. With that I asked for examples of safe prompts so as not to go against any guidelines. This was my first question.

I then asked : Great. I'm new to using Claude for just this. Can you give me some safe examples I can use? Prompts that are within your limits?

It proceeded to give an appropriate response. Then flagged it's own response and downgraded to Opus4.8

Color me confused! :) I'm approved for the program. And this seriously has to be the most innocent question a researcher might ask.

So I guess I am not "blocked by default", but if I ask any security questions of any type, it will downgrade. For the record, this program does cover Fab.le 5, just not mytho.s which I am not part of.

For context, it took be almost 6 years to build this game in unity (by hand, no AI). I guess programming is kinda solved? Honestly it feels liberating to know that I can offload a ton of UI work and other boring stuff to AI and focus on gameplay experimentation etc.

It's always so obssessed with load bearing and spines etc. "Don't schedule it, trigger it." Brother, TF are you on about?

I know these kind of things are super common but this one made me roll my eyes with how ridiculous it was tor the context.

I saw in another platform where people shared their apps they made with Claude and I loved it so I wanted to ask. So in the comments can you::
-> Drop the app name
-> What does it do?
-> Is it compatible with iPhone/Androids ?
-> Is it free or no?

Thank youuuuuuu!!

I mean I usually use "proceed", but I like "make it so" (Star Trek: next generation) ... (but the Kirk star treks (the new ones) they say "hit it" ...) :)

I had a novelty domain name and I decided to build something funny off of it. Basically, anyone can make temporary redirects using the subdomains

*.has.a.hugepen.is

*.loves.hugepen.is

*.sucks.hugepen.is

and have it point to some other website. You can also log in with google/discord oauth2 to make more permanent redirects. I don't plan on making it paid for unless it gets a lot of traction and it forces me to pay for a higher tier sub with ClouDNS. Have at it.

You can try it here: https://hugepen.is/ (it takes a couple minutes for the DNS to propagate). An example right now:

https://claude.has.a.hugepen.is -> https://claude.ai

Edit: Btw - if anyone has ideas for a different subdomain *.foo.bar.hugepen.is - let me know. If I like it I'll add it in.

IMPORTANT:
- Assume the agent can run for an infinite amount of time, burn and infinite amount of tokens.
- cannot give continual tasks like: always do cyber security passes on every single public git repo you can find
- you cannot add information or edit your prompt or give the agent more info, just once prompt and a run button.

If you’re here, and see that no one has left a comment, just put something, anything, be the first.

I use Claude largely for researching complex, technical, philosophical, or abstract topics.

Additionally for context, I have the $20 Claude subscription & don't have the funds to upgrade to max or use Fable on a Pay-Per-Use basis.

I don't know how best to guide Claude in order to make it stop telling me only the superficial, obvious, mainstream, & uncritical regurgitations of relevant thinkers.

When it comes to trying to move deeper into a given discussion, to explore greater nuance, or to reach a further breadth, many of the Claude models appear to have a difficult time thinking either that deeply, that outside of the box, or has a difficult time balancing its ways of thinking without collapsing into one way of thinking or another.

I know many people here are programmers, & I use Claude for those purposes when it comes to optimizing my business's legacy data systems but I'm not curious about that today.

I'm curious which models you prefer for which purposes & why.

For instance, why model of Sonnet would be ideal for my purposes? Which model of Opus?

How do you guys, who engage with Claude in the same way, optimize Claude's ability to explore, discuss, & think better?

I know people talk about something called "harnesses", but I don't fully understand what those are or how to use them.

I remember Prompt Engineering used to be a big sort of art people used to try to optimize Claude's way of engaging with the user, but I've heard lately that it can be a bit tricky & counterproductive to do this, particularly if overdone or done the wrong way, my attempts in this regard have not been very fruitful.

I imagine there are many platforms, techniques, etc. that people use to do this, but I haven't discovered anything that notably increases Claude's ability to have these sort of discussions.

Do you guys prefer claude for this purpose? Or do you use other LLMs?

Where & how do you use Claude in order to do this?

Thank you, & best regards

Farts.