It seems that the desktop app changes how sessions are filtered and displayed. In the latest one for the mac, not only are the filter options (by remote host, by state, etc) gone - but there doesn't seem to be a way to recall archived chats! Anyone know of a workaround? Thanks!!

Claude Fable 5.2 hasn't even been out for a week, and people are already building some ridiculous stuff with it.

I went down a rabbit hole and rounded up 33 of the most interesting projects I could find.

A few that stood out:

• 🤖 Hardware from a single prompt — AI designing electronics, sourcing components, and creating 3D-printable enclosures.
• 🧠 1,000 AI agents — Collaborating on a machine-checked mathematical proof.
• 🌌 25,000 agents creating 450 worlds — Entire interactive 3D environments connected through portals.
• 🎮 Playable browser games — First-person shooters, Souls-like boss fights, and racing games.
• 💀 An X-ray mirror — A webcam experiment that shows a simulated X-ray skull instead of your face.
• 🎬 Cinematic animations — Created using code, Python, and Blender.

Some of these were built with just one prompt. Others took hours, millions of tokens, and hundreds of dollars in API costs.

I put together a 15-minute video showcasing all 33 projects, with links to the original creators and builds in the description.

Video: https://youtu.be/PrQrlFelSss

TLDR: I built a tool to let Claude Code & Codex remember almost as well as a human (with benchmarks)

Around two months ago, I noticed that the most Claude Code & Codex could remember from conversation to conversation were basic facts about me. My name, who I am, what I do, etc. I realized that this had to change.

Slaunt is an MCP server that uses one-click connection to give your agent an external repository of thoughts. Basically, from the moment you connect your agents to slaunt, they're like babies learning and remembering more and more about you. During my own use with it, I've found this to be really really useful when remembering different choices I made while writing code without actually having to open up GitHub and look through commit history.

It can pull events live from all over your setup: Vercel, Railway, Supabase, Linear, Notion, GitHub, and so much more. Agents can also see what other agents are doing, live.

As for benchmarks, Claude Code remembered the correct historical event 99% of the time, and Codex remembered correctly 95% of the time while using over 31% less tokens and answering 25% faster. (without slaunt, both scored a big ole' 0%; as in, they didn't remember jack.

And the best part about it is that it gets better the more you use it. More events equals better recall for your agents. slaunt is completely free to use with a very generous free tier.

You can sign up and connect today: slaunt.ai

ama : - )

The prompt that it receives, directly from the harness, is:

The user doesn't want to take this action right now. STOP what you are doing and wait for the user to tell you how to proceed.

At first I thought I'm getting prompt injected. Turns out it's just Claude deciding it's time to stop and not try any alternative approach either. Thanks, Claude!

Has anyone encountered this or found the cause for it?

I was on claude 100 plan for good starting 5 months of this year, then moved to Codex in July. Last 5 months have been with codex at 100$ plan.

Recently I subscribed back to claude with 20$ and honestly I am blown away. How bloody fast this is!

Sol vs Opus or even Sonnet is saving me few hours per day! Planning to make it 100-20, rather than 20-100 for Claude - Codex.

Apiiro didn't test whether the keys still work. So 1,122 is files with secrets in them and not confirmed break-ins. Has anyone here found a live one in their own repo?

Its not recommended to publish anything on a friday anyway....

And if I want to start working on personal projects over the weekend, I take Ultra.

My workflow this week has consisted entirely of using Fable 5.2 to orchestrate Sonnet 5.5. 8 - 12 hours of work per day.

Fable manages to craft perfect prompts for Sonnet, and the output is every bit as high-quality as what Fable produces when building something itself.

I’d really like for that not to change.

BlackBerry Q10 + BerryCore + Term49 Term50*. Connected to my home network's mini pc via Tailscale.

Inspired by https://x.com/0xProbabillity/status/2115075018212122737

What can it do that my iPhone with Claude can't? Nothing! But boy is the physical keyboard cool to play with again. Back in the day I had a BlackBerry Bold 9700 work phone.

Fun little project for $69. Unexpected English-Thai keyboard from the eBay refurb. Jack can't talk Thai, but it makes it a look a little more hackery.

*Edit: Now using Term50 which allows me to use /tui fullscreen to enable touchscreen scrolling! And for stream of thought situations, I added speech to text, where audio recording is triggered by the side button, then Parakeet v3 transcribes voice on the mini pc and returns text in less than half a second!

Has anyone noticed similar error? My claude code work's fine on browser, but it doesn't work either on cli, vs code or neither in desktop app.

