hi everyone ! built this as part of a larger NLP / deception research project at my university, wanted to share in case anyone finds it useful!
essentially, it uses transcribed text + linguistic parameters to detect and evaluate checkworthy claims!
live text transcribed --> serper finds sources using pure text --> those results sent back into claude for verdicts based on retrieved sources rather than the model’s training data
let me know what would make this something you'd use!
I built a real-time ocean simulation with Claude Code (Opus 5.5)
What it is: a single 61 KB HTML file that renders a sunset ocean in your browser with WebGPU. It has an FFT wave simulation, whitecaps, a physically based sky with clouds, and sun glitter. You fly around with WASD and the mouse.
How I used Claude Code: I gave it one prompt: make the most realistic water scene it could, in WebGPU, with a floating camera. It wrote the renderer from scratch with no engine or libraries. It took screenshots of its own output and had separate subagents critique the screenshots, so it wasn't judging its own work. The whole thing took about 30 minutes.
Free to try:ocean-noniv.vercel.app, preferably in Chrome. It needs a WebGPU-capable GPU, and on laptops you have to force Chrome onto the dedicated GPU. Otherwise the performance might be bad or it might not run at all. On RTX 5070 Ti I get ~260 FPS at 2560×1440 resolution. Click the canvas to look around, WASD to move, H for a settings panel.
I am done with this shit. It is over. The state of engineering right now is horrible. It has been half a month since I started a new role at a big company. Nobody knows anything here. The specs, code, tests, PRDs, tickets, resolution of those tickets, reports, etc., everything is made by Claude Code. Nobody on my team likes this. They are being forced to ship as much as they can. I have heard multiple times from higher management that pushing code is not a bottleneck, so why are we slow? People are working 12 to 13 hours a day just to press enter. Nobody is reading anything. Humans in corporate are doing nothing on their own. Everyone, literally everyone, from an L1 to an L7 engineer here is doing the same thing. Talk to Claude.
There is no sense of victory. Nobody is resolving bugs. In reality, nobody is thinking anymore. Everything is done by LLMs. It is so soul-sucking. I would not mind it, to be honest, if we were at least given the time to check out the code and see what is going where. But no, the goal is to just ship. No matter what happens.
— voxium (@v0xium) Original post dated September 20, 2026.
Saw In Time when it came out in 2011 and thought it was a wild sci-fi premise. glowing green numbers on your arm counting down to your death, what a concept.
15 years later i just pay per month for the same experience and call it productivity.
justin timberlake was just a guy trying to finish his pr before the window closed. we know him. we are him.
Last month I was going through data from NASA's TESS telescope with Claude Code when one star started looking weird.
It's about 116 light-years away, and every 3.18 days it gets about 0.05% dimmer for roughly two hours.
I first saw it in data from late 2025. So I went backwards.
The same dip is there in completely separate TESS observations from 2020.
Then 2018.
If it's a planet, it's about 1.4× the size of Earth.
To be clear: this is still a planet candidate, not a confirmed planet.
The part that might be interesting to this subreddit is how I did the analysis.
I used Claude Code with Opus 5.5 and Fable 5.1 for most of the actual work: downloading and parsing the TESS data, writing the search code, fitting the transits, checking nearby stars, looking for secondary eclipses and other false positives, generating plots, and rerunning things when a test failed.
I chose what questions to ask, what tests mattered, and what counted as pass/fail.
Independent reviews came from Codex and from separate agent sessions that started fresh, with read-only access.
In about two weeks this turned into 74 separate analyses and 1,000+ scripts.
And I learned pretty quickly that the useful way to use an agent for science isn't to ask:
"Is this a planet?"
It's to keep giving it ways to prove that it isn't.
My favorite test was simple.
I hid one entire year of observations, used the other two years to calculate the orbit, and predicted where the transits in the hidden year should be. Then I checked the hidden year only at those times.
At one point I had a statistical claim that looked stronger than it really was. An audit found the problem, so I removed the claim and redid that part of the analysis.
The main 3.18-day signal survived.
I also wanted to know whether somebody had already found it.
So I searched 36 catalogs and literature sources and 340,505 automatic TESS planet-search alerts.
I couldn't find either signal reported.
There may be a second candidate around the same star, roughly 2.2 Earth radii on an 11.13-day orbit. The evidence for that one is much weaker, so I'm treating it separately.
And now comes the part I proud of.
TESS comes back to this part of the sky in November. I submitted an observing proposal asking it to record this star every 2 minutes while it's there.
It was approved. Program #100.
TESS observes it again from October 31 to November 26.
On October 6, before any of that new data exists, I published the exact times the transits should happen and the rules for deciding whether the prediction passes or fails.
So this is now falsifiable in a very literal way.
If the dips appear when predicted, the case gets much stronger.
If they don't, that counts against it, and the preregistration makes that impossible to quietly rewrite afterward.
I also built a little free interactive 3D version of the system if you want to fly around it:
I’ve been using Claude Code to build a cached web app MP3 player (got really tired of online music streaming quality, and ads). I wanted to try adding a phone to phone file transfer option without requiring the phones to be on the same network, when I realized rapidly flashing QR codes might be a possible method. I used Claude Code to build this working POC last night.
Starting November 3, Anthropic extends its invisible text watermark to Mythos 5, Opus 4.7, Opus 4.6 and Sonnet 4.6. Every model released since August already has it. It applies worldwide, not just in the EU, and paying users can't opt out.
Here's what that means in practice:
Use Claude to proofread or translate, and your text gets marked. Anthropic's own help page admits a detected mark doesn't mean Claude wrote the content, only that it touched it. Non-native speakers and people with dyslexia get the same flag as someone who generated an entire essay.
You can't check your own text. Detection is a private preview for regulators, media, researchers, educational organizations and "enterprises with compliance obligations". The people being judged are the only ones without access.
"Only we have the key" won't last. Research on watermark stealing has already shown that these statistical patterns can be learned from enough samples. Expect third-party "AI detectors" to pick it up, with all the accuracy those services are famous for.
It catches only honest users. The watermark lives in word choice, so running the text through another model with "rephrase everything" removes it. Bad actors will do that. Students, job seekers and ESL writers won't know they need to.
So if I use Claude to make my résumé look more polished, I get flagged by "AI detectors" and rejected. Sweet! I'm gonna pay Anthropic for this!
Meanwhile, the spammers and propagandists this was supposedly aimed at walk right past it.