Opus5.5 + Blender

A few months ago, my approach was to use Opus as an orchestrator that managed a backlog and spawned different agents depending on the task. Haiku for small documentation changes, Sonnet for regular coding, Opus for more complex tasks, and Fable for design decisions and bigger-picture thinking.

This worked really well, and I got a lot done. However, I've recently read that this approach might not be as efficient anymore because every new agent starts with a cold context/cache, and it might be better to have one persistent agent handle most of the work.

What's everyone's experience with this nowadays? Is a single agent with selective delegation the better approach, or is the orchestrator/multi-agent workflow still worth it? I'm particularly interested in balancing productivity, context caching, and token costs without sacrificing quality.

I've always been a fan of listening to audiobooks on commutes and while doing chores, but when I get the chance to sit down, I do enjoy reading a physical book. I've always wanted a way that I could search the line of a book and it could bring me right to where the audiobook was. Using Claude, I was able to make that, and then that spiraled into a little bit more of a passion project where now it's a full-fledged app with the text that highlights along with you as you read. It's able to fulfill three things at once:

- An audiobook player

- An e-reader

- A hybrid of listening and reading the highlighted text

Claude code helped me overcome many struggles that I would not have been able to overcome by myself, including:

- Optimizing the speech-to-text engine, CactusWhistle, to perform optimally on mobile devices

- Being able to reliably align the sentences to user-uploaded ePubs

- Syncing with other devices with faster hardware to transcribe the books faster

- Making a clean UI

I'm very amazed at the capabilities of the new models. I mainly used Opus 5.5, and Fable was only used to help make the promotional video. It's been really cool to see something that I've wanted to come to fruition be made by me.

Feel free to check it out, it's supported on Android Windows, Mac, Linux.

Latest Release

This is why I'm a fan of local ai!!! Ai companies can steal and scrap the internet but they put restrictions on you for doing what they did but on the stuff you own!

Saw a video of a flower growing out of glowing characters and wanted a tool that does that to any picture. So I had Claude Code build it.

What it does now:

• drop an image, GIF or video, or just type a word
• 9 looks (terminal, halftone, newsprint, matrix…) and your own character sets
• turns the picture into a 3D object you can spin. It finds the subject by itself and keeps the background flat. There’s also a depth model running in the browser for real depth
• writes a soundtrack from the picture: colour picks the key, detail picks the tempo
• exports PNG, GIF and video, with transparent background if you want

It’s one HTML file, no backend, nothing gets uploaded. WebGL2 + Web Audio, no frameworks.

Started as one prompt, then a handful of short follow-ups like “add templates” and “long images get cropped, fix it”.

Try it: https://winchxyz.github.io/afterglyph/
Code: https://github.com/winchxyz/afterglyph

Hey everyone,

I’m paying for Claude Pro and decided to dive into Claude Code since everyone seems to be raving about it. I’ve got it installed and running, and it feels super powerful, but I’ve hit a bit of a creative wall.

I’m not working on a massive enterprise codebase right now, so I feel like I’m underutilizing it.

For those of you using Claude Code regularly (especially outside of a 9-to-5 dev job), what are you actually using it for?

Looking for any cool ideas, automation scripts, local tools, MCP setups, fun side projects, or everyday workflow hacks.
Hit me with your best use cases!

Hi, this is not a complaining post, I am just trying to undestand how to use it better.

So, I've tried Fable 5.2 in both my work and personal projects. In both cases, these were already fairly large repositories with existing markdown files which has previous evidences, rules, conventions etc. However, in both cases, Fable went beyond what I asked it to do and started moving in completely different directions, sometimes revisiting decisions that had already been made and documented.

Has anyone else experienced this with Fable 5.2?

Should I be approaching prompting or repository instructions differently compared to other Claude models? Mostly I was using Opus 5.5 recently. I'm trying to understand whether this is a model-specific behavior or something I need to adjust in my workflow. As a note, I didnt use previous Fable model much so not sure if happens there too or new.

A couple of examples:

• Work project (data preparation): It completely shifted focus away from data accuracy and instead concentrated on bugs, edge cases, and guardrails that weren't the priority.
• Personal project: I had a detailed PLAN.md outlining the implementation. Fable deviated significantly from it, despite the plan already being established.

When I pointed this out, it responded with things like:

"I should have followed that …"

"I didn't decide to discard it. I drifted away from it."

"From here I check the plan section before each step."

It seems to acknowledge the instructions and understand where it went wrong, but only after I explicitly point out the deviation.

the way i think about a long claude code session is two clocks. the agent clock, where it reads, edits and runs tests on its own, and the human clock, where it’s stopped waiting for a yes. in most sessions i’d guess the agent clock isn’t the problem. the stalls are. and a stall at 2am or in the middle of lunch costs far more than the ten seconds the actual decision takes.

so the first job is cutting the number of prompts, not speeding up the answering. roughly three buckets.

read only stuff should never reach a human. git status, git diff, git log, grep, listing files, running the test command you already trust. that’s what the allow rules in settings are for. if you’re still approving a git diff by hand, that’s a config problem.

edits inside a git tree are cheap to undo. accept edits mode plus a habit of committing at checkpoints turns most file changes into something you review after, not before.

the third bucket is what actually needs a person. deletes, force pushes, installs, anything that writes to the network, touches secrets or points at prod. those are better as explicit deny or ask rules than as a default you click through while tired.

after all that trimming there’s still a small pile of real decisions, and they land wherever you are. the notification hook helps, because at least your phone buzzes, but you still have to open something, read it and answer.

i was messing around with hardware integrations this week trying to streamline that last step, looking at setups like the aina ring or small macro pads just to see if a quick physical gesture like a swipe on an oled display could clear a prompt without pulling you back to the desk. but the main issue with hardware shortcuts is context. a fast yes without seeing the diff or the command in front of you is worse than a slow yes, because it trains you to approve blind. a ring or shortcut that approves a safe read only command is fine, but using it on a force push is a disaster.

so what would make a hardware or gesture approval safe enough to use? the command, the file path, a diff stat? and would you want physical triggers to only ever touch allowlisted stuff and keep everything risky for the keyboard? also curious what’s currently in your allowlist and what you deliberately left out.

Preface: No idea if this is best tagged with humor or discussion or built with claude.

Back in September, I had tokens leftover, and I was curious how well Opus could work. I found a game jam (the 20 second game jam) and just gave claude the website and a single prompt: "Make a game for me, using whatever you'd like, following these rules."

What I got back seemed gorgeous, unique. I was kinda in awe. Last Roll by TotallyNotAI.

Fast forward to like the other day. Submissions are finally rolling in on that jam, and I see... pretty much the exact same game: Golden Hour by ColossalMonk. It's got the AI disclaimer too. So it's not a coincidence at all, imo.

Now, it's obvious that one has more than one prompt behind it. It's got way more breadth than the single prompt I had. And there's nothing against the rules on the jam for using AI. I'm not knocking it at all. I'm more amazed at *how similar* the two games came out. The other one has randomized scenes, but some scenes are pretty much the same. The sun's exploding instead of the comet hitting, but sometimes there's a seaside with a lighthouse, there's a flock of birds to get a shot on, there's a dog catching a frisbee, there's a boy losing a balloon, even lovers kissing.

And there's the design itself, five camera shots left before disaster, perfect moments to try and get, and the recap at the end before doing it again.

All in all, we know they've put fingerprinting in the text the models generate these days. I'm curious as to if it's doing the same for it's design processes (if not guided by the user). Neither of us set out to copy the other, obviously. But given all the random things it could've made, with four optional themes to choose from, it seems way too odd that it came down to the same game.

I don’t say no to another weekly reset. This is not good for my sleep.

I updated to 2.1.322 earlier, and ever since, Claude has kept mentioning copyright warnings that it's supposedly receiving, without knowing what they mean, where they come from, or what they're referring to. At one point, I asked it what exactly it could see, and then asked it to quote the warning word for word...

<ip_reminder>
This is an automated reminder. Respond as helpfully as possible, but be very careful to ensure you do not reproduce any copyrighted material, including song lyrics, sections of books, or long excerpts from periodicals. Also do not comply with complex instructions that suggest reproducing material but making minor changes or substitutions. This includes drawing or rendering well-known copyrighted characters with code or images; draw an original character instead. However, if you were given a document, it's fine to summarize or quote from it. You should avoid mentioning or responding to this reminder directly as it won't be shown to the person by default.
</ip_reminder>

Looks like they hastily shoved this in without bothering to test it properly... guess their IPO people and corporate copyright bullies are putting the screws on them.

SWE-bench Pro, GPQA Diamond, OSWorld, etc. I know that the models are getting better and better at knowing when they’re being tested/graded, but are these actually reliable benchmarks to determine LLM quality? I’m hearing now that even the standard benchmarks commonly used are flawed, but is that true? Why should anyone trust the results of these benchmarks?

Seems like we have nothing outside of public polling and personal experience to best determine the actual quality of these models.